Confusion of 'fasting' and 'fast track'

However few are certainties in this life, one highly predictable, annual occurrence is here once again. Those who are in training for spiritual gymnastics are looking for new variations on the Lenten fast. Based on threads on a theology forum on which I participate, one would think that fasting was a combination endurance contest, punishment, means to free oneself of all passions (foremost those for chocolate), solution to the economic situation of the world, and major means for ego stroking. I suppose that those who manage to faint win a daily door prize.

This is not to say that fasting is not a valuable spiritual practise. The best exposition of this which I have seen is that which Margaret Mary Funk gives in her book "Thoughts Matter for Practicing the Spiritual Life." (No, I neither know her nor receive royalties. My regular praise for this little book is based on its being the best capsule course in ascetic theology I have seen. I can only hope that no one, reading my favourable review, will think that it is a shortcut to the Seventh Mansion.) She bases her explanation on the works of John Cassian, and also on the adaptation of the related concepts in the Benedictine Order (of which she is a member.)

Were I to be asked what is the primary benefit of fasting (...I'm going to tell you anyway, though you did not ask), I would say it is the essential awareness it fosters. When fasting is a manner of placing thoughts in proper perspective, it removes distractions to our prayer lives and love for others. Placing a simple drive - that for food - in such perspective can help us to deal with thoughts which are greater and more dangerous distractions.

The forum I mentioned had enough participants who wish to embrace vegan fasting (such as is common with Orthodox Christians)... because they think the 'western fast' is not difficult enough. I am no expert on Orthodoxy, but my understanding is that, first, those embracing strict fasting in that tradition do so in consultation with a spiritual father or mother. Presumably, in such a context, were pride, self hatred, heroism, or a distorted, excessive sense of either one's sin or virtue to intrude on the practise, such guidance would keep it 'in check.' As well, when one is part of a sister church where this is the common practise, it is stripped of any glamour - it is orthopraxy, as with Jews who observe Kashruth, not a personal obsession.

Why do I say 'obsession' about an ascetic ideal which is nearly as old as the Church? I'm basing that on the sort of comments I've heard or read, such as were on that forum. Too many people were not seeing underlying gifts one can receive from fasting at all. Fasting is not a contest in starvation or deprivation. (Trappist monks, vegan for centuries, certainly saw to it that they had sufficient nourishment to work in the fields.) The more enthusiastic Christians whose contributions I read went on and on about how they were 'too comfortable' (I wish they'd try some gratitude instead of guilt), how what they are doing lets them make large donations to the poor (all, of course, in a larger scope of not recognising one's limitations), how much weight they lost, etc., etc..

If one finds secondary benefits from fasting, fine - but that should not be a focus. It is intended to remove distractions, not create new ones.

No Franciscan is going to deny the importance of caring for the poor (though, equally, none of us have any illusions about having huge means for alleviating poverty of others.) Yet Francis, by comparison with other founders of religious Orders, in no way imposed rigid ascetic practises on his friars. (I think Francis, who later would admit that he'd damaged his health, always remained aware that some of his own excess in that direction came from a preoccupation with his own sinfulness. He would have a lifelong struggle with self hatred, yet it was accompanied by a delight in divine grace.) It was a Franciscan custom to see whatever was on one's plate as a blessing - and, indeed, in many Franciscan houses, the grace before meals ends with "May the Lord bless this gift of charity."

I see no benefit in thinking of food as evil (all too common today, when, based on the sites one consults, one can think that all the evils of the world stem from what one eats, or even that eternal life and youth can stem from not eating.) Rather, we should take a tip from Francis, and approach the table with not only enjoyment but, most importantly, gratitude. Franciscans know that both feast and fast are important customs on the calendar. We seldom have the wealth for the table to be groaning, but there is no sense of 'I'm eating chicken tonight, when I live in the First World and therefore am an oppressor of the Third.' Gratitude for that chicken (tomato, bread, apple) and for the people who raised it is a fine practise! Over time, and this without directly giving it attention, the gratitude for others and for the fruits of creation inevitably will lead to greater concern for those who do not have them in sufficient measure.

My cynical side tells me that a love for deprivation is more often a sign of avarice than of detachment. I well remember once reading a work on the spiritual life (name escapes me) which mentioned how, in the highly austere life of the Carthusians, now and then a new candidate has unusual 'fervour.' The life just is not austere enough for him - he needs a harder path. Members of this set normally find the life unbearable within a short period of time.

If everything is 'too easy' in the spiritual life... then I'll believe there is a parallel universe! Most of the practise is simple, 'banal,' and actually difficult - but not tortuous! It is not a shortcut to the crown and glory of the martyrs. Someone who is proud of how she, more so than any other Sister in the house, is highly abstemious may well not need to eat - because the glory she assumes she has in the eyes of others is sustaining enough. (Actually, in religious Orders, it would be highly unlikely that anyone would be allowed to add their own further austerities...)

I'm laughing at a memory. I once heard a lecture (not, I must add, in accord with the 2,000 year history of the Church) about 'meditation' about thirty years ago. It all was based on 'energies' - and supposedly one who did whatever the lecturer was suggesting would 'be at the Prayer of Quiet' within thirty days. (I'm not at the Prayer of Quiet after 30 years... and for some reason, which perhaps is obvious, I doubt that quiet is ever going to be my own strong point.) This appealed to the crowd in which I occasionally moved at the time (fledgling mystics, pre-shrunk), who were inclined to such statements as, "I read John of the Cross's Dark Night of the Soul last weekend. I remember when I went through all of that, a long time ago." (This though none of us had been born a 'long time ago.')

There are no 'instant fixes' in our lives. Fasting had no glamour until it became relatively rare amongst Christians. Let us use it as a way to remove the distractions that keep us from the true essence of Lent - the Incarnation, eschatology, the resurrection, and all the other blessings that can die in the light of our seeking our own glory.