Should Clergy Urge Fishless Friday?
Monday February 11th 2008, 10:16 am
Filed under: religion

I started reading Should Clergy Urge Fishless Fridays? thinking that the article was going to explore the moral implications of encouraging fish-eating when 70% of the world’s fisheries are over-exploited, exploited, or depleted. But no.  It’s all about mercury, and whether priests should suggest alternatives to tuna, swordfish and other mercury-heavy fish given recent information about mercury levels in big fish.

Rev. Thomas Nairn, an ethicist who specializes in health care at Catholic Theological Union, said priests aren’t necessarily under a moral obligation to make that suggestion. After all, gluttony is not in the Gospels.

“During Lent, one should watch intake of food in general,” Nairn said. “We’re not talking about pigging out on tuna. Any Catholic who’s fasting is going to be within the limits now suggested anyway.”

One wonders exactly what moral obligations the priests are under. And I’m wondering what cousin Walt, the former director of the Environmental Justice Program for the United States Council of Catholic Bishops would say. I know he’s concerned with overfishing. Maybe I’ll ask.



5 Comments so far

When I was a kid, we used to eat so much fish - much of it canned. Because we had religious restrictions on the meat we consumed, we got most of our protein from beans and fish. I have fond memories of salmon and grits for breakfast (with toast); my mom’s mackerel patties - which made the kitchen smell oily, but tasted sooo good; fried whiting sandwiches (so hard to get on the west coast); and tuna sandwiches, tuna casseroles, and tuna salads.

But as an adult, I don’t eat much fish at all. Part of it is the expense - wild salmon goes for about $18/lb - and also the fact that the fishes I like best are the ones I grew up with, like flounder and whiting - that must be Atlantic fish because they don’t even sell in the stores here. Halibut and red snapper (which I’m terribly allergic to) just don’t make me salivate. I was eating lots of shrimp until someone wrote on my blog about terrible shrimp farming. So now that’s only occasional. I eat crab once in a while; I can’t imagine that’s a friendly practice. But apart from going and fishing myself, what am I supposed to do?

p.s. I have an $8 can of organic, wild, bottle fed, hand plucked, mercury-free, massaged-to-death tuna - I’m afraid my expectations are too high to eat it right now.

Comment by h sofia 02.11.08 @ 1:05 pm

I suppose there are at least two ethical levels for individuals. There’s the personal level regarding mercury, and the global level regarding overfishing. Either ethical level makes it difficult for me to eat much fish. I eat wild salmon occasionally, but just tend to stay away.

Comment by Ms. Theologian 02.11.08 @ 1:15 pm

Do you take fish oil pills at least? Supposedly these are very helpful.

Comment by h sofia 02.11.08 @ 9:18 pm

It is meatless Fridays. There is no mandate we would have to eat fish because we are abstaining from meat. I’ve never heard it referred to as fish-eating Fridays. Maybe the older Catholics focus on fish as an alternative. But today there are so many alternatives that any concern about fish is irrelevant (or just another way of misconstruing a very peaceful religion).

Comment by J Mann 02.12.08 @ 10:18 pm

I believe the point was that eating fish instead of “meat” per se has ethical ramifications on the personal and global level. Hence the question as to whether clergy should urge fishless Fridays.

Comment by Ms. Theologian 02.13.08 @ 8:11 am



Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)