Lent is No Criminal...or Excuse for Anorexics

Religious controversy, one of the most popular forms of controversy in the modern world, has recently gained steam due to the Catholic liturgical season of Lent. For example, Jennifer Graham of The Boston Globe's article of late puts Catholics in the hot seat, blaming Christianity for anorexia. Graham makes these claims by means of personal experience, recounting her experiences gained from accessing a "pro-ana" or pro-anorexic website. She tells of the girls frequent mentions of how they are using Lent to diet excessively and further themselves in the pursuit of their ideal of extreme, unnatural thinness. There is, of course, not just one side to this argument. For example, St. Thomas Aquinas' ancient writings - specifically Question 147 of his religious work entitled Summa Theologica - states the beliefs of the Catholic Church on the question of fasting. They serve to counter general arguments against fasting as well as Jennifer Graham's claims. St. Thomas Aquinas begins Question 147 with Article 1, explaining why fasting is considered a virtuous act. Opposition claims that fasting is not a virtuous act for a variety of reasons, including that it is not always acceptable to God. In her article, Jennifer Graham sided with the opposition, saying that it is instead an excuse for anorexics. However, St. Thomas Aquinas counters the opposition and upholds the virtuousness of fasting, saying that fasting is intended to bring about "virtuous good" in three ways. One way is by cooling feelings of lust through abstaining from meat and drink. The second way is by clearing one's mind in order to better see and understand God. The third is by bringing us back to God after sinning. Another vitally important article of Question 147 is Article 2, explaining why fasting is considered an act of abstinence. Opposition claims that fasting is not an act of abstinence while it rather applies to other virtues. Jennifer Graham also seems to side with the opposition, for she believes that fasting is not abstinence but rather self-starvation gone too far. St. Thomas Aquinas once again counters the opposition and illustrates why fasting is in fact an act of abstinence, saying that abstinence is the means by which one may fast. His argument also serves to counter Jennifer Graham’s claims as he says, “Properly speaking fasting consists in abstaining from food, but speaking metaphorically it denotes abstinence from anything harmful, and such especially is sin.” In this statement, he denies that fasting is self-starvation gone too far, but rather that fasting is not just meant to be taken literally by merely abstaining from food and that it has a greater meaning – it accounts for spiritual fasting, or abstaining from sin. As seen in Articles 1 and 2 of Question 147 among others, Lent is no criminal, or excuse, or challenge for anorexics. It is intended to allow for spiritual cleansing, and some girls have just taken it too far.