[Sca-cooks] Metal Poisoning from the fork

[Gretchen R Beck]

A quick google book search strongly suggests that Zachary's prohibition had to do with the practice of non-Christian German tribes of ritual horse slaughter with a feast following.  The theory being "pagan practice = bad", he forbid it in an attempt to differentiate converted Germans and prevent backsliding.

toodles, margaret
________________________________________
From: Sca-cooks [sca-cooks-bounces+grm+=andrew.cmu.edu at lists.ansteorra.org] on behalf of JIMCHEVAL at aol.com [JIMCHEVAL at aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 3:09 PM
To: sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Metal Poisoning from the fork

What you're essentially saying is that a pope was suggesting Catholics keep
 kosher. But this is extremely unlikely. Not only did Christians  regularly
eat pork, the Visigoths specifically banned keeping kosher:

"VIII. Jews shall not Divide their Food into Clean and Unclean,  According
to their Custom.
The blessed apostle Paul said, "To the pure all  things are pure," but
nothing is pure to those who are
defiled, because they  are unbelievers; and, for this reason, the execrable
life of the Jews and  the
vileness of their horrible belief, which is more foul than any other
detestable error, must be destroyed
and cast out. Therefore, no Jew shall  make a distinction between food
which is clean and unclean, as
established  by the customs and traditions of his ancient rites. No one
shall perversely  refuse to eat food
of any kind, whose condition is proved to be good. No one  shall reject one
article of food, and accept
another, unless the distinction  be such as is considered salutary and
proper by all Christians. Anyone
detected in the violation of this law shall be subjected to the punishment
instituted for the same. "

http://libro.uca.edu/vcode/vg12-2.pdf

The early Church was so concerned with anything "Judaizing" that the
passage you cite would, if anything, have incited Christians to do the opposite
(as they did with pork). And why would the Penitentials then say (as they
do)  that eating horsemeat was not customary, but nor was it forbidden, and
that  eating hare was actually a good thing?

Honestly, I think if a pope had  meant to relate this to a specific
Biblical injunction, he would (like the law  above) have cited it. But Zachary did
not. And again, it is very unlikely that a  Catholic pope of the period
would have (even implicitly) referenced  kashrut.


Jim  Chevallier
_www.chezjim.com_ (http://www.chezjim.com/)

Beyond Apicius (2):  recipes from other Roman sources
_http://leslefts.blogspot.com/2014/05/beyond-apicius-2-recipes-from-other.ht
ml_
(http://leslefts.blogspot.com/2014/04/beyond-wine-water-and-beer-what-else.html)







In a message dated 5/14/2014 11:48:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
rcarrollmann at gmail.com writes:

The
horse is not discussed in the verses about kosher animals,  but as it does
not have a cloven hoof *and* does not chew its cud, its  status is clear.
These rules, with other examples, are repeated in  Deuteronomy  14.



_______________________________________________
Sca-cooks mailing list
Sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org