Sunday, November 29, 2015

What's the difference? Government regulates food ingredients or the Pope regulates ingredients

I've talked about this before, and since it's the Christmas Holidays I thought I would bring it up again.

The whole idea of discussing this is to ask the following question:  If the Pope decided today to force all of the world to follow certain dietary rules, would we follow him?  If not, why are we allowing the government to tell us what food we can and can not buy or use? The transfat stupidity is a good example of this. 

Stollen is a favorite holiday cake in Germany mainly during Christmas.  I would call it a "poor man's fruit cake" since the only fruit in it are raisins (there are variations, though). Its roots go back several hundred years when the Catholic Church governed over the affairs of men.

Here is the Wikipedia article on the salient details:
Early Stollen was different, the ingredients were very different - flour, oats and water.[6]

As a Christmas bread stollen was baked for the first time at the Council of Trent in 1545,[7] and was made with flour, yeast, oil and water.

The Advent season was a time of fasting, and bakers were not allowed to use butter, only oil, and the cake was tasteless and hard.[4]

In the 15th century, in medieval Saxony (in central Germany, north of Bavaria and south of Brandenburg), the Prince Elector Ernst (1441–1486) and his brother Duke Albrecht (1443–1500) decided to remedy this by writing to the Pope in Rome. The Saxon bakers needed to use butter, as oil in Saxony was expensive, hard to come by, and had to be made from turnips.

Pope Nicholas V (1397–1455), in 1450[citation needed]denied the first appeal. Five popes died before finally, Pope Innocent VIII, (1432–1492)[7] in 1490 sent a letter to the Prince, known as the "Butter-Letter" which granted the use of butter (without having to pay a fine), but only for the Prince-Elector and his family and household.

Others were also permitted to use butter, but on the condition of having to pay annually 1/20th of a gold Gulden to support the building of the Freiberg Minster. The ban on butter was removed when Saxony became Protestant.

Over the centuries, the bread changed from being a simple, fairly tasteless "bread" to a sweeter bread with richer ingredients, such as marzipan, although traditional Stollen is not as sweet, light and airy as the copies made around the world.
At the Dresden Hauptbahnhof, they have a small walk-through history of the Stollen,  I have a photo of a portion of the display that gives a rather shortened version of the same story.  But it does mention the "Butter Letter" that just absolved the elite and wealthy from having to refrain from using butter.  Doesn't this sound like the Federal Government and the "too big to fail" banks and bankers?

So fast forward to today.  Can you imagine a WHOLE COUNTRY, such as the USA following the edicts of a holy man - or unholy man, whatever the case may be?  and bowing down to this holy man and only eating what he allows us to eat and when we can eat it?

If your answer is no, then please tell me why we allow the Federal  Government to tell us what foods we can and can not eat?  Shouldn't we be just as incensed at the Feds telling us what to do as we would be if the Pope told us all what to do?  I see no difference.

And you should see no difference, too, and be just as upset about it as I am.  And tell the Feds to stick it up their asses.







No comments:

Post a Comment