The fasts, proposed and observed by parliament in the first half of the seventeenth century, have always been defined as opportunities for propaganda. This article focuses instead on their cultural and religious meanings: why MPs believed that the act of fasting itself was important and what they hoped it would achieve. It argues that fasts were proposed for two reasons: to forge unity between parliament and the king at a time of growing division, with the aim of making parliamentary sessions more productive and successful, and to provide more direct resolution to the nation’s problems by invoking divine intervention. Fast motions commanded widespread support across parliament because they were rooted in the dominant theory of causation – divine providence – and reflected the gradual conventionalisation of fasting in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. However, this consensus seemed to wane in the early 1640s as divisions between Charles I and some of his most vocal MPs widened, while the fast day observed on 17 November 1640 was used by some MPs to express their opposition to Charles’s religious policy, especially regarding the siting of the communion table/altar and the position from where the service was to be read. The article concludes by reflecting on how a study of parliamentary fasting can contribute to wider debates on commensality and abstinence.

中文翻译：

---

早期斯图亚特议会中的禁食文化*

17 世纪上半叶议会提出并遵守的斋戒一直被定义为宣传的机会。本文重点关注他们的文化和宗教意义：为什么国会议员认为禁食本身很重要，以及他们希望它能实现什么。它认为，禁食的提议有两个原因：在分裂日益加剧的情况下，在议会和国王之间建立统一，目的是使议会会议更有成效和更成功，以及通过援引神的旨意为国家问题提供更直接的解决方案。干涉。快速议案在议会中获得了广泛支持，因为它们植根于占主导地位的因果关系理论——天意——并反映了 16 世纪末和 17 世纪初禁食的逐渐规范化。然而，这种共识似乎在 1640 年代初逐渐减弱，因为查理一世和他的一些最有发言权的国会议员之间的分歧越来越大，而一些国会议员则利用 1640 年 11 月 17 日的斋戒日来表达他们对查理的宗教政策的反对，特别是关于圣餐台/祭坛的位置以及阅读服务的位置。文章最后反思了对议会禁食的研究如何有助于更广泛的关于共融和禁欲的辩论。这种共识似乎在 1640 年代初逐渐减弱，因为查理一世和他的一些最有发言权的国会议员之间的分歧扩大，而一些国会议员利用 1640 年 11 月 17 日的斋戒日来表达他们对查理的宗教政策的反对，尤其是在选址方面圣餐台/祭坛的位置以及阅读服务的位置。文章最后反思了对议会禁食的研究如何有助于更广泛的关于共融和禁欲的辩论。这种共识似乎在 1640 年代初逐渐减弱，因为查理一世和他的一些最有发言权的国会议员之间的分歧扩大，而一些国会议员利用 1640 年 11 月 17 日的斋戒日来表达他们对查理的宗教政策的反对，尤其是在选址方面圣餐台/祭坛的位置以及阅读服务的位置。文章最后反思了对议会禁食的研究如何有助于更广泛的关于共融和禁欲的辩论。