Twenty Years Without Food?

The story matters, but not in the way people expect.

There is an old account about Nicholas, a Swiss hermit from Flue, in Switzerland, who lived in the 1400s. It says that in the last part of his life, he lived for about twenty years without ordinary food, receiving only the Eucharist.

The claim has been passed down for centuries.

At the time, it was not brushed aside. Church authorities visited him and looked into it. Those who stayed close to him did not report signs of normal eating. Because of this, the account was taken seriously.

There were no medical tools, no long-term tracking, and no way to check the claim using the standards we use today. So it cannot be confirmed in a scientific way. What remains is a story that has lasted, not measured proof.

Nicholas was a husband and a father of ten. He worked and lived among others. Around the age of fifty, with his wife’s consent, he stepped away from public life and lived in solitude. It was during this time that the accounts of his fasting appeared.

People did not go to him because he did not eat.

They went to him because of how he saw things.

He was asked for advice during tense moments. His words were seen as fair and grounded. In at least one case, his counsel helped avoid conflict.

This shifts the focus to where it belongs.

Whether the details of the fasting can be fully explained or not, his life shows a clear move toward simplicity. He depended on less and became more at ease with it.

There is no reason to copy the extreme.

But the direction still makes sense.

A person today can choose fewer distractions, fewer habits that do not help, and a more careful use of time. Not to prove anything, but to live with a clearer head.

The story of Saint Nicholas of Flue is not a call to stop eating.

Life gets clearer when you stop filling it with just anything.

Let’s keep learning the saints’ way—day by day.

⌨ ᴛʸᵖⁱⁿᵍ ᴏᵘᵗ ᵒᶠ ᵗʰᵉ ʙˡᵘᵉ ᵈᵃʳᵉᵐ ᵐᵘˢⁱᶜ ᵇˡᵒᵍ

The Quiet Between Piano Notes • Darem Placer

When Not Eating Is Actually Good

Not eating isn’t always bad. Sometimes your body just needs a pause, not another plate. Learn how fasting really works.

We all grew up thinking we had to eat three times a day—breakfast, lunch, dinner. Miss one and people said you’d get weak. But that rule didn’t come from nature. Someone just made it up, and everyone went with it. Nobody even asked why.

Back in the 1700s, people simply ate when they got hungry—plain and real. Farmers ate after long days—hunters after a good catch. No clocks yet. No rules. Then came the 1800s—factories took over, and the bell started running people’s lives more than hunger did.

By the 1900s, cereal brands joined the game. They said breakfast was “the most important meal of the day.” Catchy line. Sold boxes. It wasn’t really about health—just a smart business move.

These days, science says your body doesn’t actually care much about time. When you give it space—what people now call intermittent fasting—your system fixes itself. Clears leftovers, steadies sugar, makes room to breathe again. It’s not starving. It’s letting your body catch up.

Still, fasting’s not for everyone. If your stomach’s weak or you’ve got ulcers or low sugar, don’t push it. Hunger pain isn’t strength—it’s your body saying, “slow down a bit.”

Try it this way:

• Not hungry? Then skip it. You’re fine.

• Hungry? Eat. Don’t wait too long, or you’ll attack the food like it’s been missing all day.

• Keep water near. Sip when you want.

• Eat real food when you do.

• Rest, too. If you barely slept or your head’s too tired, fasting won’t do you any good.

Skipping a meal once in a while’s okay. Your body could still be working on the food from earlier. You don’t need to chase every rule people made up. Just listen.

⌨ ᴛʸᵖⁱⁿᵍ ᴏᵘᵗ ᵒᶠ ᵗʰᵉ ʙˡᵘᵉ ᵈᵃʳᵉᵐ ᵐᵘˢⁱᶜ ᵇˡᵒᵍ