Doubt II: In what way natural fasting is broken

THIS fasting means abstinence from any eatable thing by way of food, drink, or medicine, even if modest, de consecr. dist. 1. cap. Sacramenta. Required indeed for such receiving is matter that can be altered in the stomach, as Lugo teaches de Euch. disp. 15. sect. 2. num. 28. If, however, per accidens it be not alterable, he violates it. Required also is the form, which is the vital passage into the stomach; for this gives that matter the being of food. From the varied consideration, surely, of this matter and form arise various opinions on the breaking of the natural fast.

So also they say that noxious things are taken even by way of medicine, as poison. Many comprehend under this whatever is passed outside through the mouth; others deny it.

THEY ASK, then, first, whether if the remains of the food of the preceding day, sticking to the teeth, be voluntarily swallowed, they impede communion.

THAT THEY IMPEDE assert Vasquez in 3. part. tract. 3. dub. 11. cap. 4. num. 30, Filliucius tom. 1. tract. 4. cap. 8. num. 236, Nungus 3. part. Tom. 1. quaest. 80. art. 8, Paludanus in 4. dist. 8. quaest. 2. art. 2. concl. 2. It seems to St. Thomas 3. part. quaest. 80. art. 8. ad 4. Layman inclines so lib. 5. tract. 4. cap. 6. num. 18.

YET I hold the opposite, as probable, with Suarez 3. part. tract. 3. disput. 68. sect. 4, Henriquez lib. 8. cap. 50, Ioan. de Cruz in direct. quaest. 5. dub. 4, Mosseius in sum. tom. 1. tract. 3. cap. 10. num. 13, Pitigianensis 4. Tom. 1. dist. 18. quaest. 3. art. 3, Camerata de sacram. tract. 4. cap. 10. dub. 19, Rodriquez in sum. Tom. 1. cap. 103. num. 3, Coninch. de sacram. quaest. 80. art. 8. num. 47, Diana part. 3. Tract. 4. resol. 57 — where, however, he says they should be persuaded to spit them out. The reason is, because they fall not by way of food, but of saliva.

HE ADDS, if anyone draw in a little water through the nostrils, which fall into the stomach, it does not impede him from communion, because it has not been passed by way of food or drink. And he teaches, if anything be drawn in by way of respiration, even if it can nourish or alter, as a fly. So also Fagundez de praecep. Eccles. praecep. 3. cap. 5. num. 14, and others. Bassaeus adds V. Communio: if one swallow blood falling from the head, drops of rain, or any particle of broth passed in unnoticed in the preliminary tasting.

THEY ASK secondly, whether if one swallow paper, chalk, a little piece of wood, or something similar eatable, they break the natural fast and impede the most holy communion.

THAT THEY IMPEDE many bring forward, cited by Diana p. p. 34 Tract. 14. de celebr. miss. resol. 51, and Parte 4. tract. 4. resol. 104. So Henriquez lib. 8 cap. 49, and in the gloss, line O., Nungus tract. 1. in 1. part. quaest. 50. art. 8, Villalobos tom. 1. tract. 7. diffic. 39, Reginaldus tract. 2. lib. 29 cap. 6. num. 118, Naldus V. Euch. num. 10, Layman lib. 5. tract. 4. cap. 6, Scortia de sacrificio Missae, lib. 2. cap. 7.

ABOUT Tobacco, if taken in the mouth it be swallowed, the same teach, Diana part. 5. tract. 13. resol. 1, and others.

AND indeed this opinion is to me the more probable, although they hold the opposite as more probable: Sum. Corona part. 4. cap. 4. num. 65, Ioan. de la Cruz p. 2 de Euch. quaest. 5. dub. 4, Ludovicus de S. Iuan: sum. part. 1. Tract. de Euch. cap. 23. concl. 4, Diana loco cit., and part. 3. tract. 4. resol. 38, who concedes the same of the remainder of yesterday's food, with Tabiena V. commun. §. 42, Tannerus tract. 4. disp. 5. quaest. 8. dub. 4. num. 79, Sanchez select. disp. 41. num. 23, Pasqualig. decis. 312, Ioan. Cruz quaest. 5. dub. 4, Baunius punct. cit. tract. 10. quaest. 22 — namely, that if it be swallowed, it does not impede communion.