Doubt V: On the evening collation

A SINGLE meal, as I said, belongs to the essence of the fast; but by admitted custom the evening collation has also been allowed for some refreshment. We must therefore consider what quantity and what quality of food is allowed.

AS TO quantity, the first opinion allows three ounces. So James de Graff, Decis. part. 1. lib. 2. cap. 37. num. 29.

THE SECOND opinion extends it to four ounces. So Homob. in Exam. Eccles. part. 1. tract. 6. cap. 20. quaest. 9. Azor part. 1. lib. 7. c. 8. quaestio 8. Sà n. 8. Lezana 4. v. Ieiun. Victorellus in notis ad Manuale Nauar. cap. 21. and others.

THE THIRD opinion grants six ounces: Villalob. tom. 1. tract. 23. disp. 7. Filliucius tract. 27. part. 2. Fagundez 4. part. lib. 1. cap. 4. Diana part. 1. tract. 9. resol. 1. Sancius d. 52.

THE FOURTH opinion permits eight ounces. So Fagundez de praecep. Eccles. tract. 4. lib. 1. cap. 4. who says Suarez also answered thus. These opinions to be probable among the more recent authors, Bassaeus says, V. Ieiun. 1.

THE FIFTH opinion grants a fourth part of what is necessary for supper. So Reginaldus tract. 1. lib. 4. cap. 14. dub. 10. Layman lib. 4. tract. 8. cap. 1. Filliucius tom. 2. tract. 27. part. 2. cap. 3. quaestio 7. where he testifies that this was so defined in a famous Academy. But Diana, Loco citando, calls it lax; while Turrianus in select. centur. 2. dub. 34. calls it scandalous.

DIANA, p. p. Tract. 9., who de Ieiunio resol. 1., embraces the fourth.

HE CONCLUDES, however, with Lessius lib. 4. cap. 2. dub. 2. Bonacina de legibus, disp. ultim. quaest. 1. puncto 3. Tannero disp. 3. quaest. 3. dub. 5. num. 92. that as to quantity one must stand by the custom of places; by the custom, however, of good men who are of fearful conscience, not of the lax, as Fernandez also teaches part. 2. cap. 8. §. Tolet. lib. 6. cap. 2. Coened. quaest. 4.

SOMEONE will wonder that I alone wish to go before the others. I confess that none of these opinions pleases me, but I seek a proportion, with Bonacina part. 3. Lezana V. Ieiun. num. 4. Diana loco cit. Nauar. num. 13. Caietano V. Ieiun. Lessio lib. 4. cap. 2. dub. 2. num. 11. yet not one of places, as these say, but of persons.

FOR FIRST, since the evening collation has been granted by custom for a slight refreshment, the custom is not to be judged by places but by persons throughout the whole Church of God, since in it the precept is universal as a whole. Therefore, since for the fast only one meal is necessary, we must see what quantity can make a second meal; but this is not an absolute quantity, but one relative to persons. Hence, since persons vary in the quantity of food to be taken, various quantities also will have to be assigned; for there are some for whom eight ounces will be almost a whole supper, or at least half, or a third part.

WHEREFORE I think great prudence is necessary, that the matter be done justly; and accordingly, since in the same place there are diversities of complexions, ages, etc., each must be charged to refresh himself moderately, by as much as a small portion of supper is set forth, say a sixth; for that of a fourth part I reject, as lax. To this Azor alludes, lib. 7. cap. 8. quaestio 8.: nobles are granted a somewhat larger collation, because they are of weaker health and accustomed to more delicate banquets. Tannerus subscribes, num. 91. Sancius select. disp. 52. but it displeases me; for complexions must be reckoned, in which very many nobles are in excellent condition, while many of the non-noble are weakened by labors, slender diet, illnesses, and other discomforts of life. Indeed often a smaller allowance must be granted to nobles, who live in idleness. I should like to know what nobility adds to complexions, unless perhaps to declining labors. Badly indeed does Bassaeus say that thus nothing is determined and scruples are stirred up.

THE GREATER difficulty concerns the quality of foods.

THEREFORE Diana asserts that fish, eggs, milk-dishes, and other substantial foods customary at supper cannot be taken. The reason is, because custom never prescribed such foods. But Villalobos reports tom. 1. tract. 23. dub. 7. Azor p. p. lib. 7. cap. 8. quaestio 9. Reginaldus tom. 1. lib 4. dub. 14. Fillincius prima 2. tract. 27. part. 2. cap. 2. dub. 6. Layman lib. 4. tract. 8. cap. 1. Fagundez de praecep. Eccles. tract. 4. lib. 1. cap. 4. Angles de ieiunio , quaest. 9. art. 2. Vivaldum in Candel. part. ultim. cap. 11. Betarducium in sum. cor. part. 1. cap. 1. Ledesmam tom. 2. tract. 17. cap. 2. diff. 5. Graff. decis. part. 1. lib. 2. cap. 57. Vegam part. 1. cap. 15, casu 5. Antonium de isteratis part. 2. cap. 19. Molfesium tom. 1. tract. 10. cap. 3. Sylvium 2. 2. q. 147. art. 6. quaestio 2. and others.

THEREUPON he censures Bonacina Tract. de legib. dub. ult. puncto 3. for teaching the opposite; but on this side are Bassaeus, Pasqualig. decis. 113. and others among these authors.

THEY ASK, however, whether in the evening refreshment a broth from cooked bread, or bread with almonds, can be of the supper kind, even in that quantity which could be taken separately.

LAYMAN answers negatively lib. 4. tract. 8. cap. 1. Fillincius tom. 2. tract. 27. part. 1. cap. 2. Yet Azor concedes it part. 1. lib. 7. cap. 9. quaestio 8. Reginaldus tom. 1. lib. 4. cap. 14. num. 185. Bonacina loco citato.

FOR the night of the Nativity, however, Diana resol. 35. allows sixteen ounces of bread, or of sweetmeats, with Fagundez praecep. 4. lib. 1. cap. 24. and Llamas admits this custom even for religious part. 3. cap. 5. §. 25.

OTHERS, however, do not admit this opinion: Navar. man. cap. 25. Rodriquez Tom. 1. cap. 12. Angles in 4. tract. de ieiunio , quaest. 9. art. 2. diffic. 4. Comparing Diana, who was endowed, or rather burdened, with a tall body.

YOU WILL ASK: whether on a fast day it is lawful to take the evening collation in the morning, and to take supper at night.

Azor denies it part. 1. lib. 7. cap. 8. quaestio 6. Llamas part. 3. cap. 5. §. 16. Fagundez praecep. 4. lib. 1. cap. 4. num. 16. Valentia quaest. 2. puncto 3. citing Nauarum and Caietan.

YET the more probable opinion is that it, even if done without reasonable cause, is only venial. So Layman lib. 4. tract. 8. cap. 1. Fernandez part. 2. cap. 8. §. Tolet. lib. 6. cap. 1. Fillincius tom. 2. tract. 27. part. 2. cap. 2. Lessius lib. 4. cap. 2. dub. 2. Villalobos Tom. 1. tract. 23. dub. 7. The reason is, because the substance of the fast is not broken, but only the circumstance of that little supper. So also Bassaeus V. Ieiun. 1.

DIANA, however, notes resol. 33. that this change, for a just cause, as on account of study, business, a journey, reading, etc., is not evil. Besides those cited he alleges Cenedum in qq. Can. quaest. 45. Bettam part. 1: casu 3. Naldum verb. Ieiunium , Tannerum disp. 3. quaest. 3. dub. 5. num. 92.