Here M. Ivel will grant,1 I •rowe, that this was a Private Mass. The place was private: The audience not public nor common: the purpose touching the noble man was private: The Communion also Private, I mean for the Patriarchs part alone, for beside that the story maketh no mention of any other communicants, he could not be assured of that noble man to communicate with him. For where as he could by no means before bring him to forgive his enemy, he had but a small conjecture, he should bring it to pass now. And again, though he had conceived no distrust of his reconciliation upon this holy policy, yet we may doubt, whether the Patriarch forthwith without further and more mature probation, and examination, which S. Paul in this case requireth, would have admitted him to receive our Lords Body so upon the sudden. Now for the servant, it is a strait case that so holy and so great a Patriarch, and Bishop of so populous a City, as Alexandria was, understanding that Mass could not be celebrated without breach of Christs institution (as M. Ivel holdeth opinion) except he have a number to communicate with him in the same place: should have none of his spiritual flock with him at so weighty a matter of conscience, but one only, and him his own household servant. He was no• so simple as not to think, that the servant might be letted from receiving by some sudden pang coming upon him, or with some cogitation and conscience of his own unworthiness suddenly coming to his mind. If either this, or any other let had chanced, in what case had the Patriarch been then? He had been like by M. Ivel's doctrine, to have broken Christs institution, and so God's commandment, through an others defect, which were strange. But I judge that M. Ivel, who harpeth so many jarring arguments against Private Mass upon the very word Communion, will not allow that for a good and lawfula Communion, where there is but one only to receive with the Priest. Verily it appeareth by his Sermon, that all the people ought to re•eive, or to beb driven out of the Church. Now therefore to an other example of the Private Mass.
Here M. Iuel wil graunt,1 I •rowe, that this was a Priuate Masse. The place was priuate: The audience not publique nor common: the purpose touching the noble man was priuate: The Communion also Priuate, I meane for the Patriarkes parte alone, for biside that the story maketh no mention of any other cōmunicantes, he coulde not be assured of that noble man to communicate with him. For where as he coulde by no meanes before bringe him to forgiue his enemie, he had but a smal coniecture, he should bringe it to passe nowe. And againe, though he had conceiued no distrust of his reconciliation vpon this holy policie, yet wee may doubt, whether the Patriarke foorthwith without further and more mature probation, and examination, whiche S. Paule in this case requireth, woulde haue admitted him to receiue our Lordes Bodie so vpon the suddaine. Now for the seruante, it is a streight case that so holy and so great a Patriarke, and Bishop of so populous a Citie, as Alexandria was, vnderstanding that Masse coulde not be celebrated without breache of Christes institution (as M. Iuel holdeth opinion) excepte he haue a number to communicate with him in the same place: shoulde haue none of his spiritual flocke with him at so weightie a mater of conscience, but one onely, and him his owne householde seruaunt. He was no• so simple as not to thinke, that the seruant mighte be letted from receiuinge by some suddaine pange cominge vpon him, or with some cogitation and conscience of his owne vnwoorthinesse suddainely comminge to his minde. If either this, or any other let had chaunced, in what case had the Patriarke been then? He had been like by M. Iuels doctrine, to haue broken Christes institution, and so Goddes commaundement, through an others defecte, whiche were straunge. But I iudge that M. Iuel, who harpeth so many iarringe argumentes againste Priuate Masse vpon the very woorde Communion, wil not allowe that for a good and lawfula Communion, where there is but one onely to receiue with the Prieste. Verely it appeareth by his Sermon, that al the people ought to re•eiue, or to beb driuen out of the Churche. Now therefore to an other example of the Priuate Masse.
- 1Private Mass. Private F• ble.Priuate Masse. Priuate F• ble.
- aOrder was taken, that at the receiving of the Communion, there should b• twelve persons at the least, and never under. S. Basil, Exercitationis ad pieta•ē, Sermone. 4•Order vvas taken, that at the receiuinge of the Cōmunion, there should b• tvvelue personnes at the least, and neuer vnder. S. Basil, Exercitationis ad pieta•ē, Sermone. 4•
- bThis Decree as it is supposed was made by Anacletus, and Cal•• immediately after the Apostles time. De Con. dist. •. Episcopu•.This Decree as it is supposed vvas made by Anacletus, and Cal•• immediatly after the Apostles time. De Con. dist. •. Episcopu•.
