CHAPTER II: ON THE MATTER AND FORM OF THE SACRAMENTS

1210. - Definitions. Matter is a sensible thing to be determined to the notion of a Sacrament through form. Hence matter is that which in the Sacrament is more indifferent, and has a less perfect signification; and therefore it must be determined through another thing for signifying.

Matter is twofold: one remote, and another proximate. The former is the sensible thing itself, which is employed in the Sacrament, or the thing about which the sacramental action is exercised. The latter is the very application, or use, of the remote matter in the sacramental action. Thus in Baptism water is the remote matter, ablution the proximate matter.

But form is the part of the Sacrament which determines the matter for effecting the Sacrament, and which ordinarily (n. 1554. II.) consists in words uttered by the Minister.

1211. Principles. - I. Matter and form are altogether necessary for the validity of a Sacrament; therefore, with either one lacking, Sacraments cannot be confected. The reason is, because a Sacrament cannot be confected except in that mode in which Christ instituted it, who alone is the author of the Sacraments. It is of faith. It is clear besides from dogmatic definitions, especially from the Council of Florence in the Decree of Union, etc.

II. In confecting a Sacrament, outside the case of necessity, matter and form ought to be employed morally certain. The reason is, because, unless necessity urges, it is not lawful to use probability which does not remove the danger of invalidity. Cf. n. 60. I.

III. Matter and form ought to be united, or applied, by the same Minister and toward the same subject. "The reason is, because if one should place the matter, and another the form, the words of the form would not be verified; for the Minister, who, for example, should say: I baptize thee, while another pours out the water, would utter what is false, since he himself would not baptize.

IV. That a Sacrament be valid, there ought to be so great a conjunction or simultaneity between matter and form that one affects the other. The reason is, because otherwise the words would not fall upon such a thing, nor therefore with it constitute one total sign.

1. In the Eucharist physical simultaneity is required between matter and form; for the demonstrative pronoun THIS and HERE cannot be verified unless the matter is present.

2. In the other Sacraments moral simultaneity suffices, and that diverse according to the diverse nature of the individual Sacraments. Hence:

a) In Penance absolution can be deferred for some little time, for example for an hour; for it was instituted in the manner of a forensic judgment, in which sentence is not always immediately pronounced.

b) In Matrimony the consent of one party can follow the consent of the other for as long as this is morally judged to endure, as happens in contracts, whose nature Matrimony imitates.

c) In the other Sacraments, for validity, it suffices that the matter be applied immediately (i.e. within a space less than one Pater) before the form is pronounced, or immediately after it has been uttered. - In practice, however, as safer, the sentence of Cajetan is to be advised, which requires that the form be begun before the application of the matter is completed, or conversely.¹

1212. - There is given a twofold change both in matter and in form, namely substantial and accidental.

The change will be substantial in matter, if according to the use and estimation of men this cannot be called the same as that which was determined by Christ, as if in Baptism you should employ wine instead of water; but in form, if the sense of the words intended by Christ is changed into another, as if in Baptism you should say: I anoint thee in the name, etc. But the change is called accidental which is concerned only with the qualities of the thing, as if you baptize with water not blessed; or which does not change the sense of the words, as if in place of: I baptize, you should say: I wash.¹

Principles. - I. Every substantial change in the matter and form of a Sacrament invalidates the Sacrament, because it is no longer the rite instituted by Christ; and, if it is voluntary, constitutes grave sin, because it inflicts grave injury upon the author of the rite.

II. No accidental change in the matter and form invalidates a Sacrament; yet it induces grave or light sin, according as it is, or is not, notable.

The form of the Sacraments can be changed substantially in many ways:

1° By subtraction of an essential syllable or words, as if you say: I baptize, omitting that word thee; but not of accidental words, as if in Latin you say: I baptize thee, omitting that word I.

2° By addition, by which the truth of the Sacrament is taken away, as: I baptize thee in the name of the greater Father, of the lesser Son; but not by that addition by which only the error of the Minister is expressed, in a separate proposition, and not as an explicit or implicit condition, as: by the authority conferred upon me by Calvin, I, etc.

3° By variation of words through others not synonymous, as if in place of: I absolve, you say: I change.

4° By transposition of words, which ordinarily is only accidental, as: Thee I baptize.

5° By corruption of the same, for example by changing letters, which will more easily be substantial at the beginning than at the end of the words; because more easily for hearers the sense will be changed, for example in "in the name of the mother" for "of the father," than in "of the chalice" for "of the cup."

6° By interruption, by which the unity of the sentence is taken away, as if, after having said: This is, you should recite a Psalm or delay long; but not if, after having said: I thee, you should cough, impose silence, saying: Be silent, chatterers, and then at once conclude: baptize, etc.

1213. - A threefold rule must be established:

I. Sacraments can be repeated whenever there is a prudent doubt concerning their value. The reason is, because if perchance the Sacrament were not valid, those who approach to receive it would be deprived of its fruit. But that a prudent fear of so great an inconvenience is a sufficient reason why the Sacrament should be repeated is clear from the very well-known axiom: Sacraments are on account of men.

II. Sacraments generally cannot be repeated without grave sin, when there is no prudent doubt concerning their value. The reason is, because without cause they would be repeated, and therefore a grave injury would be inflicted upon them.

III. Sacraments ought to be repeated whenever, a prudent doubt concerning their value having arisen, charity, justice, or religion demands this; that is, whenever from justice, charity, or religion they ought to have been confected or administered. The reason is, because the nullity of the Sacrament, if perchance it were present, would turn to the harm of the neighbor, and sometimes to contempt or irreverence of Religion. But then they are to be repeated only conditionally, that reverence for the Sacrament may be provided for.¹

1214. Resolves. - 1° The Sacraments more necessary, and those which are conferred only once, namely Baptism and Order, are more easily to be repeated, even if a much greater probability makes for the value of the Sacrament against doubtful or only slightly probable reasons in the opposite direction. - Thus commonly.

2° Absolution is to be repeated with a penitent guilty of mortal sin, if there is prudent doubt concerning the due utterance of the form. But if the penitent is not in the state of mortal sin, it will not be necessary to repeat the form, since Communion can be permitted to him even without absolution.

3° The Minister who doubts lightly, and does not know why he fears, or only does not reflexively remember that he pronounced the words of the form, sins mortally per se if he repeats the form, or even one word three or four times. The reason is, because he changes the form, and introduces a new rite concerning the gravest action of all. Moreover he exhibits Christ, whom he represents, as speaking ridiculously. In practice, however, the scrupulous who repeat the form are for the most part excused from mortal sin, indeed often also from venial sin, because, too much agitated by scruples, from perplexity or without advertence, they act so foolishly. - Thus Voit.¹

4° If in Mass after the Consecration a doubt arises for you concerning the due utterance of the form, or concerning its total omission, you ought not, nor can you, repeat anything, since otherwise you are not accustomed to omit these things; for one must judge from things commonly occurring, unless nevertheless you doubt very probably, as the Rubric speaks. - See St. Alphonsus.²