Article III: On the Constitution of the Sacraments, or on Matter and Form

1399. "All the Sacraments are perfected by three things, namely by things as matter, by words as form, and by the person of the minister conferring the Sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does." Thus Eugene IV, to the Armenians. We shall treat of the MINISTER in chapter II.

DEFINITIONS. Generally, that has the notion of matter which is determinable and perfectible through another; but that has the notion of form which is determinative and perfective of another.⁵ Hence in the Sacraments:

1. MATTER is a sensible thing, to be determined to the notion of a Sacrament through the form. It is twofold: remote, or the pre-existing sensible thing which is employed in the Sacrament, or about which the sacramental action is exercised; and proximate, which 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.

2. FORM is the part of the Sacrament which determines the matter to producing the sacramental effect; and it consists in words uttered by the minister, or, for the Sacrament of Matrimony, and this alone, in signs which can hold the place of words.⁶

1400. Principles. I. Each Sacrament has its OWN matter and form, divinely instituted. It is certain that Christ determined in species the matter and form of Baptism and the Eucharist, as is clear from the Scriptures. As regards the other Sacraments, the same is not altogether certain. For some, with St. Bonaventure, probably think that the Lord constituted the matter and form of several Sacraments, for example Confirmation and Order, only in a general way, by committing to his Apostles the care of determining those signs more particularly when occasion should be given. Yet others, with St. Thomas, more commonly and more probably affirm that all matters, and also forms as to substance, were determined in species by Christ; and consequently that the diversity of sacramental rites which exists between Latins and Greeks, or between the ancient and present Church, does not pertain to the essence of the things.⁷

Hence you will deduce: 1. Christ the Lord must be called the immediate author of the Sacraments, because, even in the former opinion, he distinguished all the Sacraments singly. 2. The Church, in the dispensation of the Sacraments, can establish or change those things which she judges to be more expedient for the utility of those receiving or for the veneration of the Sacraments themselves, yet with their substance preserved, as Trent has it, sess. 21, cap. 2.

1401. II. For making a Sacrament, certain matter and form must be applied TOGETHER by the same minister, with every essential VARIATION excluded. But that, from the institution of Christ, conjunction, invariability, and certitude of matter and form are required will be clear from what is to be said; for each must be treated singly.

1402. So that a Sacrament may be validly made, two RULES must be observed:

Rule 1. Matter and form must be UNITED or applied by the same minister and toward the same subject.⁸ The reason is that, if one should place the matter and another the form, the words of the form would not be verified; for example, if Titius should say: "I baptize thee," while Caius pours the water, Titius would utter something false, as is plain.

Rule 2. Between matter and form there must be such a CONJUNCTION that, according to the moral estimation of men, with the nature of each Sacrament considered, the one affects the other; or, in other words, the conjunction must be such that, according to human usage, the words are judged to fall upon such a thing and to constitute with it one moral sign. Otherwise the words of the form would not express the truth.

We said with the nature of each Sacrament considered; for according to the diversity of the Sacraments, the conjunction, or simultaneity, must be diverse.

Whence: 1. In the EUCHARIST physical conjunction is required, since the demonstrative pronoun This and This cannot be verified unless the matter is present. 2. In BAPTISM,⁹ CONFIRMATION, EXTREME UNCTION, and ORDER it suffices for validity that the matter be applied immediately before the form is pronounced, or immediately after it has been uttered. But a delay of one Our Father between the two would invalidate the Sacrament. Whence, in practice, the opinion of Cajetan, as safer, is to be advised; he requires that the form be begun before the application of the matter is completed, or conversely. 3. In PENANCE, which follows the nature of a judgment, a longer delay of time, for example of one hour, can intervene between accusation and absolution. 4. Finally, in MATRIMONY, the same interval is admitted as in contracts, namely it suffices that the consent of one be placed while the consent of the other perseveres.¹⁰

1403. Preliminary note. In the matter and form of the Sacraments there can occur a twofold variation or change, namely substantial and accidental. "A substantial change of matter is said to occur when, according to the common use and estimation of men, it differs, in name and in reality, from that which Christ prescribed. An accidental one is said to occur when it retains the same use and name with it. A change of form is essential when the same sense does not remain; accidental, when it remains."¹¹

1404. Principles. I. A SUBSTANTIAL change in matter or in form, whether it is made on purpose and deliberately, or from error or inadvertence, always prevents the validity of the Sacrament. The reason is that through such a change the rite instituted by Christ is taken away (cf. n. 1400).

1405. II. An ACCIDENTAL change does not prevent the validity of the Sacrament; but, according to the gravity or smallness of the change, it induces grave or light sin. The reason for the first is that an accidental change does not take away the institution of Christ. The reason for the second is that it takes away the rite prescribed by the Church: either under grave obligation, for example when she commands that consecrated water be employed in solemn Baptism; or under light obligation, for example when she orders that even the least interruption in pronouncing the words of the form be avoided.¹²

Matter is changed substantially in many ways, the principal of which we shall enumerate in their proper places.

1406. Form can be changed especially in six MODES, as is indicated by these little verses:

Take nothing from the form, add nothing, vary nothing; Beware to transpose, to corrupt words, to delay.

1. By OMISSION: a change of this kind is substantial if essential syllables or words are omitted, for example the word Thee in the conferral of Baptism; but it is only accidental if non-essential words are omitted, for example I, in the same conferral of Baptism.

2. By ADDITION: this is substantial if it takes away the truth of the Sacrament, for example if you say: I baptize thee in the name of the greater Father, of the lesser Son, etc.; accidental, if it does not remove the due sense, for example if you say: In the name of the Father, who created thee, etc.

3. By VARIATION of words: this can be substantial or accidental according as the explicit sense of the form is taken away, for example if you say: In the name of the Most Holy Trinity; or is retained, for example, I wash thee.

4. By TRANSPOSITION; this ordinarily is only accidental, as: Thee I baptize.

5. By CORRUPTION of words, namely from a change of letters. Such a change is more easily substantial at the beginning than at the end of words, because the sense is more easily changed for those hearing, for example if one says: in the name of the mother instead of of the Father; than if one says: chalis instead of chalice.

6. By INTERRUPTION, by which the unity of the speech can be taken away, as if, after having said, This is, you recite a psalm or delay much; but not if, after having said, I thee, you cough, or impose silence on children, and then immediately conclude baptize, etc.

1407. Preliminary note. Doubt concerning the matter or form of the Sacraments can be of law or of fact. The first is when it is doubted whether such matter, for example water extracted from flowers in Baptism, or such a form, was instituted by Christ as valid. The other is when it is doubted whether the matter or form to be employed, or already employed, is that which Christ instituted: for example, whether this liquid is water; whether the form was duly uttered.

RULES. In every doubt, whether of law or of fact, concerning matter and form, or generally concerning the VALIDITY of the Sacraments, three rules must be observed: The first is: If there is possibility, let the safest way be chosen, that is, the safer or morally certain opinion. The second: If there is no possibility, let the way be chosen which is nearest to the safest, that is, when certain matter is lacking, let doubtful or probable matter be employed, but under a conditioned form, so that counsel may be taken both for the necessity or grave utility of the recipient, and for the reverence due to the Sacrament. The third: When the impossibility ceases, what the impossibility prohibited must cautiously be supplied.¹³ The first and second rule have already been weighed in the Treatise on Conscience (n. 82). Finally, concerning the third, here:

1408. IT IS ASKED. Whether and when a Sacrament not rightly made can or must be REPEATED?

Resp. 1. If it is prudently doubted whether one of the three unrepeatable Sacraments has been validly conferred, it must again be conferred under condition: Baptism indeed, on account of the greatest necessity of this Sacrament; Order, lest it happen that the Sacraments be invalidly administered; Confirmation, lest the soldier of Christ lack strength for constantly holding and professing the faith. The reason is that, on the one hand, in doubt concerning the validity of a Sacrament, the opinion favoring souls is to be preferred; but on the other hand, no irreverence is inflicted upon the Sacrament when it is conferred under condition from a reasonable cause.

Resp. 2. If there is prudent doubt concerning the validity of a repeatable Sacrament, it CAN be conferred again under condition when notable utility of neighbor is present; but it MUST be, when the Sacrament is necessary. The reason is the same as above.

Resp. 3. To repeat, on account of an empty doubt, a Sacrament, although under condition, is of itself a grave sin. The reason is that a rash repetition of a sacramental action is grave irreverence. Nevertheless, by accident the scrupulous are excused, on account of perplexity. And he seems to sin only venially who repeats a word or syllable in the utterance of the form.

Note. When doubtful Baptism is conferred publicly, the condition must be expressed in words (as the Ritual wills), lest those standing by believe that Baptism is being repeated absolutely against the law of the Church. Indeed, it will be safer (or at least more becoming) to express the condition in words whenever any Sacrament whatever is ministered under condition, whether publicly or privately.¹