Article First. On Receiving the Sacraments Validly

41. Required conditions. 1. For validly receiving the sacraments (except penance), neither uprightness nor faith is required in the receiver; wherefore the Church has always held as valid baptism and orders conferred on heretics or impious persons.

a. Although faith is not required for validly receiving the sacraments, nevertheless for receiving them licitly and fruitfully faith is absolutely necessary, because without faith an adult is not capable of the grace of justification.¹

b. Penance is excepted, because for validly receiving the sacrament of penance certain acts of the penitent, either as matter or as a necessary condition, are prerequired; but the prerequired acts cannot be elicited without faith.

2. For validly receiving the sacraments no attention is required. And indeed, in an adult receiver nothing else is required except that the reception be habitually voluntary; but for this attention is not required, not even external attention.

Therefore distractions, even voluntary ones, in the very act of reception do not harm the validity of the sacraments. Hence Gury rightly notes (n. 229) that penitents are sometimes troubled by scruples in vain from the fact that they suffered distractions while they were being absolved, or that they were absolved without adverting to it. Nevertheless voluntary distractions in the reception of the sacraments must be carefully excluded because of the reverence due to them. For although voluntary distractions in receiving the sacraments do not impede their validity and can be excused from mortal sin, nevertheless they are by no means excused from venial sin: for holy things must be treated holily.

3. In infants and the perpetually mad no intention is required for receiving the sacraments of which they are capable; the intention of Christ and of the Church supplies the intention which they cannot have.

But they are capable of four sacraments: baptism, which they can and must receive; confirmation, which they indeed can receive, but need not; the eucharist, which now by the will of the Church they cannot receive; order, which they could never licitly receive. These things are evident from tradition, which manifests to us the will of Christ instituting the sacraments.

4. In adults, that is, in those who have attained the use of reason, for validly receiving the sacraments there is required at least a habitual implicit intention of receiving such a sacrament.² Wherefore it is not enough that they do not positively refuse the sacrament, but a positive will of receiving the sacrament is altogether required, and one that is true and serious: since from the will of Christ reception in adults must be voluntary, because He did not will them to be sanctified without their will and consent. But a habitual intention suffices, because for receiving a gift and benefit no intention is required besides free acceptance; and free acceptance is also contained in a habitual will. Indeed, in certain sacraments (confirmation, viaticum, extreme unction) a habitual implicit intention suffices, namely one which is contained in the will either of embracing the Christian religion, or of doing all things which are necessary unto salvation, or of living and dying in the Catholic manner: for in this will is contained the intention of receiving the sacraments which are necessary unto salvation, or at least the sacraments which the Church is accustomed to confer on the faithful placed in danger of death.

a. Almost all concede that in the will of embracing the Christian religion the intention of receiving baptism is implicitly contained, even if someone has not known baptism or has not thought about it; nevertheless they do not agree whether in the will of doing all things which are necessary unto salvation, such as is contained in every contrition, the intention of receiving baptism is included. Now although some authors affirm this,³ others nevertheless, not without reason, entirely deny it where the question concerns a man who has never heard anything about the Church of Christ and baptism.⁴ For in contrition, whether imperfect or perfect, there is indeed contained a will of baptism; but this will is not absolute, but only conditional, nor is it an immediate will of baptism itself, not even implicitly, but only a will of observing the precepts. And indeed the obligation which lies upon him who has heard nothing either about the Church or about baptism is not that of receiving baptism, but immediately is the obligation of examining the Christian religion when it has been proposed to him, and of embracing it through baptism if, after an examination has been made, he has recognized its truth and necessity. But this will (vow) of baptism indeed suffices for obtaining justification through perfect contrition, but does not suffice for validly receiving baptism: for for this an absolute intention is required, and indeed of baptism itself, at least implicit. The reason for this matter is this. He who receives baptism at the same time contracts the obligation of observing the precepts of the Christian religion; but an adult must will this very thing at least implicitly, because no one is bound except voluntarily; wherefore he must also know the same at least implicitly.⁵

b. Therefore the sacraments are validly conferred on those sleeping, drunk, and those who after attaining the use of reason have fallen into madness. Yet the sacraments cannot be validly administered to them unless beforehand they have had a will, at least implicit, of receiving them. Therefore if there are those who affirm that even an interpretative intention suffices for validly receiving the sacraments, this must be conceded if by this name a habitual intention is understood, namely in such a way that an actual, at least implicit, intention preceded and was never retracted and would now be present if thought of the sacrament occurred; but if by interpretative intention there is understood that which would now be present if thought of the sacrament occurred, although before this no thought and will of this sacrament had been had, this intention certainly has no value.

c. To the sick deprived of the senses, as regards intention, the sacraments (confirmation, absolution, viaticum, extreme unction) can be validly conferred, unless it is evident that they remained impenitent up to unconsciousness, because they are rightly supposed to have a habitual implicit intention of receiving those sacraments. For there will scarcely be a faithful man living piously and Christianly who has never had the will both of receiving the means which are granted to the faithful for conducting a religious life, and of dying piously and Christianly; but in that former will there is implicitly contained the intention of confirmation, and in this latter will there is implicitly contained the will of receiving the sacraments which are granted to the faithful in death. Moreover, the faithful are rightly supposed to be penitent, unless they have given manifest signs of impenitence; but in any act of contrition or attrition there is implicitly contained the will of doing the things which are necessary unto salvation.

d. Hence he who only feignedly or in jest permits a sacrament to be conferred upon himself, or who behaves himself merely negatively while a sacrament is conferred upon him, without a serious will, at least implicit, of receiving it, receives nothing. Likewise, if someone, ignorant of what a sacrament is, merely materially permits something to be conferred upon himself, he does not receive it. On the other hand, he who, even from grave and unjustly inflicted fear, receives a sacrament, validly receives it, provided an intention at least implicit is present (matrimony is excepted). In practice, however, those who have received baptism only from fear and afterward spontaneously desire it are to be baptized again under condition, because it can be discerned only with difficulty whether internal consent to baptism was present or internal repugnance against baptism. A delirious person who resists in every way one wishing to confer extreme unction validly receives it from the at least implicit intention which he had before the illness.

e. If the receiver from error has two contrary intentions, one by which he actually refuses, another by which he habitually desires the sacrament, it can be conferred upon him where the intention of receiving it prevails. Which intention prevails must be gathered from the disposition of the soul: namely that one prevails which he would retain if he knew the truth. Imagine, for example, a parish priest treating with a gravely ill man, who had just devoutly received holy communion, about receiving extreme unction, which the sick man now refuses to receive because he is not yet in danger of death. The sick man meanwhile, deprived of his senses, the parish priest begins to anoint with sacred oil and continues in the anointing, although the sick man in the meantime, having returned to himself, shows his displeasure by agitation of the head. The sacrament is valid, because the habitual intention is the predominant intention.⁶

5. For validly receiving the other sacraments, baptism validly received is prerequired: since the other sacraments were instituted for the members of the Church alone; but by baptism alone a man becomes a member of the Church.

Therefore a sacrament which is conferred on one not baptized is null, because one not baptized is not a subject capable of the other sacraments.

¹ Cf. De praeceptis^12, n. 7 s.

² As to how far the sacraments of penance and matrimony are to be excepted from this rule, it will be said in their own places.

³ Coninck, De sacramentis in genere, q. 64, n. 103; Reuter, Theologia moralis, pr. 4, n. 63, 5; Lacroix, l. 6, pr. 1, n. 168.

⁴ Suarez, De sacramentis in genere, disp. 14, sect. 2, n. 4; Lugo, De sacramentis in genere, disp. 9, n. 130.

⁵ Therefore, in order that a missionary can licitly baptize a dying pagan or Jew deprived of the senses, it is not enough that he prudently presume that he had at least attrition, but it is required that from positive indications he can prudently judge that he had the desire of baptism or the resolution of entering the Church. Holy Office, 18 Sept. 1850; 30 Mar. 1898.

⁶ Cf. Elbel-Bierbaum III, pr. 8, n. 69.