Article III. On The Minister Of The Sacrament Of Matrimony

655. Billuart rightly writes:¹⁹⁷ "The opinion of the ancient theologians was unanimous, if perhaps you except William of Paris, that the contracting parties are themselves the ministers of matrimony, not only under the aspect of the contract, but also under the aspect of the sacrament, until Melchior Cano, book 8, De locis theologicis, c. 5, in the solution to objection 3, entering upon a new way, taught that the priest is the minister of the sacrament of matrimony; that the words, I join you together, are the form; and the matter is the mutual consent of the contracting parties." Not a few, nor ignoble, theologians followed Melchior Cano: Estius, Sylvius, Juénin, Tournely, and others; Benedict XIV,¹⁹⁸ as a private author, calls their opinion very probable. But with the princes of the schools, the Master of the Sentences, the Angelic Doctor, Scotus, and with the more ancient and now most common and certain opinion, let the thesis be:

The ministers of the sacrament of matrimony are the contracting parties themselves.

Proof 1. From the authority of St. Thomas. The Angelic Doctor¹⁹⁹ says: "The words by which matrimonial consent is expressed are the form of this sacrament; but not the blessing of the priest, which is a certain sacramental." In another place²⁰⁰ he says: "Just as in other sacraments certain things belong to the essence of the sacrament, and when these are omitted there is no sacrament; but certain other things pertain to the solemnity of the sacrament, and when these are omitted the sacrament is nevertheless truly perfected, although he who omits them sins: so also consent expressed through words of the present between persons legitimate for contracting matrimony makes matrimony, because these two things belong to the essence of the sacrament. But all other things belong to the solemnity of the sacrament, because they are employed for this, that matrimony may be made more fittingly. Hence, if they are omitted, there is a true matrimony, although those contracting thus sin, unless they are excused by some legitimate cause." This argument indeed appears to be very clear if it is considered that in the time of St. Thomas the impediment of clandestinity did not yet exist.

Proof 2. From theological reasons. a) The instrumental efficient cause of a sacrament is the same as the minister of the sacrament. Now the instrumental efficient cause of the sacrament of matrimony is not the priest, but the contracting parties themselves, since the Council of Florence defined: "The efficient cause of matrimony regularly is mutual consent expressed through words of the present." Therefore the contracting parties themselves, expressing mutual consent, are the ministers of the sacrament of matrimony.

b) The marriages of Christians can sometimes be validly and licitly contracted without any intervention of a priest. Thus it was before the Council of Trent for clandestine marriages; thus it is after the new Code of Canon Law in a case of necessity. But every valid matrimony of Christians is a true sacrament, as Pius IX and Leo XIII declared.²⁰¹ Therefore it is clearer than light that the priest is not the minister of the sacrament of matrimony, and nothing remains except that the contracting parties themselves are the ministers of this sacrament.

Let these two reasons suffice; he who desires more should go to Billuart,²⁰² who proves our thesis with many arguments and excellently resolves the objections brought against it. There is no reason for us to note that, in the celebration of matrimony through a proxy, not the proxy but the mandator is the minister of the sacrament of matrimony. For the proxy is nothing but the instrument of the mandator.

¹⁹⁷ De matrimonio, diss. 1, a. 6.

¹⁹⁸ De syn. dioec., l. 8, c. 12, n. 4.

¹⁹⁹ Suppl., q. 42, a. 1, ad 1.

²⁰⁰ Suppl., q. 45, a. 5.

²⁰¹ Cf. above, n. 628.

²⁰² De matrimonio, diss. 1, a. 6.

656. The opinion of Maldonatus. Maldonatus and a few others²⁰³ taught that the priest is indeed the ordinary minister of the sacrament of matrimony, but that in extraordinary cases Christ conferred this office upon the contracting parties; just as in a case of necessity a layman is also the minister of baptism. This opinion indeed attempts to reconcile two other opposed opinions, but has no foundation either in tradition or in the infallible magisterium of the Church.

Scholion. It is not necessary that those about to marry know themselves to be the ministers of the sacrament of matrimony, because by the very fact that they intend to contract according to the institution of God, as is done in the true Church of Christ, they also have the intention of doing that which the Church does; and this suffices for the validity of the sacrament. Indeed, it is not customarily expedient that simple faithful be expressly admonished that those about to marry are themselves the ministers of the sacrament of matrimony, because they understand this with difficulty, and this knowledge can hinder rather than profit the reverence to be employed in receiving the sacrament of matrimony.

²⁰³ Cf. Hurter, Theol. dogm., III, n. 596.