Chapter II. The Matter and Form of the Sacraments

THE decree of Eugenius IV, for the instruction of the Armenians, lays down that all the sacraments consist essentially of three things: the matter, the form, and the minister who makes the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does. And, it adds, if any one of these elements be wanting the sacrament is not made. The sacraments, then, are not simple, but composite signs, which consist of two distinct elements. One of these in technical language is called the matter, because it is that portion of the sacramental sign which is the most indeterminate with respect to conveying the meaning which the sacrament signifies. This matter is called remote when considered by itself; it is called proximate when it is taken and applied by the minister to the making of the sacrament. The second element consists of words, and this part is called the form of the sacrament, because the words determine the matter to the more complete signification expressed by the whole sacramental sign. Thus in Baptism the water, considered by itself, is the remote matter of the sacrament and does not necessarily signify washing; water may be used to slake the thirst, and for many other purposes. The application of the water to the person to be baptized is the proximate matter, and when this is done with the form of words, “I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” the whole composite rite assumes a religious aspect, and signifies, according to the intention of the minister, the washing away of sin from the soul.

The minister of a sacrament must necessarily use the matter and form which were instituted by Christ, for he alone as God-Man has the power to cause grace to be conveyed to the soul by means of sacred rites.

There must be no change made in the matter and form of the sacraments; not even the Church’s authority suffices for that. If a substantial change be made either in the matter or in the form, the sacrament is destroyed. The matter will be substantially changed if in the estimation of ordinary men it is no longer the same, but something else. Thus, if the wine has become vinegar, it cannot be used as the matter of the Eucharist. The form will be substantially changed if the sense is no longer the same, but different. Thus, ‘“ I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ” is the divinely instituted form for Baptism, and if the minister baptize with the words, “I baptize thee in the name of the Trinity ” it is no sacrament, because of the substantial change. It is not lawful to make any change in the matter and form of the sacraments, but if an accidental and not a substantial change be made, so that the matter and the sense of the form remain the same, the sacrament will not be rendered invalid, as a general rule. However, a change which in itself is slight and accidental may be made substantial by the perverse intention of the minister. For the sense may then be quite different, and that different sense is expressed in the form. Thus Pope Zacharias wrote to St Boniface that Baptism administered with the form, Baptizo te in nomine Patria, et Filia, et Spiritus Sancta, is valid when the mistakes are made through ignorance of Latin, and not through heresy or a perverse intention. If, then, such changes were introduced to give expression to heresy, the sense would be substantially changed and the form would be invalidated. Similarly, if Baptism were given with the form “* T baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and of the Blessed Virgin Mary,” the sacrament would be invalid if the minister intended to baptize in the name of the Blessed Virgin as of one of the Persons in the Godhead; if the addition was made through mistaken devotion to the Mother of God the sacrament would not be invalid. On the principles just stated Leo XIII decided that Anglican ordinations are invalid.

Except in case of necessity it is not lawful in the administration of the sacraments to use only probable matter or a probably valid form. An opinion contrary to this doctrine was condemned by Innocent XI, March 2, 1679. Justice and charity, which demand that the minister confer a sacrament validly, and do nothing to imperil its validity, require that he should use only certain matter and the certainly valid form as far as possible. Reverence also for the sacrament and for Christ, who instituted it, makes it necessary to take all due care that when a sacrament is administered it should be properly and validly administered. If, however, in a particular case only doubtful matter is at hand, and unless the sacrament is at once administered, the subject may be altogether deprived of it, then such doubtful matter may be used, since the reasons to the contrary then cease to be valid, because the sacraments were made for the benefit of man, not man for the sacraments.

As the matter and the form of a sacrament constitute together one composite sign of grace, there must not be such an interval between them as to destroy their unity. In the holy Eucharist the form requires that the matter should be physically present at the time when the words of consecration are uttered. In the other sacraments it is not necessary that the matter and form should be put at the same time in order that the sacrament may be valid; it is sufficient for the validity if there be a moral union between them so that according to a moral estimate they form one whole. Thus in Baptism, although the rubrics prescribe that the words should be said while the water is poured on the head, yet if a brief interval, say the space of a Pater or of an Ave, separate the matter and the form, the sacrament will still be valid.

The matter and the form should be applied by one and the same minister. Baptism would not be valid if one poured the water while another pronounced the words. In the Eucharist, however, and in Extreme Unction there are more than one form, each with its separate matter, and the sacrament would be valid if one minister consecrated one species or anointed one sense and another finished the rite. This, however, is only lawful in case of necessity, nor is it lawful for many ministers to make one sacrament at the same time, except when newly ordained priests celebrate Mass with the Bishop who has ordained them.

The sacraments should ordinarily be administered absolutely according to the manner in which they were instituted by Christ. If, however, in any particular case it is doubtful whether a sacrament was validly administered and there will be danger of grave spiritual loss to the subject unless it is repeated, it may and should be repeated conditionally. The condition should be expressed when the rubrics require it, as in the case of Baptism and Extreme Unction. Otherwise the condition may be implicit, and it will be sufficient if the minister intend to do his duty according to the institution of Christ and the laws of Holy Mother Church.

The Ritual expressly warns the minister that the conditional form for administering Baptism is not to be used at random or lightly, but with prudence, when after diligent inquiry there is a probable doubt whether the sacrament was validly conferred before. The same principle is to be applied to the conditional administration of the other sacraments.”

Except in the case of Matrimony, which is a contract and follows in this the rules affecting other contracts, a sacrament cannot be validly administered under a condition which regards a future and uncertain event. The reason is because such a condition would of its nature suspend the effect of the sacrament, and when the condition is verified the matter and form no longer exist and cannot now produce their effect. Thus Baptism conferred on a child under the condition, “If you attain the age of reason,” would be null and void. On the other hand, a sacrament conferred under a past or present condition will be valid if the condition be verified; it will be invalid if the condition be not verified. We have already seen when it is lawful to administer a sacrament conditionally. There will bean obligation to do so whenever justice and charity due to our neighbour require it in order to prevent his spiritual loss, or when reverence for the sacraments and for Christ, who instituted them, makes it necessary in order to avoid their invalid administration (Can. 732, sec. 2). ¹: St Thomas, 2-2, q. 186, a. 5; can. 499, sec. 1.

¹ St Thomas, 2-2, q. 186, a. 5; can. 499, sec. 1.