Chapter — Slater, Manual of Moral Theology

Chapter IV. The Recipient of the Sacraments

1.

THE sacraments were instituted to sanctify the souls of men and thus to prepare them for heaven. Only living men, then, can validly receive the sacraments; dead men or other beings cannot receive them validly. Death takes place when the soul is separated from the body, but we do not know the precise moment when that separation takes place. Except putrefaction, there are no absolutely certain signs of death, and it is quite probable that the soul remains united to the body for some time after all apparent signs of life have disappeared. Under these circumstances recent medical men and divines hold that it is lawful to administer the last sacraments to one who has to all appearances been dead for an hour or two. This is especially the case when death is the result of some sudden accident. Men only, not women, are capable of receiving the sacrament of Orders, and only those who have committed actual sins after Baptism can validly receive the sacrament of Penance. As the sacraments were instituted for the Church of Christ, of which men become members by Baptism, this sacrament is a necessary condition for the valid reception of the others.

p. ii, 71

2.

No special disposition or intention is required on the part of infants, who have not come to the use of reason, and of imbeciles for the validity of the sacraments which they are capable of receiving. As they have not the use of reason they are incapable of disposing themselves for the reception of the sacraments, and yet the Church has been accustomed to give them the sacraments. The practice of the Church in such matters has the very greatest authority, as the Angelic Doctor says: ““ The custom of the Church has the greatest authority, and it should always be followed in all things, because even the teaching of Catholic Doctors receives its authority from the Church. So that we must rather stand by the authority of the Church than by the authority of Augustine or Jerome, or of any Doctor soever.”1+ With reference to infant Baptism the Council of Trent passed the following decree: “ If anyone saith that little children, for that they have not actual faith, are not, after having received Baptism, to be reckoned amongst the faithful; and that for this cause they are to be rebaptized when they have attained to years of discretion; or that it is better that the Baptism of such be omitted than that while not believing by their own act they should be baptized in the faith alone of the Church; let him be anathema.”2

1 Summa, 2-2, q. 10, a. 12.

2 Sess. vii, c. 13, de Bapt.

p. ii, 71

3.

On the other hand, God does not sanctify adults who have the use of reason without some co-operation on their side; justification, says the Council of Trent,1 is the sanctification and renewal of the interior man by the voluntary reception of grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Some wish, desire, or intention to receive a sacrament is, then, necessary on the part of adults for its validity. A positive refusal to receive a sacrament, or a neutral state of mind neither willing nor refusing it, would make the reception of a sacrament null and void. The kind of intention which is necessary and sufficient for the validity of a sacrament varies according to its nature. In Penance and Matrimony a virtual intention is required in the subject, as it is required in the minister. For in Penance the acts of the penitent enter into the substance of the sacrament, and so they must be directed by him to its confection. Matrimony is constituted by the mutual consent of the parties, and for this at least a virtual intention is necessary. An habitual intention is required in order to be baptized validly; in other words, the person baptized must have at some time intended to receive the sacrament and not revoked his intention afterward. It is a disputed point among divines whether an habitual and express intention is necessary or whether an implicit intention contained in a desire to do all that God has ordained, or in an act of perfect charity or contrition, is sufficient. The latter opinion is probable, and it may be used in case of necessity when one is in danger of death, and then only. For the sacraments, which confer benefits without imposing any great burden, a general or implicit intention, such as is contained in a desire to die like a Catholic with all the rites of the Church, is sufficient for their validity. For Orders at least an habitual intention is required.

Those, therefore, who are asleep, or are unconscious, can receive the sacraments validly, for they may have all the dispositions which are necessary. The only difficulty is about Penance, but, as we shall see, it is at least a probable opinion that absolution is valid when given to one who is unconscious, but otherwise disposed for the sacrament. However, it is not lawful to administer the sacraments to those who are asleep, unconscious, or out of their mind, except when in danger of death. For the subject should be in a fit state to dispose himself for the reception of the sacraments so that he may receive them with due reverence and fruit.

1 Sess. vi, c. 7.

p. ii, 72

4.

Except in Penance, neither faith nor good dispositions are required for the validity of the sacraments, as is clear from the practice of the Church, which is not accustomed to repeat sacraments received in heresy or in bad dispositions. However, the state of grace is necessary for the lawful reception of the sacraments of the living, as we have seen; and for those of the dead, faith, hope, and sorrow for sin are necessary, as the Council of Trent teaches that they are for the justification of the sinner.1 Furthermore, for the lawful reception of the sacraments the subject must be free from all censures which deprive him of the right to receive them.

It follows from this that heretics and schismatics even when baptized may not lawfully receive the sacraments at the hands of Catholic ministers, as a general rule.22 The sacraments are intended for those who are visibly members of the Catholic Church, and they alone have the right to receive them. If anyone else wishes to receive them, let him enter the visible Church of God. However, it is a disputed point whether the sacraments may be lawfully administered to a schismatic or heretic who is in good faith, and who is in danger of death. Although St Alphonsus and others deny that it is lawful to absolve such a person, yet the opposite opinion has its supporters, and it is in keeping with several decrees of the Roman congregations—as, for example, that of the Holy Office, July 20, 1898.3 The faithful are not prohibited from asking for the sacraments from ministers who they know lead bad lives, if they have good reason for so doing. Sin, indeed, is committed by the minister if he administers a sacrament while in sin, but if he does so his malice must be imputed to himself, not to those who for good reason exercise their right to receive the sacraments. Moreover, the malice of the minister cannot affect the sacraments.

Although in extreme necessity a Catholic may receive the sacraments from schismatical ministers, yet scandal to be avoided rarely permits of its being done, as Benedict XIV teaches.4

The faithful may confess to any Catholic priest of any rite who has faculties for confession (Can. 905); and the faithful may receive Holy Communion consecrated according to any rite. But they are to be counselled to receive their Easter Communion according to their own rite. Holy Viaticum should also be received according to the rite of each one, except in case of necessity when it may be received according to any rite (Can. 866).

1 Sess. vi, c. 6.

2 Can. 731.

3 Analecta Ecclesiastica, 1898, p. 387.

4 De Syn. vi, c. 5, n. 2.

p. ii, 73–74