Chapter I: General Notions

— Appendix XV belongs to this section. Historical. Cf. Appendix XV.

— Ordination, which was taken for the creation of magistrates, in the Church designates the creation of sacred ministers. Hence c. 948, which deliberately abstains from the word sacrament of order, has: "Order, from the institution of Christ, distinguishes clerics from laics in the Church for the rule of the faithful and the ministry of divine worship." This canon is to be compared with c. 107 concerning the divine origin of the distinction of clerics from laics.

But the sacrament of Order is the sacrament by which, through a sacred rite used by a competent minister, spiritual power is conferred together with grace for worthily undertaking the sacred offices. The power chiefly regards the sacraments, or those things which are referred to the sacraments, as chrism, oil of the sick, etc. With this power is connected the power, at least radical, of preaching the word of God, of ruling the people of God, of blessing.

Order taken actively is the same as ordination, and designates the action by which that spiritual power is conferred; but passively, it designates the effect of that action, or the aptitude conferred. It can also signify the collection of persons who have been endowed with sacred power, or the ecclesiastical hierarchy.

This sacrament is a certain potential whole, so that several parts can exist separately and be conferred separately, which are had together by him who possesses the fullness of order.

— In the Latin Church there are now distinguished three major or sacred orders: subdiaconate, diaconate, presbyterate or priesthood, which is twofold: lesser or incomplete, and greater, which is the episcopate; and four minor orders: porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte.

Are the minor Orders a sacrament? Most today deny this, relying chiefly on historical reasons, by which they show that these orders did not exist before the third century, have varied in number, and are not now the same in the Latin and Greek Church. Yet those grave arguments are not strictly apodictic, if you consider that the sacrament of order was instituted by Christ as a potential whole, and that it is not repugnant to that institution that the Church could have distinguished new grades to which a partial power contained in a greater grade would be committed. Therefore the opinion of St. Th., in 4 Sent., d. 24, q. 1, art. 2, q. 2, or Suppl., q. 35, a. 2, and of most scholastics, who admitted the nature of a sacrament to be present in all orders, can be defended (cf. Ballerini-Palmieri, V, n. 886; Noldin, III, 452; Bucceroni, III, 880).

It is established, however, that the diaconate, presbyterate, and episcopate are sacraments, from Trent itself, sess. XXIII, cap. 3 and can. 6: "If anyone shall say that in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy instituted by divine ordination, which consists of bishops, presbyters, and ministers, let him be anathema." These ministers at least are deacons.

Moreover the episcopate is a sacrament so distinct from the simple presbyterate that not only do inferior priests lack the power conferred through episcopal consecration, but also, at least according to several, the episcopate does not contain the simple presbyterate, and, if priestly ordination has been passed over, it would be conferred invalidly; while, on the contrary, the ordination is valid of a deacon who has received no inferior order, and the ordination is valid of a priest who has not previously been ordained deacon. Although the Church most gravely prohibits ordinations "by leap" and commands that omitted formal ordinations be supplied.

— But first tonsure, since it confers no power, is not a sacrament, but an initiation into the clerical state, by which clerics are distinguished from laics. Yet the Church, in its conferral, wills that the norms concerning conferring sacraments be observed; and therefore the words "to ordain, order, ordination" include, besides episcopal consecration, all orders and first tonsure itself, "unless something else is drawn from the nature of the matter or the context of the words" (c. 950).

— Certain orders are called sacred, either because of the annexed vow of chastity, or because of the power given over consecrated things. The same are called major, because they approach more closely to the sacrifice itself, or rendered men fit for undertaking the greater offices. I say rendered, because no longer, after the Code, can a subdeacon or deacon be co-opted among bishops.

— But the sacrament of order imprints a character. Therefore it can neither be lost nor repeated. This, at least from ecclesiastical institution, also holds concerning minor orders and first tonsure.

— First tonsure is conferred by this essential rite: that the bishop or competent prelate cuts the extremities of the hairs, and he who is tonsured says: "The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my chalice; You are He who will restore my inheritance to me." The omitted handing over of the surplice is neither essential nor seems to have to be supplied. Nor for validity is it required that the one conferring tonsure himself pronounce the words before him who is tonsured, although the custom of pronouncing them thus is said to be observed. Is tonsure validly conferred if the bishop, in place of true hairs, cuts the hairs or locks of a false wig? The matter is not established. Therefore, if one's own hairs are altogether lacking, it will be safer to have recourse to the Holy See (cf. Gasparri, n. 1011).

Minor ordinations and the subdiaconate consist essentially in a certain handing over, as proximate matter, and in the words of the bishop or ordaining minister then pronounced, as form.

To the porter are handed the keys of the church. It is not essential that the porter close and open the door, or strike the bell. For validity it is enough that one key be handed over, although the rubric commanding that keys be handed over is to be observed; and they can be silver, iron, or wooden, provided they are apt for opening (Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, March 11, 1810, Collectanea P. F., ed. 1, n. 1189); and any keys suffice (Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide, March 13, 1844).

To the lector is handed the book of readings, or the codex from which they are to read, that is, either a Missal, or Breviary, or volume of Sacred Scripture.

To the exorcist is handed the book in which the exorcisms are written, but in its place the Pontifical or Missal can be handed over.

To the acolyte are handed a) the candlestick, for which there cannot be taken the instrument with candle which the bishop is accustomed to use at the book; b) the cruets or empty ampullae, or at least one. And they commonly hold that the handing over of each instrument is essential. One or the other which has been omitted or doubtfully placed will have to be supplied absolutely or under condition, with nothing else repeated.

— To the subdeacon: a) there is handed an empty chalice with an empty paten placed over it. Neither the handing over of cruets nor the imposition of vestments is essential; indeed these rites do not seem necessarily to have to be supplied if they have been passed over. That the chalice and paten are handed over empty or with wine and host, this matters nothing for validity; but that they are handed over unconsecrated gives place to a certain controversy. Some object that by the handing over of a non-sacred thing sacred power is not signified (so St. Alph., VI, 747); others answer that the signification is already had from the material form itself. And this seems more probable to us. Nor is that consecration, concerning which the Pontifical is silent, more necessary for the symbolic rite than it is necessary that the keys of the church itself be handed to the porter; b) the book of Epistles or Missal is also handed over. Several think that this also is now essential.

Therefore if one or the other handing over has been omitted, let it be supplied absolutely or under condition, according as the omission was certain or only doubtful. If neither was done, the ordination itself will have to be repeated absolutely or conditionally.

But all these handings over are received by those to be ordained by touch of the right hand, which they will to be physical, so that if physical contact has been lacking, the handing over is to be supplied at least conditionally.

The step which, although not necessary, expresses the solemn vow of chastity can usefully be made by all who are not bound by such a vow. Yet by those who are held by a perpetual vow, even a simple one, it is customarily omitted.

— A deacon, according to the more probable opinion, is ordained by imposition of the hand with the eucharistic prayer or Preface, into which, not from the beginning, these words are inserted: "Receive the Holy Spirit for strength and for resisting the devil and his temptations: in the name of the Lord."

Yet for the sake of security there cannot be omitted the physical handing over of the book of Gospels or Missal, with the formula: "Receive the power of reading the Gospel in the Church of God, both for the living and for the dead, in the name of the Lord. Amen."

Unless there were that power of the Church of more defining the matter and form of sacraments instituted by Christ, it would have to be held as established that by this hand-imposition alone with the joined Preface the essential ordination is completed. And the same would have to be said concerning the presbyterate. For it is established, and recently His Eminence Cardinal Van Rossum has luminously demonstrated by his learned work, that through many centuries there was no handing over of instruments in the Latin Church, just as neither is any had now in the Greek Church. Yet the Church seems able to determine the essential rite. Now the opinion of St. Thomas and of the scholastics, Eugene IV in the decree for the Armenians, and the Roman Pontifical itself, in which, even after the Preface has been recited, those to whom the vestments are to be imposed and the book of the Gospel handed over are called those to be ordained, not yet ordained, prove that in the Latin Church a common persuasion concerning the necessity of that handing over prevailed. This common persuasion at least probably demonstrates, from custom itself, the will of the Church of having that handing over as essential. Therefore we do not doubt concerning the power of the Supreme Pontiff to suppress that necessity; but until he has done this, the handing over of instruments in the ordination of deacon and priest cannot safely be omitted.

Therefore practically: 1. if the imposition of the hand has been passed over, it alone is to be supplied with its words (c. 3, De Sacramentis non iterandis, I, 16). These words seem to be the whole Preface, rather than the brief formula: "Receive the Holy Spirit" (cf. Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione, II, 1050); 2. if the handing over of the book of Gospels with the relevant form has been omitted, this also will have to be supplied; 3. if both have been omitted, the whole ordination will have to be restored. Yet observe that the words "Receive the Holy Spirit" seem less essential than the rest of the Preface. Yet if they have been passed over, the matter cannot be neglected without authority of the Holy See.

The other prayers and the imposition of vestments are not at all essential; indeed, if perhaps passed over, they do not even seem to have to be supplied.

— In the ordination of a priest⁽¹⁾, we observe a threefold imposition of hands and the handing over of instruments. First, the bishop in silence imposes both hands upon the head of the one to be ordained, which, after him, other priests perform, if any are present; for this is not essential. This having been done, another succeeds, unless you prefer to say that the first is continued in another way. That is, the bishop and the priests present extend their right hands over those to be ordained, while the bishop says: "Let us pray," etc. This prayer, which is rather an invitation to praying, is followed both by a true prayer directed to God, "Hear us," and by the Preface or eucharistic prayer. In this, besides other things, these words are said: "Grant, we beseech You, almighty Father, to these Your servants the dignity of the presbyterate; renew in their inward parts the spirit of holiness, that they may obtain from You, O God, the office of second merit." The third imposition of hands is made at the end of Mass, before the Postcommunion, by which the bishop imposes both hands upon the head of each, saying: "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."

⁽¹⁾ Cf. ancient documents, for example in Appendix V, at the end of the work De sacra ordinatione, C. Gasparri.

In the Greek Church, ordination consists in the imposition of hands alone under the due form. But in the Latin Church, somewhat after the second imposition of hands, the vestments are put on, the hands are anointed; and there is handed to each one the chalice with wine, over which is placed the paten with a host, and the bishop says: "Receive the power of offering sacrifice to God, and of celebrating Masses both for the living and for the dead, in the name of the Lord." And in the Pontifical, not before, but already then they are called ordained.

Concerning the essential matter and form of this ordination, it seems that it must be said thus. Theoretically, that rite is to be held as essential by which the bishop, in the manner which the Church has determined, clearly signifies the communication of priestly power.

For a long time, this rite was, after the exhortation to pray, the extension of the hand over the head of the one to be ordained with a prayer in which grace was implored over him whom the Church was dedicating with the honor of the presbyterate (cf. Duchesne, Origines, 5, pp. 390, 391). Through the first nine centuries, the imposition of hands alone was used. Then the scholastics, with St. Thomas, considered the blessing, the imposition of hands, through which they recognized that the fullness of grace was given, and the anointing of hands, as a preparation for the formal conferral of power, which they thought was made through the handing over of the chalice with the words: "Receive the power of offering sacrifice to God," etc., in which giving of the chalice the character would be imprinted (cf. St. Th., in IV Sent., d. 24, q. 2, art. 3, c.). To this doctrine the Pontifical seems to have been accommodated. Hence in the decree for the Armenians, which decree is a practical instruction, yet of greatest authority, it is said: "the presbyterate is handed down through the presentation of the chalice with wine and the paten with bread... The form of the priesthood is such: Receive the power of offering sacrifice in the Church for the living and the dead in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Benedict XIV, De syn., l. 8, c. 10, n. 8, judged that this must be interpreted concerning an integrating and accessory form. Today authors incline more and more toward these parts, so that theoretically they hold the imposition of hands alone with the prayer Exaudi nos quaesumus and the following Preface as essential. Yet in the Preface itself there are several things which cannot be held as essential, since several are related historically. But the last part of the Preface, from the words "Grant, we beseech You, almighty Father," is clearly principal. The Holy See has abstained from a doctrinal definition. Practically, however, it responds as if both the imposition of hands and the extension of the hand with the following prayer, and also the handing over of the chalice with its form, were essential, and the power of absolving were given through the last imposition of hands with the words Receive the Holy Spirit, etc. Hence there are especially two opposed opinions. The first holds that every priestly power is communicated together from the beginning, and that afterward it is more clearly explained what has been conferred; the other, on the contrary, holds that from the beginning the conferral of power is prepared, which is made formally either together, in the handing over of the chalice with the words joined to it, or through two successive parts, in the handing over of the chalice, and in the last imposition of hands under the words then to be pronounced.

Theologians agree, however, that the safer parts must be followed, and that nothing is safe except what the Holy See has declared to be such.

— What things in the imposition of hands itself and in the handing over of the chalice must practically be held as essential is to be defined more precisely.

1. Concerning the imposition of hands:

a) it is established that priests have been made before the third imposition of hands, for they concelebrate with the bishop. Some doubt only is had concerning the necessity of the third imposition for giving the power of absolving. Therefore the ordained man who has not received this will be able safely to celebrate Masses, but not sacramentally to absolve, before this ceremony has been supplied by a bishop in another sacrifice; and indeed absolutely, if it certainly was omitted, but conditionally, if it probably, even with slight probability, was neglected or badly performed;

b) by extending the hand, the Ordaining minister continues the imposition of hands previously made in silence. So Benedict XIV, De syn., l. 8, c. 10, n. 4, and after him authors. Therefore for a long time the first imposition of hands was considered as an integrating but non-essential part, which it was enough to supply afterward.

This, by the obvious sense of the words, Gregory IX also teaches, in c. 3, De sacramentis non iterandis (I, 16). Yet there are those who remain in doubt whether there is question there of the first or of the third imposition of hands. Yet departing from that usage of merely supplying the first imposition of hands, which Gasparri, De ord., II, 1080, and Palm., V, n. 910, for example, attest, on July 4, 1900, the Holy Office judged that the whole ordination must be repeated under condition, because the first imposition of hands had been made without physical contact.

It was also said that either imposition of hands suffices for validity. And Gasparri, II, 1081, reports a response of the Holy Office, September 16, 1877, by which it had declared that acquiescence should be made, that is, nothing should be supplied, after an ordination in which only the second imposition had been passed over. But more recently, July 19, 1899, the Holy Office ordered that the ordination be repeated entirely under condition, in which the first imposition of hands had been made, because it was not established "at least for a moment, concerning the extension of hands over those to be ordained" (Anal. eccl., VII, 340).

Physical contact, however, is necessary in the first and third imposition. Yet mediate contact suffices. Thus, January 22, 1890, the Holy Office responded that physical contact had not been lacking in an ordination in which the bishop, in the first imposition, had physically touched the skullcap of the one to be ordained and not the head (An. eccl., V, 144).

But what if the first imposition of hands is supplied not after the ceremonies of ordination have been completed, but in the ordination itself, even after the Preface or handing over of instruments but before the Canon of the Mass, without any repetition of words? We think this suffices for validity. For this imposition is to be made without a form of words; but the words pronounced before are joined with the extension of the hand, and, being made during the ordination, it is morally united with the whole rite. So also Palmieri, V, 892, would say. Yet an authentic declaration is desired.

C. Gasparri, II, 1982, thinks that it is enough that, if it has been omitted, the first imposition of hands be repeated with the subsequent extension of hands and with the words passed over, if the invitation Oremus or the prayer Exaudi nos had been omitted. We think that the whole ordination must be repeated under condition, unless the error is corrected before the Canon.

There seems to be no reason why we should call the exhortation to pray, "Let us pray, dearest brethren," by which the right hands are extended over those to be ordained, essential. But the form consists in the following prayer and Preface. Nevertheless, if the words "Let us pray," etc., have been omitted, the Holy See will have to be approached. The form of the third imposition is certainly contained in the words: "Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive," etc.

But whether the words have been omitted, or have been substantially corrupted, the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, May 27, 1840, prescribed only the conditional supplying of the third imposition and form, because the bishop had said: "Whose sins you shall forgive are retained" (Gasparri, II, 1085).

2. Concerning the handing over of instruments:

a) if the chalice is handed over empty of wine, or the paten without a host, the whole ordination must be repeated under condition (cf. Holy Office, July 6, 1898; January 11, 1899, An. eccl., VI, 338; VII, 145). But that the mixture of water has been omitted does not affect the essence, since that mixture is not necessary for the consecration of the wine itself. Indeed Lehmk., II, 742, reports that it was answered that one could safely acquiesce, when certainly a greater quantity of water had been poured into the wine. But because the chalice with wine and the paten with host constitute one certain thing, for validity it suffices that the candidate has touched either. Thus the Sacred Congregation of Rites, December 3, 1661, pacified a priest who had not touched the chalice (Decr. auth., n. 1921); thus the Holy Office, June 22, 1892, ordered that an ordinand acquiesce who certainly had touched the host, but positively doubted about the touch of the paten (An. eccl., V, 144); and on March 17, 1897 another who had touched the paten and host but not the chalice (An. eccl., V, 203). But if he has touched only the paten and not the host and chalice with wine, or only the host but not the paten and chalice with wine, it will be safer to ask the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments or the Holy Office, or to repeat the entire ordination under condition (Gasparri, II, 1085).

It is also established that it is enough that the contact be morally joined with the form.

Therefore the Holy Office, March 17, 1897, willed that a priest be secure who had touched the instruments before the bishop pronounced the words, but not during those words (An. eccl., V, 144).

— Neither the anointing of the hands nor the handing over of vestments is essential. Yet the anointing will have to be supplied afterward, with the other ceremonies omitted. Cf. c. un., De Sacra unctione (I, 15).

It is not established that the imposition of vestments must be supplied.

Much less is it established that concelebration must be supplied, although some hold this. But it is established that other things are not to be supplied (cf. Gasparri, II, n. 1086; Lehmk., II, 743; Palm., V, 910). Gasparri, loc. cit., would rather wish that the promise of obedience be supplied.

Of all religious who are not exempt, the bishop truly is the High Priest. Nor do they have a prelate properly so called except exempt clerical religious. Therefore the promise of obedience at the end of ordination seems to have to be made by all others to the Ordinary Bishop.

Concerning concelebration, it was treated above, nn. 287 and 318 (cf. also Benedict XIV, De sacrificio missae, III, 16, n. 7).

— Episcopal consecration is essentially contained in the imposition of hands with the Preface or eucharistic prayer, or with the relative words: "Receive the Holy Spirit." The imposition of the open book of the Gospels over the neck and shoulders of the one to be consecrated, which is done in silence from the beginning of the sacred rite, is certainly not of divine institution, and seems to be merely a sacramental. Yet we do not yet have an authentic response, so that safely we could have this as accidental (cf. Gasparri, II, 1115). The other things are not essential. But from c. un., De sacra unctione (I, 15), Innocent III defined that an omitted anointing, whether of the head or of the hands, is to be supplied by a bishop, with two bishops assisting, without any other repetition of the consecration.

— General norms concerning correcting or supplying defects.

1. In ordinations whose special rite is certainly of ecclesiastical institution, or, as others say, which certainly are not sacraments, a rite probably valid becomes certainly valid, since the Church can and is accustomed to supply defects of this kind, or at least practically to permit that, with the inferior grade omitted, one ascend to a higher one. Yet authors circumscribe this rule to the four minor orders, since some, who nevertheless remove the reason of sacrament from minor orders, have wished to place the subdiaconate among the sacraments. Nor is this rule to be followed practically when a truly grave reason suggests nullity.

2. It is also established, in every ordination, that a rite which is certainly of ecclesiastical institution does not pertain to the essence beyond the will of the Church or of the supreme Pastor (Lehmk., II, 743). Therefore the Church could be content with probable observation of that rite. Yet hitherto it has by no means done this. Therefore it has not rarely commanded conditional repetition of ordination on account of a probable defect of such a rite. Thus, with this distinction omitted, it must be said as follows:

3. a) a defect which certainly has been committed in a rite certainly essential obliges to the whole ordination being repeated absolutely;

b) but an ordination which probably, by probability of fact or of law, is affected by a substantial defect is to be repeated under condition.

If, however, the omitted rite already supposes certain power conferred through another rite, as is the handing over of the book of Gospels in the ordination of a deacon, or the third imposition of hands in the ordination of a priest, then it is enough to supply what was omitted.

The same suffices if the omitted rite can be judged to be merely an integrating part of the rite which was used. And they were bringing forward as an example the first imposition of hands in the ordination of a priest (cf. Palm., V, 910). But this has now come into controversy, as we have seen.

And when it is a question of the power of an inferior grade which is certainly contained in the superior, the obligation of receiving the order again conditionally will not be present without a truly grave reason, at least in him who has received the superior order;

c) the rite itself certainly accidental, if it has been passed over in a grave matter, as is the anointing of the hands of a priest, is to be supplied, but without the ordination being repeated. If in a light matter, nothing is to be done.

It is also clear that he sins gravely who knowingly neglects a notable ceremony.

4. It is not required that the same bishop supply who committed the defect, since, as is clear in Extreme Unction, partial matters and forms of one sacrament can of themselves be administered by several.

5. When an essential rite is to be supplied absolutely, the time of ordination is of itself to be awaited. But the Sacred Congregation will dispense so that the ordination be repeated secretly and at another time.

But if, on account of doubt, an Order is repeated under condition, probably it can be repeated on any day and by any bishop; and on the same day both major and minor orders can be conferred together, with only those solemnities used which are certainly or probably necessary for validity (St. Alph., VI, 759).

— I. Ordination designates the creation of sacred ministers.

Order, actively, is the same as ordination; passively, it designates the conferred power; collectively, the ecclesiastical hierarchy itself.

The sacrament of Order is the sacrament by which, through a sacred rite used by a competent minister, spiritual power is conferred together with grace for worthily undertaking sacred ministries.

This sacrament is a potential whole: the parts which are had together by him who possesses the fullness of order can be conferred separately. Yet it is doubted whether the episcopate can be validly conferred without formal presbyterate. And ordination by leap is so prohibited that the omitted formal orders must always be supplied.

The three major and sacred orders: episcopate, presbyterate, and diaconate are sacraments. Are the minor orders and subdiaconate sacraments? The matter is controverted and rather denied.

First tonsure is mere initiation into the clerical state, in the conferral of which, however, the norms concerning conferring sacraments are to be observed.

II. Essential rites. A. Generalities. This can be said theoretically concerning all orders: that rite is to be held as essential by which the competent minister, in the manner which the Church has determined, clearly communicates spiritual power. Practically, no imposition of vestments pertains to the essential rite. Concerning the four minor orders at least they admit that a probably valid rite becomes certainly valid, because the Church can and is accustomed to supply defects of this kind, or practically permits that, with the inferior grade omitted, one ascend to the superior, if the ordination objectively was null.

B. Concerning individual orders. 1. First tonsure. The competent prelate cuts the extremity of the hairs, and he who is tonsured says: "The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my chalice; You are He who will restore my inheritance to me." If hairs are altogether lacking, recourse will have to be made to the Holy See.

2. Minor ordinations and the subdiaconate. A certain handing over is had as proximate matter and the pronouncement of words as form. Note that the handing over of an empty cruet is essential to the acolythate, but the handing over of full cruets is not essential to the subdiaconate. Physical touch is always required for security.

3. The deacon is more probably ordained by the imposition of the right hand with the eucharistic prayer or Preface, into which the formula taken more broadly is inserted: "Receive the Holy Spirit for strength," etc. For the sake of security, the handing over of the book of Gospels or Missal, with the formula "Receive," etc., cannot be omitted and is to be supplied.

4. In the presbyterate the essential rite is more probably contained in the second imposition or extension of the hand, which continues the first imposition of hands, made in silence, with the eucharistic prayer. The third imposition of the hand with its form, "Receive the Holy Spirit," etc., is certainly not essential. Practically, however, neither the first nor the second can be omitted. If the third has been lacking, it must be supplied before the priest hears confessions. Besides this, the handing over of the full chalice with host, and with the formula, cannot be omitted in the Latin Church without necessity of repeating the ordination under condition.

III. Rules for supplying defects. 1. A defect certainly committed in an essential rite obliges to the whole ordination being repeated.

2. On account of a probably substantial defect, the whole order is repeated under condition.

3. Yet if the omitted rite already supposes certain power conferred through another rite, as the handing over of the book of Gospels to the deacon or the third imposition of hands in priestly ordination, it is enough to supply what was omitted.

4. The rite itself certainly accidental in a grave matter, as the anointing of the hands of a priest, is supplied without the ordination being repeated.

5. It is not required that the same one supply who committed the defect. Conditional repetition can probably be made on any day and by any bishop; this the Sacred Congregation easily permits also where the essential rite is to be supplied absolutely.