Chapter III: On the Subject and Right Reception of the Sacraments

— Principles. I. For valid reception of a sacrament these three things are commonly required and suffice:

1. radical capacity, which all and only wayfaring men have with respect to baptism; and all baptized by baptism of water have with respect to the remaining sacraments. Nevertheless extreme unction demands dangerous illness, and, like Penance, use of reason by which sins could have been committed; Order demands the male sex; Matrimony demands diversity of sex and habitual use of reason, together with freedom from another bond, and excludes those laboring under perpetual impotence.

2. in adults, reception voluntary at least in this sense, that it is not physically coerced while the interior will resists; and besides, according to the very common opinion, will at least habitual and implicit. For just as an adult is not justified without his own consent, so, without the same consent, he is not initiated and consecrated to God through a sacrament. Yet because one who receives a sacrament, as such, does not act, virtual will which renders the act human is not of itself necessary. But according to the nature of the sacrament, as will be said afterward, habitual expressed will, or even virtual will, must be present.

Yet for little children and those perpetually insane, the intention which the minister has in the name of Christ and of the Church suffices. For these are saved and sanctified without their own consent. Wherefore the defect of consent in them stands in the way only of matrimony, whose essential matter and form are placed in consent itself;

3. the intention of the minister sufficiently determined so that it affects such a person of the recipient.

— What if an adult approaches feignedly or simulatedly to receive a sacrament, that is, if he accepts the external rite voluntarily, while internally he does not will the sacrament?

And it is sufficiently certain that nothing is obtained by that sacrilegious reception of sacraments which do not imprint character; indeed, there is plainly no reception of the sacrament of penance and matrimony, where acts of the recipient enter the essence of the sacrament. The more common opinion also denies that baptism, confirmation, and ordination are valid for him who dissents in heart while by mouth or by the very approach he asks for the sacrament. Nevertheless Cardinal Gasparri holds the opposite opinion as truer: both because Innocent III, c. 3 De baptismo (III, 42), approves those who hold that the character of Christianity is received by one who externally indeed does not resist, though he approaches baptism feignedly; and because one so approaching wills that the minister place upon him the matter and form of the sacrament, with the due intention: but in these the sacrament consists; then the interior will of not receiving the sacrament is elided by the opposite will by which the act of approaching is commanded. Indeed an intention expressly terminated to the external rite alone does not suffice in the minister, who must sanctify instrumentally; but it is not proved necessary in him who must merely receive the sacrament. Cf. Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione, c. 3, s. 2, art. 1.

— II. Corollary and Applications. 1. A sacrament which someone coerced by fear wishes to receive is beyond doubt valid. Except matrimony, at least from the positive disposition of the Church. She also does not wish to impose obligations connected with sacred orders upon a cleric who, coerced by grave fear, received sacred order.

— 2. When there is not question of sacraments which of themselves demand a human act of the recipient, the will which is required in the recipient is rather that of one not opposing than that of one positively consenting. For every action is done by the minister; the effect is obtained ex opere operato, unless the contrary will of the recipient stands in the way of that efficacy.

But practically the sacraments which impose a burden must be distinguished from others by which a benefit is conferred without burden. For the former it is certainly required that there have been a positive will which at least implicitly is terminated to that sacrament. When there is question of ordination, a will once expressed and not retracted alone seems able to contain this positive intention. Wherefore for ordination habitual expressed will is necessary in the adult recipient. Many demand the same for the valid reception of baptism.

Yet there are those who are content with the will, which is had in every contrition or attrition, of doing what is necessary for salvation.

Confirmation, viaticum, and extreme unction bring grace without burden. Wherefore whoever wish to live or die Christianly in no way resist reception of these sacraments. Therefore their implicit habitual will amply suffices, not only that these sacraments be validly, but also that they be licitly bestowed on the sick who are destitute of the senses and are not to be presumed indisposed in soul. For the eucharist one must also beware of danger of exterior irreverence; and, since its necessity is less but its dignity greater, a positive presumption of the good state of the soul seems necessary, so that it may be licitly bestowed on a man who is deprived of the use of reason but seems likely to receive it with exterior decency.

He who is by no means alien from receiving a sacrament does not for that reason have the will of receiving the sacrament at any time, without consciousness of himself, at least when the time is not determined by necessity itself. Wherefore one can at least doubt concerning the value of a sacrament which without necessity is conferred on someone outside the present use of reason. Therefore, outside probable danger of death, one must wait until someone has come out of sleep or temporary insanity; and what we were saying just now about viaticum is not valid concerning the dispensation of the eucharist outside danger of death. Cf. Lehmkuhl, II, 65, note, to whom Ballerini, IV, 701, partly contradicts, and deservedly indeed when implicit habitual intention suffices.

He who takes a host which he does not know to be consecrated generally receives materially only, but not sacramentally and with fruit, the thing which is the sacrament, because sufficient will is generally lacking. Thus St. Thomas, 3 p., q. 80, art. 3 ad 3; d'Annibale, III, 257, note 2.

— 3. Matrimony, which has the character of contract, demands habitual expressed will, or will which, formally conceived, afterward has not been retracted. Indeed virtual consent is required when it is celebrated personally and between parties present.

In Penance, virtual will is needed with respect to the acts of penance; for receiving absolution alone, implicit habitual will suffices. Cappello, De Sacramentis, I, 83 and 85, 4°.

— On the Insane. 1. Those who after use of reason have fallen into insanity are to be treated as adults, whose will or disposition is to be estimated from the time before the use of reason was lost. Except matrimony, which requires the present use of reason.

2. As to those who are perpetually half-witted or doubtfully insane, the probable utilities of the subject are to be composed with reverence for the sacred sign, yet in such a way that in an ambiguous matter this prevail: the sacraments are for men.

Hence it is never lawful to give them Order. Matrimony is not permitted to them, just as to the insane in lucid intervals, except for a grave cause, to be proposed to the Ordinary. The eucharist will not be given to them too frequently; Penance and Extreme Unction will be ministered only conditionally. Finally, the sacraments which certainly are valid in children will be conferred absolutely on those who ask according to their manner; conditionally on others.

The deaf and at the same time mute from birth, if they have been suitably instructed, are capable of all sacraments just like adults. Those who have lacked instruction most probably do not have the expeditious use of reason. Wherefore, according as hope of competent instruction is still had or is lacking, they seem to be treated as children or as perpetually almost insane. Therefore to those themselves who in no way ask for the sacraments, baptism and confirmation are to be administered conditionally; and sometimes absolution itself will be given under condition. To those dying, extreme unction will be conceded conditionally, which will be able to profit them more certainly than penance; and, with danger of irreverence excluded, after conditioned absolution, at least viaticum will be able to be given.

— On Error. In matrimony, error about the person, when someone thinks that he gives fidelity to Titius and only Caius is present, is regarded as substantial. In the others it suffices that the will affect that capable individual, even if perhaps you absolve a woman as a man, or promote willing Sempronius, as absent Gracchus, by sacred order.

— II. That baptism and penance may be received licitly and fruitfully, there is required and of itself suffices, besides the will of receiving the sacrament, the disposition of faith, hope, and attrition: because they are sacraments of the dead. The remaining sacraments, which are called of the living, demand the state of grace.

To approach a sacrament of the living with habitual venial sin is of itself not a sin; to approach with actual affection for venial sin will be a venial sin if the present disorder regards the very reception of the sacrament, as if someone presents himself irreverently; if it does not regard the reception, the circumstances are to be considered. It will be no sin if someone seeks in the sacrament a remedy for putting off the disordered affection; it will be sin if he neglects to put off the affection when he can do this easily enough. Cf. Cappello, De Sacramentis, I, n. 88.

The state of grace is to be procured by confession for the eucharist, not for the other sacraments, from a special precept, at least of ecclesiastical law (c. 856).

In what way extreme unction holds, in some manner, a middle place between the sacraments of the living and of the dead will be said in its proper place.

Acts of faith and hope are sufficiently contained in attrition itself or contrition, so that special solicitude is not to be borne concerning the disposition of faith and hope.

Rather, let the minister know this: whether or not the recipient holds those things which are to be believed by necessity of means and which must be known for receiving this sacrament fruitfully. Nevertheless, by an act of faith or hope, a sin contrary to faith or hope, if any has been committed, will have to be retracted.

— In foreign missions those can create difficulty who, doubtfully adult, are not yet sufficiently instructed and ask baptism. If instruction can be completed without notable inconvenience, baptism itself must be deferred. But if delay is subject to serious inconvenience, if, for example, administration by Protestant heretics is to be feared, those seem able to be baptized who, with parents or circumstances attended to, give hope of greater instruction in the Catholic religion, provided they ask according to their measure. Otherwise baptism will have to be deferred, yet in such a way that the salvation of the soul is always employed as the supreme rule.

— On Reviviscence. With the obstacle removed, baptism certainly revives and confers first grace. The same, with divine goodness and the very nature of the sacraments attended to, is commonly admitted concerning the other sacraments which imprint character; and also concerning matrimony and extreme unction, which cannot be repeated in the same marriage or danger. Concerning penance itself, most rather deny that the sacrament can be validly and at the same time fruitlessly received; we shall hold the contrary side. But they commonly deny that the most holy eucharist revives, since it can be repeated frequently, unless perhaps you remove the obstacle before the species have already been consumed.

Nor then, as R. P. Cappello observes, op. c., n. 14, is there properly question of reviviscence, since the sacrament of the most holy eucharist is the very permanent body of Christ under the species. Therefore the question ought to have been posed thus: can the application of the sacrament which previously was fruitless, indeed gravely culpable, be converted into fruitful by a better disposition of the subject for as long as the eucharistic species remain? Cardinal Billot affirms this, consequently to his chosen opinion by which, in the sacrament of the eucharist, he considers the presence of the body of Christ as reality and sacrament and therefore as title of grace to be received (De sacramentis in communi, Thesis 6, p. 107). But those who hold that grace is conferred not insofar as Christ is present in us, but insofar as he is eaten, will deny the same, unless they think that eating is not completed by the very taking within, but perseveres until the species are corrupted.

But the obstacle is removed when that disposition is procured which would have had to be had for receiving the sacrament fruitfully. But if the reception was sacrilegious, or after the sacrament received a mortal sin was committed, these will have to be blotted out before there can be place for reviviscence.

— The required disposition must be morally certain to the recipient himself, lest he expose the sacrament to danger of frustration and thus derogate from due reverence. Wherefore in doubt which cannot be solved by presumption, greater certitude of itself will have to be procured or awaited. Yet you are excused by a prevailing necessity, because sacraments are for men, nor is supreme reverence owed to them as such, though otherwise one must speak of the eucharist insofar as it contains Christ. Therefore moral certitude is not to be taken in such a way that reception becomes subject to scruples and anxieties; but it is judged to be had when a solid reason for affirming is attacked by no positive reason to the contrary.

Yet there are those who are content with probable disposition in the recipient and prohibit only the minister from using a merely probable opinion. Cf. St. Alphonsus, l. 1, n. 51.

If there is danger in delay, the sacraments by which provision is made for the necessity of a dying person will have to be bestowed by the minister himself, while at the same time guarding against scandal and offense of the faithful. If the doubt affects the value, or there is question of extreme unction, administration will be done conditionally. And today, at least in places where many are not baptized, baptism itself seems first to be administered conditionally to an unknown man who is in danger of death and destitute of the senses.

— Licit reception of a sacrament also supposes immunity from a prohibiting censure. Excommunication prohibits reception (cc. 855, §1; 2260, §1), and, as to certain sacraments, interdict. Cf. on censures.

— It is further necessary that you ask the sacraments from a fitting minister. 1. Of itself, such a minister is legitimate and worthy.

2. "From excommunicated persons to be avoided, and also from other excommunicated persons after a condemnatory or declaratory sentence has intervened, the faithful can, in danger of death alone, ask both sacramental absolution... and also, if other ministers are lacking, the other sacraments and sacramentals" (c. 2261, §3). The same must be said, because of prohibited communication in sacred things (c. 1258), concerning those who are ascribed to a non-Catholic sect; and concerning those publicly intruded, because of scandal. Cf. for example, in Lehmkuhl, II, 73, the responses of Pius VI, May 28, 1793, concerning intruded persons at the time of the French disturbance.

3. From other excommunicated persons it is lawful for the faithful "for any just cause to ask the sacraments and sacramentals, especially if other ministers are lacking; and then the excommunicated person requested can minister the same, nor is he held by any obligation to inquire of the requester concerning the cause" (c. 2261, §2).

4. One must not speak otherwise concerning a minister whom you know to be constituted in mortal sin, because a thing good in itself is sought, and it stands through the minister if he does not dispose himself rightly. Therefore, with a special reason of scandal or of danger to be averted excluded, in order that you honestly ask a sacrament from a sinner, some inconvenience in some way notable, which you do not lightly bear, suffices, or "any just cause of necessity or utility" (d'Annibale, III, 261).

But if there is question of a minister who from office must minister the sacraments to you, the inconvenience of going to another church or changing confessor suffices.

5. A legitimate minister is not always a minister of any Catholic rite whatever. Outside necessity, a priest of one's own rite is to be approached for the sacraments of baptism, confirmation, order, and matrimony. Sacramental absolution can be asked from a priest of any rite who has been approved by the local Ordinary. Holy communion can be received by any faithful person out of devotion in the rite of the church where he approaches the holy table. "Yet it is to be advised that each faithful person satisfy the precept of Easter communion in his own rite. Holy viaticum must be received by the dying in their proper rite; but in urgent necessity, let it be lawful to receive it in any rite" (c. 866, §§2 and 3). Observe that a priest must always observe his own proper rite in that ministration. In urgent necessity, if a priest of a different rite is not present, it is lawful for those who are permitted to consecrate only unleavened or leavened bread to minister the eucharist in leavened or unleavened bread, while their own rites are observed in other respects (c. 851, §2).

— Both by divine and human law it happens that use of the sacraments is prescribed, and this of itself, from the account of the sacrament, or per accidens, from the necessity of the subject, according to the rules to be handed down in their proper place.

— I. For valid reception of the sacraments there is need and suffices: 1. radical capacity of the subject, which all and only men have with respect to baptism; but the baptized with respect to the remaining sacraments, except that Extreme Unction also demands dangerous illness, and, like Penance, sins, and therefore use of reason; Order demands the male sex; Matrimony demands diversity of sex and freedom from another bond; and the perpetually impotent are excluded from matrimony;

2. in adults, a will at least not resisting the sacrament, or implicit habitual intention; indeed, because of the special essence of the sacrament or because of annexed burdens, habitual expressed intention for ordination, matrimony, and perhaps baptism. Matrimony contracted personally and between parties present demands consent at least virtual, which is also demanded in the acts of the penitent, while for receiving absolution habitual intention is required and, if expressed intention has preceded, certainly suffices. In children and the perpetually insane, who are saved and sanctified without their own consent, defect of consent stands in the way only of matrimony; but defect of personal sin stands in the way of penance and Extreme Unction. The insane after use of reason are to be estimated from the will which they previously had, with matrimony excepted; the half-witted or doubtfully insane, to whom uninstructed deaf-mutes are to be equated, are to be treated according to probable utilities and reverence for the sacrament. Those not perpetually insane are capable in lucid intervals; outside these, they are to be judged from the will which they had in lucid intervals;

3. the intention of the minister sufficiently determined, so that it definitely affects the person of the recipient: in matrimony alone error concerning the very person, who is thought to be Titius while he is Caius, is regarded as substantial.

II. For licit and fruitful reception: 1. in baptism and penance, sacraments of the dead, faith, hope, and attrition, in which faith and hope are already sufficiently contained, are required and of themselves suffice; in the remaining sacraments, the state of grace is required, which, for the eucharist alone, must be procured by confession, from a special precept, at least ecclesiastical.

The required disposition must be morally certain to the recipient himself; but it is judged to be had when a solid reason for affirming is attacked by no positive contrary reason.

Where there is danger in delay, let the minister bestow the sacraments by which provision may be made for the necessity of the dying person, while at the same time guarding against scandal and offense of the faithful.

2. It is also required that the sacraments be sought from a fitting minister, that is, a legitimate and worthy one. And a priest of one's own rite is to be approached for baptism, confirmation, order, and matrimony.

But any cause of necessity or utility of itself suffices that they be sought from a tolerated excommunicated person or from a sinner. If he is one's own priest, the inconvenience of going to another church or changing confessor suffices. In danger of death alone can both sacramental absolution and also, if other ministers are lacking, the other sacraments and sacramentals be sought from an excommunicated person to be avoided or judicially declared or condemned. To these non-Catholics and publicly intruded persons are to be equated.