Scholion I. On the Ministration of a Doubtfully Valid Sacrament

I. The morality of doubtfully valid ministration. 1. Of itself it is illicit to minister a sacrament with doubt about its validity; in other words, moral certainty about the validity of the sacrament is required of itself. The reason is that of itself it is injurious to Christ, the Author of the sacraments, to place the external rite instituted by Him, wholly or at least partially, and indeed in order to constitute a sacrament, with grave danger of not truly constituting the sacrament. There is added proposition 1 condemned by Innocent XI: "It is not illicit in conferring the sacraments to follow a probable opinion about the validity of the sacrament, the safer one being left aside, unless law, agreement, or danger of incurring grave harm forbids it. Hence one must not use only a probable opinion in the conferral of Baptism, priestly Order, or episcopal Order."¹ Therefore of itself it is illicit: 1. to use doubtful matter or form; 2. to minister a sacrament in doubt whether another requisite for validity is present, for example the presence of the penitent due in the sacrament of Penance. Consequently, of itself it is also not licit to minister a sacrament under a condition which, according to what was said in n. 32, renders the validity of the sacrament doubtful (St. Alphonsus, VI, 28, 46).

Note. The moral certainty about validity which is required must be taken more strictly or more broadly according to the diversity of the sacraments; more broadly, for example, for the sacrament of Penance, as will be explained in its place.

2. Accidentally, a sacrament can sometimes, or even must, be conferred with doubt about its validity, namely if on the one hand it cannot certainly be conferred validly, and on the other hand there is a grave reason for conferring it. For since the sacraments are for men, the salvation of men to be procured prevails over the obligation of taking care lest the sacrament be exposed to the danger of nullity. A sufficient reason is present the more easily in proportion as the sacrament is more necessary (St. Alphonsus, VI, 28, 29).

Corollary I. A doubtfully valid sacrament can be conferred if the validity is at least probable and, from the sacrament not being conferred, grave spiritual harm threatens someone. Hence, for example, one doubtfully disposed can be absolved if there is fear lest otherwise he be alienated from the sacraments. But scarcely ever is it licit to consecrate doubtful matter (St. Alphonsus, VI, 28, 29, 432).

Corollary II. In danger of death, even with slight probability about validity, the necessary sacraments must be conferred, namely Baptism and Penance; likewise Extreme Unction, at least if Penance certainly cannot be conferred validly (St. Alphonsus, VI, 103).

¹ Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1151.

II. The mode of doubtfully valid ministration. If a sacrament is ministered with doubt about validity, it must be confected under condition; namely, the reverence due to the sacrament requires that the minister, in a doubt of this kind, protest that he does not will to confect the sacrament if the necessary condition is lacking.¹ Besides, observe:

1. Let the condition be placed on which validity depends, not that on which only the fruit depends. The reason is that a sacrament conferred under a condition on which only the fruit depends, for example, if you are disposed to receive grace, cannot revive; for if the condition is verified, the sacrament is immediately received validly and fruitfully; if it is not verified, it is not even validly received, and therefore cannot revive (n. 11). On the contrary, a sacrament conferred under a condition on which validity depends, for example, if you are capable of receiving the sacrament, is validly conferred if the condition is verified; and if perhaps it is now received without fruit, afterwards, when the due disposition is added, it can revive.

2. It is not required that the condition be expressed by mouth, but it suffices that it be expressed mentally, except in the cases in which, according to the Roman Ritual,² it must be expressed by mouth, namely: 1. in doubt whether the one to be baptized has already been baptized, or whether that which has been born is a human being; 2. in doubt whether the one to be anointed is still living (St. Alphonsus, VI, 29). The reason is that a condition placed mentally suffices for the sacrament truly to be conferred conditionally, in other words, for the intention to be restricted to the case of valid confection. This is confirmed by these words of the Roman Missal: "If he doubts very probably that he has omitted something essentially in the consecration, let him repeat the form at least under a tacit condition."³ Indeed, it is enough to place the condition, whether by mouth or only mentally, implicitly; for example by ministering the sacrament according to the institution of Christ or the intention of the Church.

¹ If doubt about validity is removed by the Church supplying the defect, if it exists, the sacrament must be conferred absolutely. If someone places the condition: if you are disposed, it can seem doubtful whether there is intended a disposition required for the fruit alone or, at least confusedly or predominately, for validity. Hence it is safer not to express the condition in this way.

² Title 2, chapter 1, nn. 9, 22; title 5, chapter 1, n. 14.

³ De defectibus, title 5, n. 2.