Section — Wouters, Manual of Moral Theology
Scholion. On the Informity and Reviviscence of the Sacraments
I. Informity. 1. The informity of a sacrament consists in this: that the sacrament is validly received, but, on account of an obstacle, does not produce fruit, that is, grace. It is said to be on account of an obstacle, whether material or formal, according as it is placed inculpably or culpably.
- Six sacraments certainly can be unformed; concerning Penance alone it is disputed whether it can be received informly, that is, validly but without fruit.
II. Reviviscence; concerning which several things must be explained.
Notion. Reviviscence consists in this: that a sacrament validly but fruitlessly received afterwards produces grace, when the obstacle has been removed and the sacramental sign has ceased. I said "when the sacramental sign has ceased." Hence, supposing that the Holy Eucharist, received with an obstacle, produces Eucharistic grace when the obstacle has been removed before the consumption of the species,1 there would not be reviviscence of the sacrament, because the fruit would be produced while the sacramental sign remains.
The sacraments which revive are these:
a) Baptism certainly can revive; this is clear from the fact that otherwise those who received Baptism without fruit would be unable to obtain the remission of original sin and of the other sins committed before Baptism. For original sin and the other sins committed before Baptism are not remitted except through Baptism received in reality or in desire. But those who have once received Baptism can no longer receive it: neither in reality, because Baptism cannot be repeated; nor in desire, because if a new Baptism is impossible, the desire for a new Baptism is also excluded.
b) Confirmation, Order, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction much more probably can revive. Otherwise those who had received the said sacraments fruitlessly, even inculpably, would remain deprived of sacramental grace, which is so necessary to man in the various states of life; since Confirmation and Order cannot be repeated at all, Matrimony cannot be repeated while the same bond remains, and finally Extreme Unction, while the same danger persists, is at least not licitly repeated.
c) Whether Penance can revive is doubtful: both because it is doubtful whether it can be unformed, that is, valid and fruitless; and because it can be repeated.
d) The Holy Eucharist, at least if it has been received sacrilegiously, is almost commonly said not to revive: both because it can be repeated so often, and because there would follow the absurdity that one who had communicated very often sacrilegiously, if he afterwards truly repented, would immediately be heaped with grace.
The time of reviving. Baptism, Confirmation, and Order can always revive, since they can never be repeated, and by force of the character in some way continue in being. Matrimony can revive so long as the same matrimonial bond persists. Once it has been broken, sacramental grace either is no longer necessary, or can be acquired through a new marriage. Extreme Unction can at least revive so long as the same danger continues. Finally, Penance, if it must be numbered among the sacraments that revive, must be said to be able always to revive.
The requisites for reviviscence. If someone has sacrilegiously received a sacrament, or has sinned gravely after receiving it, there is required of itself contrition or attrition with sacramental absolution; accidentally, given good faith, attrition with a sacrament of the living received in good faith suffices, as is taught much more probably. The reason is that such a man is in the state of mortal sin. But in order that mortal sin may be remitted, and thus that place may be given for the reviviscence of the sacrament, there is required of itself contrition or attrition with sacramental absolution; accidentally, attrition with a sacrament of the living suffices (St. Alphonsus, VI, 6, 87, 444). Outside these cases:
a) Attrition certainly suffices in order that Baptism and Penance may revive. For the disposition required in the very reception itself suffices.
b) Of itself contrition is required, but accidentally attrition most probably suffices, in order that Extreme Unction may revive, because this sacrament, received in good faith with attrition, most probably produces fruit.
c) Of itself contrition is required, but accidentally attrition more probably suffices, in order that Confirmation, Order, and Matrimony may revive, because those sacraments, received in good faith with attrition, more probably produce fruit (n. 6).
The mode by which reviviscence has place is explained in different ways, according as the causality of the sacraments is explained in different ways. Supporters of moral causality teach that the value of the sacrament received perseveres morally in divine acceptance, and, when the obstacle has been removed, moves God to the infusion of grace. Defenders of intentional causality say that there remains a title demanding grace, and that, when the obstacle has been removed, it produces grace. Defenders of physical causality attribute the reviviscence of Baptism, Confirmation, and Order to character; as for the reviviscence of the other sacraments, some of them deny it, others derive it from a certain habitual determination in the will, and others have recourse to moral causality for these cases.
The degree of reviviscence seems to correspond to the actual disposition of the subject.2
1 Whether this has a place, see in the treatise on the Eucharist.