The Nature of a Sacrament

2. Definition. A sacrament of the new law can be defined: a visible sign divinely instituted for signifying and effecting the sanctification of men.

A visible sign, that is, sensible, which can be perceived by some external sense. Divinely instituted, because the author of the sacraments is Christ Jesus: for God alone can institute a sacrament, because God alone can give to material things the power of producing sanctifying grace. For signifying and effecting sanctification: for the sacraments are not only signs of grace, but also causes of the same. Besides this, by these words the end of the sacraments is shown, all of which tend to this, that they sanctify man through grace. Moreover, the grace which all the sacraments signify and confer is principally sanctifying grace: for they either first confer this grace or increase it once already conferred.

¹ St. Thomas III, q. 60-65. St. Alphonsus, bk. 6, n. 1-89. Fr. Suarez, De sacramentis in genere, disp. 1-18. Io. de Lugo, De sacramentis in genere, disp. 1-9. Sporer-Bierbaum, Theologia moralis decalogalis et sacramentalis, tom. III, pars 1, De sacramentis in genere, n. 1-196. Aeg. Coninck, De sacramentis, quaest. 60-64. Chr. Pesch, Praelectiones dogmaticae^3, tom. VI, VII. A. Lehmkuhl, Theologia moralis^10, II, n. 1-54 (n. 1-74). The numbers added within parentheses refer to the twelfth edition. Ballerini-Palmieri, Opus theologicum morale^3, IV, n. 642-710. Nik. Gihr, Die hl. Sakramente der kath. Kirche^2 (Freiburg: Herder, 1903). I. B. Pruner, Lehrbuch der Pastoraltheologie (Paderborn: Schoningh, 1900), I. Bd. Dom. Prummer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis (Freiburg: Herder, 1915), t. III. The new Code of Ecclesiastical Law, for the sake of brevity, is cited in this manner, e.g. cn 371, or cn 859, 3.

3. Effect of the sacraments in general is threefold: one is common to all the sacraments: sanctifying grace, supernatural virtues, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit; another is peculiar to the individual sacraments: sacramental grace, by which name is understood both the right of obtaining all helps necessary for pursuing the end proper to each sacrament, and these helps themselves actually conferred in their own time; finally, the third is proper to three sacraments, baptism, confirmation, and order, namely character.

Character is an indelible sign impressed upon the soul, by which the soul is conformed to Christ and is specially deputed and consecrated to His service in a diverse state and grade: for through the character of baptism a man is constituted a sheep and member of Christ, and is conformed to Christ the head and supreme shepherd; through the character of confirmation he is constituted a soldier of Christ and is conformed to Christ the supreme leader of our warfare; through the character of order he is constituted a minister of Christ and is conformed to Christ the supreme prince of shepherds, the bishop of our souls, the high priest.¹

Concerning the grace which the diverse sacraments confer, these things can be established from the more common doctrine of theologians.

a. If sacraments diverse in species, baptism, confirmation, etc., are compared with one another, they do not all produce the same grace, but one sacrament produces a grace greater and more perfect than another: for one is in itself more worthy and perfect than another, and therefore it also produces a greater and more perfect effect; and since the most holy sacrament of the eucharist is the most worthy of all, it confers an effect more perfect than all the others. And indeed the end of diverse sacraments is more perfect in one case than in another; therefore it also demands that one sacrament produce a more perfect effect than another. Since, for example, the end of order is more perfect than the end of confirmation, order confers a more perfect grace upon those receiving it.

b. If sacraments diverse only in number are considered, for example, several baptisms, it must be said that in subjects of the same disposition they of themselves, as to grade, always produce the same effect: for any sacrament whatever, from divine institution, is ordered of itself to producing a certain and determinate effect. But in subjects of diverse disposition, all teach that a diverse effect, as to grade, is produced, namely a greater effect in a better-disposed subject and a lesser effect in a less-disposed subject. Yet some say that the effect of the individual sacraments is limited according to a certain grade and measure from divine institution, so that a certain measure is not exceeded even in him who is disposed to receive a greater one. Others, on the contrary, think that the effect of individual sacraments is determined to a certain grade not from divine institution, but only from the disposition of the receiver, so that those unequally disposed obtain unequal grace according to the perfection of their disposition, which is limited only by the disposition, finite by its own nature.²

¹ Cf. Sporer-Bierbaum III, pr. 1, n. 57.

² Cf. Laymann, bk. 5, tr. 1, c. 6, n. 6; Sporer-Bierbaum III, pr. 1, n. 49 ss.

4. Division of sacramental effects. Of the effects which are conferred by the individual sacraments, some are called effects per se, others effects per accidens. An effect per se is that for producing which the sacrament has been instituted, and which therefore is always and in every case produced; thus the remission of original sin is the effect per se of baptism. An effect per accidens is that for obtaining which the sacrament has not been instituted, and which therefore is produced by the sacrament only in some extraordinary case; thus the remission of mortal sin is an effect per accidens of the eucharist. An effect per se is distinguished into primary, which God principally intends in the institution of the sacrament, and which therefore is the adequate reason for instituting the sacrament; and into secondary, which God intends only remotely, and which therefore is not the reason for instituting the sacrament. Thus the remission of mortal and venial sin is produced per se and by force of institution by the sacrament of penance, but the former primarily, the latter only secondarily.

5. Mode of effecting. The sacraments produce their effect ex opere operato, that is, by force of the sacramental action itself, which has this from the will and institution of Christ, that of itself it can confer grace and sufficiently sanctify; not ex opere operantis, that is, not from the dignity and merit of him who administers the sacrament, nor of him who receives the sacrament. For the dispositions of the receiver which are required constitute a necessary condition, but not an efficient cause of grace; and the dispositions of the minister are required so that the sacrament may be administered worthily, not so that it may be administered validly. Therefore, once the sacramental action has been placed, the sacraments infallibly produce their effect and confer it on the receiver, provided no obstacle is present which impedes it.

Sacraments are said to produce their effects ex opere operato negatively indeed, so that they do not have their force from the merit of the minister conferring or of the subject receiving; positively, however, it signifies that the sacramental action itself has the force of causing grace.

6. Number of the sacraments. There are seven sacraments of the new law, neither more nor fewer: baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, extreme unction, order, and matrimony. This is certain by faith from the definition of the Church: "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the new law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, or that there are more or fewer than seven, let him be anathema."¹

a. The number seven of the sacraments can be gathered not from the nature of the thing, but only from the will and good pleasure of God. Yet it was most fittingly done that seven sacraments were instituted: for the end of the sacraments is supernatural life, which has a likeness with this natural life. Now for natural life, both private and public, seven things are necessary: that a man be generated, strengthened, nourished, freed from infirmity and its remnants; because he lives in society, superiors must be constituted who rule society; because he is mortal, the legitimate conjunction of male and female is necessary for propagating the human race, lest society fail. In like manner, for supernatural life seven things are necessary: generation through baptism, increase and strengthening through confirmation, nourishment through the eucharist, remedy against sin through penance, remedy against the remnants of sins through extreme unction, power of ruling the Church through order, and propagation of the human race destined for the worship of God through matrimony.²

b. The individual sacraments differ especially by the end for which they have been instituted. Therefore, although all the sacraments confer sanctifying grace, nevertheless they confer it as diverse according to the diverse end. Namely, the sanctifying grace which is conferred in the individual sacraments is the principle and foundation of the helps which afterward conduct to obtaining the peculiar end of the sacrament. In baptism, therefore, there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which man can worship God and observe His precepts; in confirmation there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which man is strengthened for preserving and defending the faith; in the eucharist there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which man can possess Christ through greater charity in union with Christ; in penance there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which a man who has relapsed into sin may arise again; in extreme unction there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which man is aided to bearing with a calm soul the annoyances of sickness and of the last struggle; in order there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which one ordained may be able worthily and fruitfully to exercise the offices of his order; in matrimony there is conferred sanctifying grace insofar as it contains a right to divine helps by which married persons may fulfill the duties of the common life rightly and worthily. Hence it follows that a man who by mortal sin loses sanctifying grace at the same time loses the right to the helps which is contained in it.

¹ Council of Trent, sess. 7, can. 1.

² Cf. St. Thomas III, q. 65, a. 1.

7. Division of the sacraments. The seven sacraments of the new law are:

a. Repeatable, which can be received often because they do not imprint upon the soul an indelible character: eucharist, penance, extreme unction, matrimony; and non-repeatable, which can be validly received only once, because they imprint an indelible character upon the soul: baptism, confirmation, order.

b. Sacraments of the dead, which per se and primarily have been instituted for conferring first grace, and therefore for infusing spiritual or supernatural life into a man spiritually dead: baptism and penance; and sacraments of the living, which per se and primarily have been instituted for conferring second grace, and therefore for increasing supernatural life of grace in him who already lives by grace: confirmation, eucharist, extreme unction, order, and matrimony.

alpha. It happens per accidens that even sacraments of the dead confer second grace, namely if the one who receives them, through perfect contrition, is already in the state of grace. Likewise it can per accidens happen that sacraments of the living confer first grace, namely if he who receives them is in the state of mortal sin but in good faith thinks himself to be in the state of grace, provided he has attrition; this indeed is certain concerning extreme unction, but concerning the others it is not equally certain.

beta. Those who affirm that the sacraments of the living confer first grace per accidens use this argument: sacraments confer grace ex opere operato on those who do not place an obstacle; but he who in good faith and with attrition receives a sacrament does not place an obstacle; otherwise the sacraments of the dead would not produce an effect. But those who deny this answer that this very thing is in question, whether in sacraments of the living only the culpable obstacle or also an inculpable obstacle is constituted by the lack of the state of grace.¹ Since the whole matter depends upon the will of Christ instituting the sacraments, but the will of Christ in this matter has not been manifested, beyond extreme unction nothing certain can be defined concerning it.²

c. Necessary and non-necessary: alpha. baptism and penance are necessary for all men who after baptism have lapsed into grave sin, by necessity of means; beta. the eucharist is necessary by necessity of precept; gamma. the remaining four sacraments per se are not necessary to individuals, either by necessity of means or by necessity of precept.

d. Invalid, in which the sacrament itself is null and only its external rite is performed; and fruitless, in which the sacrament itself is validly conferred, but nevertheless lacks the effect of grace.

alpha. Invalid sacraments produce no effect in the soul of the receiver; fruitless sacraments produce some effect: some imprint a character, and all confer a right to the grace suited to the sacrament received.

beta. It happens that he who administers or receives an invalid sacrament sins more gravely than he who receives or administers a fruitless sacrament.

e. Formed, which produce their effect, sanctifying grace or the form of the soul, when they are received; and unformed, which indeed are validly received, but on account of an obstacle existing in the receiver do not produce their effect.

alpha. Obstacle or fiction is called the defect of the necessary disposition which in the receiver impedes the sacrament from being able to produce the effect of grace. It consists in mortal sin, or rather in adhesion to and affection for the will of mortal sin. Yet an obstacle does not impede the imprinting of character.

beta. Sacraments can be unformed through fault or without fault, because the obstacle can be found in the soul culpably or in good faith. Moreover, all sacraments can be unformed; concerning penance alone several doubt whether this is possible, as will be said below.

¹ Cf. St. Thomas III, q. 79, a. 3.

² Benedict XIV, De synodo, bk. 7, c. 11, n. 1.

8. On the reviviscence of the sacraments. For sacraments to revive signifies that they afterward, once the obstacle has been removed, confer the same grace which they would have conferred if the obstacle had not been present in the soul. To remove the obstacle signifies to acquire for oneself the necessary dispositions which, when the sacrament was conferred, should have been present, but were not present either culpably or without fault.

1. All indeed readily concede that there is no repugnance in the reviviscence of the sacraments, since reviviscence is explained in this way: every validly conferred sacrament produces its proper effect, that is, it confers upon the receiver either the grace itself or a right to grace to be produced through the sacrament. Since this grace cannot be applied to the soul on account of an obstacle existing in it, it remains meanwhile suspended until the obstacle is removed; but once the obstacle has afterward been removed, that grace is applied to the soul itself. Now it can easily be understood that by the reception of a sacrament there is acquired a right to grace to be conferred by force of the sacrament, which is actually conferred as soon as the obstacle is removed. The only question is whether, and which, sacraments in fact revive from the institution of Christ. For some teach that baptism alone revives; others, on the contrary, affirm that all sacraments revive once the obstacle is removed; others finally attribute reviviscence to some sacraments, namely those which imprint a character, but deny it to the others.¹

2. It is certain that baptism revives once the obstacle has been removed: for a character impressed demands the complement of the sacramental effect. Besides, since baptism cannot be repeated, if it did not revive, many would have to lack graces very necessary to salvation and ordinary to it.

It is very probable that confirmation and order also revive once the obstacle has been removed: for since these sacraments on the one hand produce an effect altogether proper to them, and on the other hand cannot be repeated, if they did not revive, there would be men who would have to lack graces ordinary and necessary to the state constituted for them; besides, character seems to demand reviviscence.

It is also probable that extreme unction and matrimony revive once the obstacle has been removed, because these sacraments have certain effects proper to them which endure during the same sickness or the same marriage and cannot be repeated.²

But because in favor of the eucharist, which can be received daily, a similar reason does not hold, it is not very probable that this sacrament also revives once the obstacle has been removed.

The reviviscence of penance depends on whether it can be unformed or not; but whether the sacrament of penance can be unformed will be stated below.

3. As to the disposition which is required that unformed sacraments afterward revive, one must distinguish among the sacraments of the living, the sacraments of the dead, and extreme unction. In the sacraments of the living, except extreme unction, contrition or attrition with absolution is required; in the sacraments of the dead and in extreme unction, attrition suffices, unless sacrilege or grave sin committed in the reception was present: for in this case contrition, or attrition with absolution, is required.

¹ Coninck, q. 62, n. 64 ss.

² Several teach that extreme unction certainly revives.

MERELY external religion, without devotion of mind and heart to the service of God, is hypocrisy, but though we should serve God in spirit and in truth, external rites and ceremonies are not excluded from religion. On the contrary, they form an essential part of it. Man is composed of body and soul; both come from God, and both should share in the worship due to their Creator. Besides, internal religion will be faint and likely to evaporate altogether, unless it sometimes finds expression in outward acts. God has provided for these wants of human nature by instituting the sacred rites, which we call sacraments, as essential parts of true religion. They serve also as signs by which the faithful are known to and united among themselves and distinguished from those outside the fold. They serve, too, as an external profession of faith, and as a means of practising the very salutary virtue of humility, inasmuch as we are compelled to seek in external rites the spiritual help of which we stand in need, whereby intellectual pride is humbled.

There were sacraments under the Old Law as there are under the New, although the latter are far more efficacious than the former. As expressing what is common to the sacraments of Judaism and Christianity, a sacrament may be defined to be an outward sign of inward grace. A sacrament, then, is some outward rite or ceremony instituted by God, to show forth and make known the grace which he thereby bestows on the soul of the recipient. Thus circumcision signified separation from the idolatrous world, incorporation among the people of God, and the infusion of grace into the soul for the remission of original sin. The sacraments of the Old Law produced their effects by exciting the faith of the ministers and recipients of them and by the profession of faith in the coming Redeemer which their use contained.

The sacraments of the New Law were instituted by Christ our Lord, and they confer the grace which they signify, not on account of the meritorious dispositions with which they are ministered or received, but on account of their dignity and intrinsic excellence. They were instituted by Christ, they are administered in his name and by his authority, and thus they are in a true sense the actions of Christ our Lord executed by his ministers. Divines express this by saying that the sacraments of the Christian Church confer grace ex opere operato, while those of the Old Law produced it ex opere operantis. A sacrament, then, of the New Law may be defined to be an outward sign of invisible grace instituted by Christ to confer the grace which it signifies.

There are certain rites and ceremonies in use in the Church which are called sacramentals. Of these we may mention the consecration of abbots, the first tonsure of clerics, the sacring of kings, the blessing of chalices and bells, holy water, Agnus Dei, scapulars, and many more. They are called sacramentals because they are sacred rites which, if properly used according to the mind of the Church, confer spiritual graces on the soul of him who uses them. They do this through the approbation and blessing of the Church, the Spouse of Christ, whose prayers and desires Christ always listens to, and through the good dispositions of those who use them. They thus differ from sacraments, as also in the grace which they produce. They confer actual graces, special helps to do good and avoid evil, given by God in answer to the prayers of the Church and the pious desires of those who use them properly (Can. 1144).

The Council of Trent defined as of faith that there are seven sacraments instituted by Christ our Lord: Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony; that these sacraments contain the grace which they signify, and that they always confer grace on all those who receive them and put no obstacle to their effect. The sacraments, then, require certain dispositions on the part of the recipient in order that they may produce their effect. They will be validly received if nothing that is essential be wanting to them, but in order to produce their effect when they are received the recipient must have the required dispositions. I may apply a match to a faggot of wood, but this will not take fire if it is sodden with water. Similarly, if an adult asks for Baptism and is rightly baptized the sacrament will be validly received, but if the recipient has no faith or no sorrow for his sins the Baptism will indeed imprint a character, but it will not infuse sanctifying grace in the soul. In such a case as this the sacrament is validly but not licitly received; it is said by divines to be unformed, not formed.

The Council of Trent also defined it to be of faith that the three sacraments, Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, whenever they are validly received, imprint on the soul a certain spiritual mark which is called a character. This character serves to distinguish in the eyes of God and of his saints those who have received the sacrament in question; it is indelible, and prevents the sacrament from being received a second time. It is, however, compatible with the presence of mortal sin in the soul, so that, as was said above, a valid sacrament imprints its proper character even when on account of some obstacle in the recipient it is unformed and does not convey sanctifying grace to the soul.

The question here occurs whether a valid but unformed sacrament will afterward produce grace in the soul, if and when the obstacle be removed. The common opinion of Doctors and divines is that it will do so in the case of the three sacraments which impress a character on the soul. This opinion is founded on the tradition of the Church and on what is to be expected from the goodness of God and the nature of the sacraments. A cause which is in existence, but which was hitherto prevented from producing its full effect on account of some obstacle in the way, will produce that effect when the obstacle is removed. Many divines hold the same doctrine of reviviscence concerning the sacraments of Matrimony and Extreme Unction, which may not be repeated at the will of the recipient. Whether it is also applicable to Penance is a much disputed point, while it is commonly denied that the sacrament of the holy Eucharist can afterward produce its effect if it was unformed when received.

The sacramental grace which is conferred by the sacraments is habitual or sanctifying grace as directed toward the particular end for which the sacrament from which it flows has been instituted. Together, then, with the grace which justifies the sinner, or which increases the sanctifying grace of the soul in friendship with God, a sacrament gives a title to receive from God special help or actual graces when they are required by the recipient of the sacrament. Thus, the sacrament of Penance, if worthily received, infuses sanctifying grace into the soul by which the sins confessed are blotted out, and, moreover, it gives the sinner a title to receive actual graces in time of temptation, so as to enable him not to yield. In the same way the holy Eucharist increases sanctifying grace within the soul, making it more holy and more pleasing in the sight of God, and fresh help is given to enable it to remain steadfast in the friendship of God. The sacraments of Baptism and Penance, which remit sin and give sanctifying grace to souls that were deprived of it, are called sacraments which give the first grace, or sacraments of the dead, inasmuch as they give spiritual life to those who were spiritually dead; while the sacraments which should only be received by such as are already in the state of grace are said to confer the second grace, and are called sacraments of the living. If the soul is already justified and in the state of grace, sacraments of the dead confer second grace; while Extreme Unction may, as we shall see, confer the first grace, although it is primarily a sacrament of the living; and it is a probable opinion that the other sacraments may per accidens confer the first grace when received in good faith by the sinner. Inasmuch as a sacrament confers grace in virtue of the worth and dignity of the sacred rite itself, the quantity of grace given will per se be the same for all who receive it. However, per accidens, since a cause acts with greater or less efficacy in proportion to the dispositions of the subject on which it works, so a sacrament will give more grace to such as receive it in better dispositions. It may, then, very well be that more grace will be obtained from Holy Communion received two or three times a week with better dispositions than from daily Communion made without fervour.

The Council of Trent anathematizes anyone who shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, though it also teaches that not all the sacraments are necessary for every individual. Under each sacrament it will be explained how far it is necessary and in what sense.

I. Summary notion. By force of the word, a sacrament signifies every sacred thing. Here, however, it is taken more strictly and is defined: a sensible sign of a sacred thing sanctifying man, that is, of grace. Sacraments of the Old Law and sacraments of the New Law are distinguished. The former only signify; the latter signify and produce grace. Hence a sacrament of the Old Law is defined: a sensible sign, but not an efficacious sign, of grace; but a sacrament of the New Law is called: a sensible and efficacious sign of grace.

II. Existence of the sacraments. In order that the existence of the sacraments may be rightly set forth, the various states of men must be distinguished, namely: 1. the state of innocence in paradise; 2. the state of the law of nature, so named not to the exclusion of grace, but to the exclusion of the written Mosaic law. This state prevailed for the Israelites until the written law, and for others until Christ; 3. the state of the Mosaic Law, which for the Israelites lasted until Christ; 4. the state of the new or Christian Law. Now:

1. In the state of innocence, by the consent of all, no sacrament existed.

2. In the state of the law of nature, more probably at least one sacrament existed. Namely, considering the will of God to save all, there certainly existed a remedy by which little children would be freed from original sin. That this was a sensible sign of sanctifying grace, or a sacrament, is more probable, as the dogmatic theologians explain (cf. St. Thomas, part 3, q. 61, a. 3; q. 60, a. 5, ad 3; q. 61, a. 1).

3. In the state of the Mosaic Law, several sacraments existed, as is deduced from the Council of Trent¹ and from the decree of Eugene IV for the Armenians. Moreover, it is commonly admitted that circumcision was a sacrament. Other sacraments of this Law are enumerated: the consecration of priests, the eating of the paschal lamb and of the loaves of proposition, and purifications (cf. St. Thomas, I-II, q. 102, a. 5; part 3, q. 61, a. 3, ad 2).

4. In the state of the New Law there are seven sacraments, and these were instituted by Christ; this is of faith from the Council of Trent: "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord; or that there are more or fewer than seven, namely Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony; or even that any one of these seven is not truly and properly a sacrament, let him be anathema."² That the said sacraments were instituted immediately by Christ, not by the Apostles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is certain doctrine, although it is disputed whether it was defined by the Council of Trent as a truth to be believed with Catholic faith.

It is disputed how Christ instituted the sacraments. Some teach that Christ determined the matter and form only in general, commanding only an apt gesture and suitable words, and leaving the more exact determination to the Church; this is the opinion of immediate institution in general. Others judge that Christ prescribed this gesture in species and these words in species, yet in such a way that there is room for some latitude, insofar as the Apostles or the rulers of the Church can, not indeed abrogate the matter and form established by Christ, but determine them more exactly or more strictly, or even increase them by new elements, so that the very sign-value is, within certain limits, subject to the will of the Church; this is the opinion of immediate institution in a perfectible specific form. Others admit immediate institution in a fixed specific form, so that the Church can do nothing directly with respect to validity by changing or adding anything concerning the matter or form.

¹ Session 7, canon 2.

² Session 7, canon 1.

III. Essence of the sacraments. 1. The sacraments of the New Law consist of things and words; this doctrine is declared in the decree for the Armenians. It is clear: 1. from Sacred Scripture, which expressly affirms this about several sacraments, such as Baptism,¹ Confirmation,² and Extreme Unction;³ 2. from the doctrine and use of the Church. For the rest, words and things can be understood morally, so that it suffices for words and things to be had equivalently.

2. Things and words in the sacraments stand to one another as matter and form; this doctrine is proposed in the same decree for the Armenians. It is clear from the fact that the thing of a sacrament, which of itself can signify several things, for example washing in Baptism, and therefore of itself is indeterminate in the being of a sign, is determined by words to a special signification; so that the thing is like matter, the determinable part, while the words are like form, the determining part.

3. The matter of a sacrament is customarily distinguished as twofold, remote and proximate. The remote matter is the thing which is used in the sacred rite, as water in Baptism; or the thing about which the sacramental action is concerned, as sins in Penance. The former is called the remote matter from which, the latter the remote matter about which. The proximate matter is the application of the remote matter, as washing in Baptism; or the action which is concerned with the remote matter, as the acts of the penitent in Penance.

¹ Matt. 28:19.

² Acts 8:15, 17.

³ Jas. 5:14.

IV. Division of the sacraments. The sacraments of the New Law are distinguished into:

1. Sacraments of the dead and of the living, according as they were primarily instituted for giving grace, namely to the spiritually dead; or for increasing it, namely in the spiritually living. The grace which is conferred on a man deprived of every degree of grace, or spiritually dead, is called first grace; the grace which is conferred on a man constituted in the state of grace, or spiritually living, is called second grace. The sacraments of the dead are Baptism and Penance. The sacraments of the living are Confirmation, Eucharist, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony.

2. Repeatable and non-repeatable, according as they can be conferred on the same person more than once or only once.

3. Necessary and non-necessary, according as they ought or ought not to be received by individuals. Of those which ought to be received, some are necessary by necessity of means and precept, others by necessity of precept alone. Baptism for all (can. 737), and Penance for all who have fallen into mortal sin after Baptism, are necessary by necessity of means and precept (can. 901 and 906). The Eucharist is certainly necessary by necessity of precept (can. 859, §§ 1 and 4; can. 864, § 1); concerning necessity of means, it is disputed. Confirmation and Extreme Unction are not necessary by necessity of means; whether they are necessary by necessity of a grave precept is disputed. Finally, Matrimony and Order are necessary only to the community; each of these matters will be developed in its own place.

4. Formed and unformed, according as, as soon as they are received, they confer grace, or, on account of an obstacle, at least do not produce it immediately. Of the unformed sacraments, some, when the obstacle has been removed, revive, that is, confer grace; others do not revive (St. Alphonsus, VI, 6).

5. Finally, a sacrament is called valid or invalid according as nothing or something is lacking for constituting it.

The question is whether the sacraments truly produce grace, etc.; concerning the effects themselves there will be discussion in the following part. Now:

I. The sacraments of the New Law confer grace ex opere operato, or are truly efficient causes of grace. This proposition is established against the Protestants and Modernists, and is of faith from these words of the Council of Trent: "If anyone shall say that grace is not conferred through the sacraments of the New Law themselves ex opere operato ... let him be anathema."¹

II. The sacraments concur in producing grace only as instrumental causes; the principal cause, which uses the sacraments as instruments, is God alone; for no creature can, as principal cause, produce an effect which exceeds the order of every creature.²

III. The mode by which the sacraments concur in producing grace is explained in different ways. Some teach that the sacraments, which morally are actions of Christ, move God by an infinite and infallible power to confer grace (the doctrine of moral causality). Others judge that the sacraments do not immediately produce grace, but effect in the subject a title which, so far as lies in itself, demands grace (the doctrine of intentional causality). Others teach that the sacraments physically and immediately produce grace (the doctrine of physical causality). This is the opinion of St. Thomas (I-II, q. 112, a. 1, ad 2; III, q. 62, a. 1, 3, 4, 6).

¹ Session 7, canon 8.

² Council of Trent, Session 6, chapter 7.

The effects of the sacraments are grace and character. The former is common to all the sacraments; the latter is proper to three, namely Baptism, Confirmation, and Order.

In the three Questions that preceded we spoke of the means by which man is sanctified and is enabled to secure supernatural rewards through the merits of his own works; for the virtues make their possessor as well as his acts morally righteous, while through God’s grace the good deeds done for His sake entitle the doer to the crown of eternal life. In the present Question we pass on to consider certain means by which God is honored by man and man is sanctified through the application to his soul of the merits and passion of Christ; for the Sacraments were instituted by Christ both as external acts of religion (2175, 2244) and as most powerful agencies to begin, restore, and increase the life of holiness.

It should be observed, first, that the present work is concerned with Moral Theology; and, secondly, that it must be confined within the limited number of pages which a two-volume production of convenient size necessitates. Hence the reader will understand why in the Question now beginning we speak only of man’s duties in reference to the Sacraments, and omit other points that do not so strictly pertain to Moral. (a) Thus, the nature, institution, number and effects of the Sacraments belong to Dogma, which the authors hope to treat later in a similar work. (b) The administration of the Sacraments, their rites, rubrics, ceremonies are set forth in ritual books and works on liturgy. (c) The legal rights of ministers, canonical requirements on registration, penal and processual legislation in reference to the Sacraments, and like juridical questions are treated fully in commentaries on pertinent sections of the Code.

(Summa Theologica, III, qq. 60-65.)

Nature of a Sacrament.—In the New Law a Sacrament is an outward sign instituted permanently by Christ to signify and convey grace.

(a) The internal cause or essence of a Sacrament is the outward sign, which has two parts. The indeterminate part or matter is a visible object (e.g., the water of Baptism, the chrism of Confirmation, the bread and wine of the Eucharist, the oil of Extreme Unction, the imposition of hands in Orders) or a perceptible act that looks to another act for its perfectionment (e.g., the confession, etc., of the penitent in penance; the giving of oneself as spouse in Matrimony). The determining part, or form, is either the sacred formula spoken over the material element (e.g., in Baptism the words “I baptize thee, etc.”) or an act that completes another act (e.g., the acceptance of another as spouse in Matrimony). As the matter must be visible or otherwise sense-perceptible, so the form must be audible or at least (in Matrimony) equivalently audible; for a Sacrament is a sensible sign. The words are audible when they are heard or are capable of being heard at least by the minister.

(b) The external efficient cause or instituter of the Sacraments is Christ, the founder of the New Testament religion and the productive and meritorious author of grace as our God and Saviour.

(c) The external final cause or purpose of the Sacraments is to symbolize outwardly by their rite and to work inwardly by their instrumental virtue the application of Christ’s redemption in the soul of properly disposed recipients. It is the nature of Baptism and Penance (Sacraments of the Dead) to produce first grace or forgiveness, of the others to produce second grace or increase of holiness (Sacraments of the Living). Furthermore, three of the Sacraments (Baptism, Confirmation, Orders) have a second effect, since they sign the soul with the indelible character of member or soldier or minister of Christ, and hence these Sacraments cannot be repeated.

What is a sacrament? - As regards the force of the name, sacrament, in Greek mystery, is the same as a sacred, hidden thing. As regards the thing, sacrament, insofar as it comprehends the sacraments of the Old Testament and of the New Testament, is defined: A visible sign of invisible grace. But insofar as it is restricted only to the sacraments of the New Testament, it is defined: A sensible sign which, from the institution of Christ, has the power of signifying and causing grace. Hence the sacraments of the Old Testament differ much from the sacraments of the New Testament. For the former did not cause grace, but only figured that it was to be given through the passion of Christ; but our sacraments both contain grace and confer it upon those worthily receiving them. - Sacraments are distinguished from sacramentals, which are certain sacred things, sacred prayers, or actions instituted by the Church, which do not have the power of causing grace of themselves, but only, from the prayers of the Church, of exciting pious movements in us; and thus consequently they have the power of remitting venial sins and temporal punishment, and also of obtaining for us other spiritual and temporal goods, by way of impetration, by reason of the prayers of the Church. Sacramentals are: the Lord's Prayer, holy water, the use of eulogiae, Agnus Dei, consecrations, blessings, general confession, alms, etc. Sacred anointings, which are not sacraments, instituted by the Church, are counted among sacramentals. - Florence, Decree for the Armenians; Trent s. 7, c. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8; Roman Catechism n. 2, 14; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 60, a. 1-4; q. 87, a. 3; Suppl. q. 29, a. 1; L. 90-94; La Croix 218 ff.; Ferraris v. Peccatum n. 52 ff.; Voit 112-117; E. M.

Agnus Dei are blessed and consecrated by the Roman Pontiff. They have power against demons and against all evils of the elements; they are a protection for women giving birth, and for all in prosperous and adverse cases, and they free from unexpected death.

How many are the sacraments of the New Testament? - There are seven: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, Matrimony. Namely, as in bodily life we are born, grow, are nourished, are healed when sick, are fortified against enemies, are governed, and are multiplied, so also in spiritual life. For through baptism we are spiritually reborn; through confirmation we are increased in grace and strengthened in faith; through the Eucharist we are nourished with divine food; through penance we are spiritually healed from the sickness of sin; through extreme unction we are strengthened in agony against the devil; through order the Church is governed; through matrimony it is multiplied. Florence, Decree for the Armenians; Trent s. 7, c. 1; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 65, a. 1-3.

Were all the sacraments instituted by Christ, and when? - R. To the first: In the affirmative, and this is of faith from Trent s. 7, c. 1. But it is far truer that all were instituted immediately by Christ, by himself, and not some mediately through the Apostles or the Church.

R. To the second: Christ more probably instituted Baptism before his passion, when he was baptized in the Jordan, John c. 3, v. 5; Matthew 3:15-17; penance after the resurrection, when he gave to the Apostles the power of remitting sins, John c. 20, v. 22, 23; Trent s. 14, c. 1, 14; the Eucharist at the Last Supper, Trent s. 12, c. 1; order at the Last Supper, when he conferred on the Apostles the power of consecrating, 1 Corinthians c. 11, v. 24-26; Trent s. 22, c. 1, c. 2, and after the resurrection when he gave to them the power of remitting sins, John l. c.; matrimony at the wedding of Cana, or when he established its indissolubility and perpetuity, Matthew c. 19, v. 5, 6, 9, for the matter is not certain. Nor is it established at what time he instituted confirmation, whether after the institution of the Eucharist at the supper, in that discourse in which he promised to all that he would send the Holy Spirit, John 14, 17, or after the resurrection, when Christ conferred on the Apostles full episcopal power in the Church, saying to the Apostles: As the Father has sent me, I also send you.... Receive the Holy Spirit, John 20:21, 22. Nor likewise is it established at what time he instituted extreme unction. - St. Thomas 3 p., q. 64, a. 2-4; 4 D. 3, q. 1, a. 5, s. 2; Roman Catechism p. 2, on Baptism, n. 19.

Do all the sacraments, and always, confer grace? - All the sacraments of the New Testament contain grace and have the power of conferring it on those not placing an obstacle, and they give it always and to all who rightly receive them. Trent s. 7, c. 6, 7. An obstacle is had if the necessary dispositions are lacking in the one receiving. It is also called fiction, because it prevents the sacrament from effecting that which it signifies. St. Thomas 3 p., q. 60, a. 3; q. 69, a. 9 ad 3. - Hence sacraments are called formed or unformed according as they produce grace while they are received, or, with an obstacle intervening, suspend their effect, namely grace, until the obstacle is removed. Whence it appears that sacraments can be at the same time valid but unformed, and can be received at the same time validly but illicitly. Validly, when nothing is lacking from those things which pertain to the essence of the sacrament; illicitly, when, from fault, something is lacking from the necessary dispositions in the one receiving. - Decree of the Holy Office Lamentabili, July 3, 1907, propositions 39, 40, 41.

Do unformed sacraments, when the obstacle is afterwards removed, revive? - For a sacrament to revive is to furnish the grace which it would have furnished from the beginning if there had not been an obstacle. But the obstacle is removed by supplying those necessary dispositions which were lacking from the beginning, e.g., imperfect contrition, if it is a question of baptism received by an adult without any contrition for his own sins, and meanwhile he has not committed a new grave sin. Otherwise either perfect contrition is required, with the vow of the sacrament of penance, or imperfect contrition with the sacrament itself of penance. And then baptism destroys original sin and at the same time all actual sins committed before baptism. But the sacrament of penance destroys sins committed after baptism, and the sin of fiction, or of depraved disposition, with which the sacrament of baptism was received, at least insofar as this depraved disposition persevered after baptism, since it impeded its operation.

Now baptism revives, because it cannot be repeated. St. Augustine l. 1 Contra Donat. c. 13; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 69, a. 10, and others commonly. The same consequently must be said of confirmation and of order. St. Thomas 4, d. 49, art. 2. The same also must be said by proportionate reason of extreme unction and of matrimony, which during the same infirmity and the same marriage likewise cannot be repeated. - But concerning penance and the Eucharist it is much disputed. The reason for doubting is that if attrition is lacking in penance, the matter of the sacrament is lacking; and consequently the sacrament is neither formed nor unformed, since it is invalid, namely since it is altogether not. But the Eucharist from its institution can frequently be repeated, and therefore it does not seem that there was need to attribute to it this efficacy, so that assistance may be given to human frailty.

But St. Thomas, 4 dist. 17, q. 3, a. 4, qc. 1, speaking of a penitent who has made a valid but unformed confession, says: "although then he does not perceive the fruit of absolution, nevertheless when the fiction recedes he will begin to perceive it; as also happens in the other sacraments." But the general reason for revival is that it is only by accident that they do not produce their proper effects of grace, namely because of the obstacle; and therefore those effects remain suspended while the obstacle remains, but when this has been removed they must be applied to the soul. - Lugo d. 9, n. 50, 55; La Croix 207; L. 6, 87, 444, 707; H. A. Exam. Ord. n. 4.

What grace do the sacraments cause? - Sacramental grace, which the sacraments cause, is not grace entitatively diverse from common or non-sacramental grace, but it is sanctifying, habitual grace, insofar as it is given through such a sacrament, and gives a right to such special and more abundant helps, and comprehends these special helps themselves, actually conferred in their own time, according to the diversity of the end for obtaining which each sacrament was instituted. Florence, Decree for the Armenians. But the sacraments which from their primary institution cause the first sanctifying grace are called sacraments of the dead, as baptism and penance. Those which from their primary institution cause the second sanctifying grace, as the five other sacraments, are called sacraments of the living. But, since all the sacraments of the New Testament contain and confer grace on those not placing an obstacle, Florence, Decree for the Armenians; Trent s. 7, c. 6, 7, the sacraments of the dead by accident confer second grace if someone receives them already in the state of grace, and this is certain.

On the contrary, the sacraments of the living by accident confer first sanctifying grace, if someone simply attrite receives them in the state of grave sin, in good faith falsely thinking himself to be rightly absolved or perfectly contrite; and this again is certain concerning extreme unction, very probable concerning the others. The reason is that all the sacraments cause grace for those not placing an obstacle; but the obstacle to grace is not sin existing in the soul, but affection toward sin. - St. Thomas 3 p., q. 62, a. 1-4; q. 72, a. 7 ad 2; q. 79, a. 3.

Do the sacraments cause equal grace in all? - Sacraments cause grace by force of the sign itself, or ex opere operato, not by the merit of the minister or of the recipient, or ex opere operantis. Hence they of themselves effect grace equally in all; yet this by accident, from the greater merit and better dispositions of the subject, can be greater, as happens in the effects of other causes which act physically and necessarily. For greater merit and better dispositions of this kind, in order to the effect of grace ex opere operato, have themselves as more fully removing every obstacle. Trent s. 6, c. 7; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 69, a. 8.

Do all the sacraments imprint character; what is the nature of character? - Only three sacraments imprint character, which therefore are customarily called characteristic, namely baptism, confirmation, and order, by which we are made subjects, soldiers, and ministers of the Church. Character is a certain spiritual sign, distinctive from the others, impressed on the soul and indelible. Hence they cannot be repeated without grave sin of sacrilege. For they would be repeated in vain, and consequently not without grave irreverence, since it would be to mock Christ himself, who instituted the sacrament. Sacramental character is not incompatible with grave sin; therefore sacraments, even unformed ones, although they do not produce grace, nevertheless imprint character in the soul. The remaining four sacraments do not imprint character and admit repetition. Hence sacraments are divided into unrepeatable and repeatable. Penance and the Eucharist are simply repeatable; extreme unction and matrimony indeed are repeatable, but not in the same infirmity and the same marriage. Therefore they hold a middle place between the unrepeatable and the repeatable, and cannot be repeated without grave sacrilege. - Florence, Decree for the Armenians; Trent s. 7, c. 9; St. Thomas 3 p., q. 63; Lugo, de Poenit. d. 16, n. 558.

Are the sacraments necessary? - Baptism for the non-baptized, and penance for those who after baptism have fallen into grave sin, are necessary by a necessity not only of precept but also of means, in reality or in desire. Florence, Decree for the Armenians; Trent s. 5, Decree on original sin; s. 14, c. 1, 4, 5; can. 1, 2, 6, 7. The Eucharist is necessary by necessity of precept. Trent s. 13, c. 9. The sacraments of order and matrimony are altogether free to individuals. Trent s. 7, c. 4. But whether confirmation and extreme unction are necessary from precept is not certainly established, as will be explained in its own place. - St. Thomas 3 p., q. 61.

By what are the sacraments perfected? - "All Sacraments are perfected by three things, namely by things as matter, by words as form, and by the person of the minister conferring the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does; and if any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not perfected." Florence, Decree for the Armenians.

Things and words are required so that they may intrinsically constitute the sacrament, or the sensible sign signifying and causing grace, as matter and form. But since the proximate matter and form, which is contained in words, do not exist of themselves, but are contained in human actions, therefore a minister is furthermore required for substantially perfecting the sacrament, and indeed with the intention of doing what the Church does; for by this intention the ultimate signification of that sign is completed. For even with the thing and word, or matter and form, posited, that whole action still does not have perfect sacramental signification; for it can still be a sacramental action or some action, e.g., one mocking the sacrament itself, according to the intention of the one acting. But the sacraments "effect that which they figure" and signify, St. Thomas 3 p., q. 62, a. 1 ad 1, and therefore if they signify nothing, they effect nothing.

190. • I. DEFINITION. A Sacrament is a sensible sign instituted by Christ to signify and confer grace.

Hence three things are necessarily required in every Sacrament, namely: 1º a sensible sign; 2º divine institution; 3º the force of producing the grace promised by Christ.

All Sacraments are perfected by three things: 1º by things as matter; 2º by words as form; 3º by the person of the Minister confecting the Sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does. This is clear from the Council of Florence in the Decree of Union.

The Sacraments, besides sanctifying grace, produce grace which is called sacramental, that is, they confer helps for obtaining the special end for which each Sacrament was instituted, if the due conditions are not lacking. The Sacraments operate ex opere operato, that is by force of the divine institution, independently from the work of the one operating, namely of the Minister and of the subject of the Sacraments.

Hence the Sacraments are distinguished from sacramentals, which are certain sacred things or actions instituted by the Church, such as lustral water, blessings and consecrations, the Agnus Dei, etc.

“How ought Pastors to conduct themselves in celebrating the marriages of those who have notoriously incurred ecclesiastical censures?—Response. Care must be taken with all strength that those bound by ecclesiastical censures be reconciled with the Church in the due manner; but if they refuse to be reconciled, and grave evils seem likely to threaten unless the marriage is celebrated, the Pastor shall consult the Ordinary, who, having taken account of the matters and circumstances and having considered all the things handed down by approved authors, and especially by Saint Alphonsus, book 6, treatise 1, chapter 2, no. 54, shall declare those things which he shall judge more expedient in the Lord, the celebration of Mass, however, always being excluded.” Sacred Penitentiary, 10 December 1860. The same Sacred Penitentiary responded on 15 July 1856, the same care having been employed and the same circumstances standing: “In such a case the Pastor can lawfully assist at the marriage of a public and notorious excommunicate who is tolerated. A Bishop likewise can, when these circumstances concur and suitable precautions have been employed, give a Pastor permission to assist at such a marriage.”—C. 1525 ff.

“Likewise, how ought Bishops to conduct themselves if any of those mentioned above who are bound by a censure should present themselves in order to act as sponsor either in the Sacrament of Confirmation or of Baptism?—Response. As in the preceding.” Sacred Penitentiary, 10 December 1860.

“Can the Most Holy Eucharist be administered to those notoriously bound by a censure before they have, as is fitting, been reconciled with the Church?—Response. Negative.” Sacred Penitentiary, 10 December 1860; A. S. S., vol. 1, p. 563.

One who is not baptized cannot be ordained; and if he is ordained, he does not receive the character of Order. Innocent III, chapter Veniens, last, De Presbytero non baptizato; chapter Si quis, 1, same title.

1. The efficacy of the Sacraments depends solely on the will of God, and hence all that is required for their valid administration on the part of the minister is power and jurisdiction, proper application of matter and form, and an actual or at least a virtual intention of doing what the Church does.¹ It is a mortal sin for any one not in the state of sanctifying grace to administer a Sacrament solemnly. Ignorance, of course, is an excuse, and so is urgent necessity, as when the administration of Baptism or Penance cannot be postponed without danger to the salvation of others. In such urgent cases the minister is called minister necessitatis; in all others, minister called minister necessitatis; in all others, minister solemnitatis.

¹ Conc. Trident., Sess. VII, De Sacr., can. 10, 11, 12; Sess. XIV, De Poenit., can. 10 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 853, 854, 855, 920).

Hence the general rule that no Sacrament should be performed or administered by one who is in the state of mortal sin. One who is so unfortunate as to be called upon to administer a Sacrament in that state, should first cleanse himself by the worthy reception of Penance, if he can conveniently find a confessor (habita copia confessarii)² or else by an act of perfect contrition.

² Conc. Trident., Sess. XIII, cap. 7, can. 11; Rit. Rom., De Administr. Sacram., tit. i, n. 4; Codex Iuris Can., can. 807.

Matrimony is the only Sacrament that is not administered by the priest but by the contracting parties to each other, and hence husband and wife are themselves the ministers.³ They should receive this holy Sacrament in the state of grace, which means, ordinarily, that they should go to confession and Communion before plighting their troth.

³ Conc. Trident., Sess. XXIV, De Reform. Matr., c. i; Rit. Rom.t De Sacr. Matr., tit. 7, c. 1, n. 17.

In regard to the other Sacraments the question arises: If a priest who is in the state of mortal sin be called upon to administer a Sacrament, must he go to confession, or is perfect contrition sufficient? We answer: Perfect contrition suffices for all Sacraments except the Holy Eucharist (i. e., saying Mass). The reason is this: Perfect contrition, including the votum sacramenti, restores sanctifying grace, and the administration of all the Sacraments, with the exception of the consecration of the Eucharist, is always, morally speaking, a matter of necessity. When the celebration of Mass is a matter of necessity, as sometimes happens, it will suffice for the priest to make an act of perfect contrition, but he is bound to receive the Sacrament of Penance as soon thereafter as an opportunity offers, i. e., at least within three days, according to the common interpretation of the law.⁴

⁴ Conc. Trident., Sess. VI, c. 5-6.—Missale Rom., De Defect. in Cel. Missae, tit. 8, n. 2 sq.— Prop. Damnat. ab Alexandra VII., 38: "The command of the Council of Trent, given to a priest who celebrates from necessity while in mortal sin, to confess as soon as possible, is a counsel, not a precept."—Prop. 39: "That phrase ‘as soon as possible’ is understood to mean when the priest confesses in his own time." (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1138 sq.).—Cfr. Ferreres, Comp. Theol. M., ed. 8a, Vol. II, n. 431, qu. 5.

It follows that all those who are ex officio entrusted with the administration of the means of grace, are in duty bound to hold themselves in readiness to administer the Sacraments, in other words, to be habitually in the state of grace.⁵

⁵ Cfr. St. Augustine, Enarr. in Ps., CIII, s. i, n. 9: "Let those who use holy things unholily consider what account they will have with God." (Migne, Pat. La*., XXXVII, 1343).

So much for the interior disposition of the minister. Now for the act of administration. As the minister acts in the name and by authority of the Church, the first rule is that he must comply with her directions. Sancta sancte tractanda. Hence it is a mortal sin knowingly to employ the wrong matter or form, or, except in case of necessity, a matter or form of doubtful validity; since this would endanger the Sacrament. In cases of necessity (iusta causa) a doubtful matter or form may be employed, because the Sacraments are instituted for the sake of men (sacramenta propter homines). It is likewise sinful (mortally or venially, according to the circumstances of each case) to alter or mutilate the words of the form, to utter them inarticulately or without devotion, or to omit important rites or ceremonies prescribed by the Church. If this is done out of contempt for Christ or the Church, or if it causes grave scandal, the minister commits a mortal sin, and even when the motive is mere negligence, a mortal sin is committed every time the object is materia gravis.⁶ 2. The faithful have a right to the Sacraments, and hence all duly appointed ministers of the Church are bound in justice to administer the same whenever they are asked, and should always be ready and willing to comply with every reasonable request, nay exhort their people to make frequent use of the divinely appointed means of grace.⁷ It is a mortal sin for a priest entrusted with the care of souls to refuse to administer a Sacrament without good reason, or to administer it with manifest reluctance. Such conduct is apt to deter the faithful from the reception of the Sacraments and easily causes scan- dal. The duty of administering Baptism and Penance, in particular, binds even when there is danger of contracting a contagious disease or incurring grave risk to life or limb.⁸ Of course, all reasonable precautions may and should be taken in such cases. The duty just mentioned does not bind priests who are not officially engaged in pastoral work, though all are bound to respond to urgent calls when there is grave necessity, as, e. g., on the field of battle, or when some one is seriously ill or dying and no other priest can be had. The same rule applies to a pastor in his conduct towards those not under his care. We need hardly add, however, that no true priest will confine himself to what is of strict duty in matters of this kind.

⁶ Cfr. Conc. Trident., Sess. VII, De Sacr., can. 13 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 856); Rit. Rom., De Administr. Sacram., tit. 1, n. 11.

⁷ Cfr. Concilium Trident., Sess. XXIII, De Ref., c. i; Rit. Rom., De Administr. Sacram., n. 5.

⁸ John X, 11-13. —Benedict XIV, De Synodo Dioecesana, XIII, c. 19, n. 8.—Cfr. I. Chapeauville, Tract. de Necessitate et Modo Ministrandi Sacramento, Tempore Pestis, Mayence 1612.

It is forbidden (extra periculum mortis) to administer the Sacraments to persons who are notoriously unworthy (publice indigni), especially if these persons are excommunicated by name, or are under an interdict, or if they lead a life of public infamy, e. g., prostitutes, fortune tellers, concubinarians, and Freemasons publicly known as such, unless indeed they have done penance and repaired the scandal given. The reason for this prohibition is the danger of scandalizing the faithful and Christ's admonition not to give that which is holy to the dogs nor to cast pearls before swine.⁹

⁹ Matth. VII, 6.—Cfr. 1 Tim. V, 22.—Rit. Rom., De S. Eucharist. Sacr., tit. 4, c. 1, n. 8-9. —Chr. Pesch, Praelect. Dogmaticae, Vol. VI, 3rd ed., pp. 126 sqq.

In applying this rule attention must be paid to the distinction between public and private sinners and to the nature of the request made. If the priest knows of the unworthiness of an applicant only by his official position, i. e., through the confessional, he is obliged to administer the Sacrament asked for, e. g., Holy Communion, because the preservation of the seal and the good name of the recipient are more important than regard for the sanctity of the Sacrament. Hence if a person who is guilty of secret sin should publicly demand a Sacrament, his demand must not be refused if there is danger of public defamation or grave scandal. The case is different with public sinners and secret offenders who apply privately to the priest. To such (extra periculum mortis) no Sacrament should be administered except Penance and, under certain conditions, Matrimony.

To simulate a Sacrament, e. g., by administering an unconsecrated host, is never allowed, not even for the purpose of preventing sacrilege or saving one's life.¹⁰ To bless or pray over a penitent not properly disposed, in order to protect the secret of the confessional or the good name of the sinner, is not a simulatio or fictio sacramenti, and therefore permitted.¹¹

¹⁰ The proposition: "Urgent grave fear is a just cause for simulating the administration of the Sacraments." was condemned by Pope Innocent XI (Prop. Damnat., n. 29; Denz.- Bannwart, n. 1179).

¹¹ H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. III, 11th ed., pp. 40 sq.

READINGS. —St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, 3a, qu. 60-90. —St. Alphonsus, Theologia Moralis, 1. VI, tr. 1-5 (ed. Gaudé, Vol. III).—P. Schanz, Die Lehre von den hi Sakramenten, Freiburg 1893, pp. 161 sqq. —N. Gihr, Die hl. Sakramente der kath. Kirche, Vol. I, 2nd ed., Freiburg 1902, pp. 140 sqq.—Chr. Pesch, S.J., Praelectiones Dogmaticae, Vol. VI, 3rd ed., pp. 98 sqq. —P. Pourrat, Theology of the Sacraments, 2nd ed., St. Louis 1914. —Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. I, St. Louis 1915, pp. 161 sqq. —Wilhelm-Scannell, A Manual of Catholic Theology, Vol. II, 2nd ed., London 1901, pp. 366 sqq. —J. E. Pruner, Lehrbuch der Pastoraltheologie, Vol. I, 2nd ed., Paderborn 1904, pp. 94 sqq.—H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. III, 11th ed., pp. 3 sqq. —J. de Lugo, De Sacramentis in Genere, disp. 1-9. —Ballerini-Palmieri, SJ., Opus Theol. Mor., 3rd ed., Vol. IV, n. 642-710.—A. Lehmkuhl, SJ., Theol. Moral, Vol. II, 11th ed., pp. 1-43 —Sabetti-Barrett, SJ., Comp. Theol. Mor., 22nd ed., pp. 515 sqq.—Th. Slater, SJ., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. II, pp. 15 sqq.

Regarding the moral requisites of worthy reception, a distinction must be drawn between what is necessary for the validity of a Sacrament and what is required for its licit and fruitful reception.

1. The valid reception of a Sacrament requires: a) that the recipient be in the wayfaring state (in statu viatoris); b) that (if he be an adult) he have the wish to employ the Sacrament as a means of grace; c) that he be baptized. Baptism, according to an ancient saying, is the door to the supernatural life. No other Sacrament can be validly received without it.¹

¹ Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, The Sacratnents, Vol. I, 2nd ed., pp. 238 sqq.; Chr. Pesch, S.J., Praelect. Dogm., Vol. VI, 3rd ed., pp. 130 sqq.; N. Giehr, Die hi. Sakramente, Vol. I, "5 and ed., pp. 158 sqq.

As regards the necessary intention, this is supplied by the Church for infants, insane and weakminded persons, and adults who lack the full use of reason.² When there is question of adminis- tering Extreme Unction to an unconscious Catholic, it may be presumed that the patient would wish to receive the Sacrament if he were in possession of his faculties. Penance and Extreme Unction require an actual, or at least a virtual, intention; for the other Sacraments (Baptism of adults, Confirmation, Communion, and Holy Orders) a habitual intention is sufficient.

² Cfr. Matth. VIII, 5-10; XV, 22-28; Mark IX, 16-26.

2. For the licit and fruitful reception of Baptism (in the case of adults) and Penance there is required in the subject faith, hope, and imperfect contrition (attritio). One who has lost sanctifying grace after Baptism must regain it by a worthy confession before he can worthily receive Holy Communion.³ The reception of Penance is recommended, though not prescribed, as the best means of preparing for the other Sacraments of the living. To receive any of these Sacraments consciously in the state of mortal sin is a sacrilege and a more grievous sin than would be the administration of a Sacrament in the same condition.

³ Conc. Trident., Sess. VI. c. 5-6; Sess. XIII, c. 7, can. 11 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 797, 798, 880, 893).

Broadly speaking, the faithful are in duty bound to demand the Sacraments only from properly constituted ministers of good character. Every priest is to be regarded as worthy unless his unworthiness is certain and notorious.

READINGS. —P. Schanz, Die Lehre von den hl. Sakramenten, Freiburg 1893, pp. 187 sqq.—Chr. Pesch, S.J., Praelectiones Dogmaticac, Vol. VI, 3rd ed., pp. 130 sqq. —Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. I, pp. 191 sqq. —Sabetti-Barrett, S.J., Com/>. Theol. Mor., 22nd ed., pp. 526 sqq. —H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. III, pp. 42 sqq. —Th. Slater, S.J., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. I, pp. 41 sqq—A. Lehmkuhl, S.J., Theol. Mor., Vol. II, pp. 37 sqq.

1. BAPTISM. —Since the coming of Christ Baptism is "the laver of regeneration,"¹ in which every man must be washed, either actually (in re), or at least in desire (in voto), in order to be saved.²

² John III, 5.—Conc. Trident., Sess. VI, c. 4; Sess. VII, De Bopt., can. 2 sqq. (Denzinger-Bannwart, n, 796, 858 sqq.)—Cfr. Pesch, Prae- Sess, Praelect. Dogm., Vol. VI, 3rd ed., pp. 181 sqq.

¹ Tit. III, 5.

The necessity of Baptism, therefore, is a necessitas medii; but it is also a necessitas praecepti, on account of Christ's command to the Apostles to teach and baptize all nations.³

³ Matth. XXVIII, 19.

The precept of receiving Baptism obliges all who have the use of reason and are capable of receiving this Sacrament.⁴ Nothing can dispense from this duty except utter inability. a) Baptism being "the Sacrament of faith," is necessary for all men, including the children of Christian parents, and as an indispensable condition of membership in the mystic body of Christ imposes certain well-defined duties.

⁴ Conc. Trident., Sess. V, can. 4; Sess. VI, c. 7 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 799); Rit. Rom., De Sacr. Bapt., tit. 2, c. 1, n. 1.

Parents and their representatives are bound under pain of grievous sin to have their children baptized as soon as possible after birth. To allow a child to die without Baptism is a mortal sin. As regards the time, due attention should be paid to approved custom and local ecclesiastical regulations. Under the present discipline infants must be baptized as soon as it can conveniently be done.⁵ Most theologians deem it a mortal sin to defer Baptism for more than a month without reasonable cause. It is safe to say that the reception of this most important Sacrament should not be postponed for more than a few days unless there be some very good reason for delay.

⁵ Cat. Rom., P. II, c. 2, qu. 33. — Decree of the Holy Office, of Jan. 11, 1899: “It must be urged that Baptism be administered as soon as possible.” — Codex Juris Can., can. 770: "Infants are to be baptized as soon as possible; and pastors and preachers are frequently to remind the faithful of this grave obligation of theirs."

The Rituale Romanum forbids a child to be baptized in utero matris on the ground that the Sacrament cannot be validly administered under such conditions. This prohibition is based on an assumption which has proved to be unfounded. With the means now at command it is possible to baptize an infant in utero, and therefore it should be done. If the head can be reached, the child should be baptized in the regular way, and the Baptism must not be repeated if the child is born alive; if the head cannot be reached but some other limb protrudes, the child should be baptized conditionally and rebaptized sub conditione after birth.⁶

⁶ Codex Iuris Can., can. 746, § 1: "No one enclosed in the mother’s womb is to be baptized until there is probable hope that, once duly delivered, he can be baptized. If an infant has put forth the head and danger of death is imminent, he is to be baptized on the head; nor afterward, if he survives, is he to be baptized again conditionally. If he has put forth another member, he is to be baptized conditionally on it if danger is imminent; and then, if he lives after birth, he is again to be baptized conditionally." —Cfr. Rit. Rom., De Sacr. Bapt., tit. 2, c. 1, n. 16. —Cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 68, art. 11.

Apparently still-born infants, and such as are incompletely developed (foetus abortivus) or abnormally shaped (monstra), should be conditionally baptized if there is doubt whether they are dead or alive.⁷

⁷ Codex Iuris Can., can. 747, 748.

In case a mother dies during pregnancy, the fetus should be carefully extracted from the womb and baptized, —absolutely if it is certainly alive, conditionally if there be doubt.⁸

⁸ Rit. Rom., De Sacr. Bapt., tit. 2, c. 1, n. 17. —Cfr. Stohr-Kannamuller, Handbuch der Pastoralmedisin, 5th ed., Freiburg 1909, pp. 479 sqq.; Pruner, Lehrb. d, Pastoraltheol., Vol. I, 2nd ed., pp. 157 sqq. —Codex Iuris Can., can. 746, § 4.

Infants should be baptized privately immediately after birth if there is reason to fear that they will die before the Sacrament can be administered in the ordinary way. This precept implies the duty, on the part of physicians and midwives, of calling attention to such danger, where it exists, and on the part of all concerned of seeing to it that the Sacrament is administered in time.⁹

⁹ Codex Iuris Can., can. 759, § 1; can. 743. —Rit. Rom., De Sacr. Bapt., tit. 2, c. 1, n. 13. —The decree of the Holy Office of Jan. 11, 1899, already quoted, says: "It can then be permitted that the midwife confer it when there is a positive fear that the child will die during the delay." —Cfr. J. B. Geniesse, La Mort Reclle et la Mart Apparente et leurs Rapports avec I'Administration des Sacrements, Paris 1906; J. Antonelli, Medicina Pastoralis, Vol. I, 2nd ed., Rome 1906, pp. 265 sqq.

b) After having their child baptized, parents are in duty bound to give it a good Christian education, in order that the grace conferred by Baptism may be preserved. In case of death or neglect, this duty devolves upon the sponsors, of whom there should be at least one and not more than two.¹⁰

¹⁰ Codex Iuris Can., can. 760, 764. —Rit. Rom., De Sacr. Bapt., tit. 2, c. 1, n. 25. —Cfr. C. Krieg, Wissenschaft der Seelenleitung, Vol. I, p. 110. Under the new Code no spiritual relationship is incurred by Baptism except between the baptizing minister and the person baptized, and between the latter and the sponsors (can. 768).

2. CONFIRMATION. —The Sacrament of Confirmation bestows the grace to be "a good soldier of Christ Jesus,"¹¹ to profess the Catholic faith courageously, and never under any circumstances to deny it. Hence all who are able to receive this Sacrament are in duty bound to do so.¹² Culpable neglect in this matter exposes one to great spiritual danger and is a mortal sin if inspired by formal contempt for the Sacrament or accompanied by grievous scandal, or when there is proximate danger of losing faith or charity.

¹¹ 2 Tim. II, 3. —Cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 72, art. 1 and 7.

¹² Codex Iuris Can., can. 787.

Bishops are under a grave obligation of affording the faithful an opportunity to receive this Sacrament at least once every five years.¹³

¹³ Ibid., can. 785, § 3 sq.

Each person confirmed ought to have a separate sponsor, whose obligations are similar to those assumed by the sponsor at Baptism.¹⁴

¹⁴ Codex Iuris Can., can. 794, 797.

There is no obligation either to administer or to receive this Sacrament fasting, though, according to St. Thomas, "where it can conveniently be done, it is more becoming that both giver and receiver should be fasting."¹⁵

¹⁵ Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 72, art. 12, ad 2: "Because of the multitude of the faithful and the dangers that threaten, it is tolerated that this Sacrament, which can be given only by bishops, be given or received even by those who are not fasting, because one bishop, especially in a large diocese, would not suffice to confirm so many people if their time were restricted. Yet where it can suitably be observed, it is more fitting that it be given and received by those who are fasting."

READINGS. —Rituale Romanum, De Sacro Baptismate. —J. B. Geniesse, La Mort Reel et la Mart Apparente et leurs Rapports avec I'A dministration des Sacrements, Paris 1906. —J. Antonelli, Medicina Pastoralis, Vol. I, 2nd ed., Rome 1906. —Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. I, pp. 238 sqq., 304 sqq. —Stohr-Kannamiiller, Handbuch der Pastoralmedizin, 4th ed., Freiburg 1900. —Codex Iuris Canonici, De Baptismo, can. 737-779; De Confirmatione, can. 780-800. —M. J. O'Donnell, "Baptism in the New Code," in the Irish Eccles. Record, 5th Series, Vol. X, No. 6, pp. 441 sqq.—P. Hoornaert, S.J., Baptéme d’Urgence, Brussels 1923. —Sabetti-Barrett, S.J., Comp. Theol. Mor., pp. 534 sqq., 555 sqq.—Th. Slater, S.J., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. II, pp. 47 sqq., 67 sqq. —H. Noldin, S.J., Summa Theol. Mor., Vol. III, pp. 62 sqq., 99 sqq.—A. Lehmkuhl, S.J., Theol. Mor., Vol. II, pp. 43 sqq., 70 sqq.

The Holy Eucharist is entitled to an important place in Moral Theology because it has been instituted as the spiritual food of the soul, as a means to avoid everyday sins, and as a pledge of eternal glory.¹ Christ instituted this Sacrament for the twofold purpose of transforming and ennobling human nature, and enabling men to advance on the way to righteousness and become intimately united with God. As Communion the Holy Eucharist is both the efficient cause and sign of a real and mystic union with Jesus Christ ² —"the sacrament of ecclesiastical unity, which is brought about by many being one in Christ." ³ "From the Eucharist the martyrs drew their strength, the virgins their zeal, the saints their courage." ⁴ The nature and effects of this Sacrament give rise to the following obligations.

¹ John VI, 50 sqq.—St. Ignatius (Ep. ad Ephes., 20, 2) calls the Holy Eucharist "the medicine of immortality, the antidote that we should not die, but live forever in Christ." (Funk, Patres Apost., Vol. I, 2nd ed., p. 230). —Rit. Rom., De S. Euch. Sacr., tit. 4, c. 2, n. 6: "O sacred banquet, in which Christ is received, the memory of His Passion is recalled, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us."

² Cfr. John VI, 54; 1 Cor. X, 16 sq.—Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. II, 2nd ed., pp. 218 sqq.; M. Heimbucher, Die Wirkung der hi. Kommunion, Ratisbon 1884.

³ "The Sacrament of ecclesiastical unity, which consists in this, that many are one in Christ." (St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 82, art. 2, ad 2). —St. Augustine 123 exclaims: "O Sacrament of piety! O sign of unity! O bond of charity!" (TV. in loa., 26, n. 13). In another place (ibid., n. 14) he calls the Eucharist "panis concordiae." Again he says: "The martyrs are strong, the martyrs are steadfast; but bread strengthens the heart of man, the bread which came down from heaven." (Serm., 333, c. i; Migne, P. L., XXXVIII, 1464). —Cfr. K. Adam, Die Eucharistielehre des hl. Augustin, Paderborn 1908.

⁴ Don Bosco.

1. THE DUTY OF RECEIVING HOLY COMMUNION. —Holy Communion is not necessary as a means of salvation (necessitate medii), but a divine precept imposes upon all who have attained the use of reason the duty of receiving the Eucharist if possible (necessitas praecepti).⁵

⁵ Cfr. Luke XXII, 19; John VI, 4 1 Cor. XI, 26. —Conc. Trident., Sess. XIII, c. 2, can. 9; Sess. XXI, c. 4, can. 4 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 875, 891, 933, 937)- —St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 73, art. 3; qu. 80, art. 11. 5 "The most perfect and most necessary provision for the journey."

1. This duty is based on the same general reasons as that of receiving Confirmation, plus the additional one that Holy Communion is a food without which the supernatural life of the soul must needs grow weak or cease altogether. There can be no doubt that the divine precept of receiving the Holy Eucharist as viaticum 6 (when there is danger of death from whatever cause) obliges under pain of mortal sin, for Christ expressly declared: "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you." ⁷

⁷ John VI, 54. —Codex Iuris Can., can. 864, § 1. —Conc. Nicaen. I., can. 13 (Hefele, Concilicngeschichte, Vol. I, 2nd ed., p. 417). —Conc. Trident-, Sess. XIII, c. 8. —On the ancient custom of receiving Communion as viaticum see A. Struckmann, Die Gegenwan Christi in der hi. Eucharistie, Vienna 1905, pp. 210 sqq.

2. The duty with which we are concerned is inculcated by the well-known ecclesiastical precept which commands all the faithful who have attained the use of reason to receive Holy Communion at least once a year, during Easter time. This law, passed by the Fourth Council of the Lateran,⁸ was at first purely disciplinary, but received dogmatic character at the Council of Trent.⁹ The paschal precept must be regarded as an authentic interpretation of the divine command to eat the Body and Blood of the Lord. Needless to say, it can be fulfilled only by a worthy Communion.¹⁰ If for some reason the precept is not complied with during the paschal season, it remains binding for the remainder of the ecclesiastical year, and if one foresees that he will be unable to perform his Easter duty within or after the prescribed time, he should try to attend to it in advance.¹¹

⁸ Conc. Lat. IV. (A. D. 1215), c. 21 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 437).

⁹ Conc. Trident., Sess. XIII, can. 9. —Cfr. J. P. Gury, Comp. Theol. Moralis, Vol. II, n. 218 sq. —The new Codex Iuris Can. states the law of paschal Communion in the usual terms of our catechisms, but adds (can. 859, § 1): "unless perhaps, on the advice of his own priest and for some reasonable cause, he judges that its reception should be postponed for a time."

¹⁰ This has been indirectly defined by Innocent XI when he condemned the proposition: "The precept of annual Communion is fulfilled by a sacrilegious eating of the Lord." (Prop. Damnat., n. 55; Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1205). The new Codex Iuris Can. expressly says (can. 861): “The precept of receiving Communion is not fulfilled by a sacrilegious Communion.”

¹¹ Cfr. Koch-Preuss, Handbook of Moral Theology, Vol. I, p. 179. —St. Alphonsus, Theol. Moral., 1. VI, n. 297 sqq.

The place for making the Easter Communion is the parish church. One who makes it elsewhere, under the new Code of Canon Law, is admonished to inform his pastor of the fact.¹²

¹² Codex Iuris Can., can. 859, § 3: "The faithful are to be advised that each fulfill this precept of paschal Communion in his own parish; and those who fulfill it in another parish are to take care to notify their own pastor that the precept has been fulfilled." —On the history of this procept see A. Villien, A History of the Commandments of the Church, St. Louis 1915, pp. 210 sqq.

II. PREPARATION FOR COMMUNION. —The nature of the Holy Eucharist is such that it must be received with the greatest possible purity of soul and body. i. PREPARATION OF THE SOUL. —In order to receive Holy Communion worthily, the soul must be free from mortal sin.¹³ Therefore, if one is conscious of a mortal sin, he must worthily receive the Sacrament of Penance before approaching the Holy Table. If he must communicate, and confession is impossible, he should at least make an act of perfect contrition. Mortal sins forgotten in a worthy confession should, if a good opportunity offers, be confessed before approaching the Holy Table. There is, however, no strict obligation to do so, and if one has no opportunity to confess, it will suffice to mention such sins in the next confession. To receive the Holy Eucharist while conscious of mortal sin is a very grievous sin, and the greatest of sacrileges, though, contrary to the opinion of many, by no means the most grievous sin a man can commit.¹⁴

¹³ Cfr. 1 Cor. XI, 27 sqq.; Conc. Trident., Sess. XIII, c. 7, can. 11 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 880, 893); Sess. XXII, De Observ. et Evitand. in Celebrat. Missae. —Cfr. Prop, Dantnat. ab Alexandra VII., n. 38 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1138).

¹⁴ Cfr. St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, 3a, qu. 80, art. 5; Pohle- Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. I, 2nd ed., pp. 268 sq. —On the participation of Judas in the Last Supper see St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 81, art. 2; J. Belser, Die Geschichte des Leidens und Sterbens des Herrn, Freiburg 1903, pp. 162 sqq.

As an immediate preparation for Holy Communion, acts of faith, hope, charity, adoration, desire, devotion, and humility should be elicited. All these acts may profitably be directed to Christ's sacrificial death on the cross.¹⁵ A part of the preparation for Communion in the wider sense is the thanksgiving following its reception. This is a very important and effective means of preserving the graces obtained and of making them fruitful for the spiritual life. The thanksgiving after Communion should consist mainly in acts of adoration, humility, gratitude, love, and self-oblation,¹⁶ and should contain some special petitions and resolutions.

¹⁵ Cfr. Luke XXII, 19; 1 Cor. XI, 26; Rit. Rom., De Euch. Sacr., tit. 4, c. 1, n. 4; F. S. Renz, Die Geschichte des Messopferbegriffes, Vol. I, pp. 115 sqq.

¹⁶ Cfr. P. Lejeune, Avant et après la Communion, Paris 1901.

2. PREPARATION OF THE BODY. —On the part of the body the worthy reception of the Eucharist requires: a) Cleanliness and a decent habiliment. Neglect of these requisites betrays a moral defect and is a violation of the respect due to the Sacrament and to Jesus Christ, who is present therein. Holy Communion must not, however, be denied to those who suffer from diseases which ordinarily involve physical uncleanness, e. g., leprosy, smallpox, eczema, etc. The married are advised (though not commanded) to abstain from carnal intercourse immediately before and after Communion. ¹⁷ "Neither legitimate cohabitation nor a flow of blood nor seminal pollutions during sleep but only impious and illicit conduct can violate nature or expel the Holy Ghost/' ¹⁸ b) A second bodily requisite for the worthy reception of Communion is that the recipient be fasting. The Eucharistic fast, known as ieiunium naturale, consists in complete abstention from food and drink and everything that is ordinarily taken after the manner of food and drink (per modum cibi et potus) after midnight (post mediam noctem).¹⁹™ This law binds under pain of mortal sin and admits of no parvitas materiae. The term midnight is to be understood physically, not morally, but we are allowed to follow either standard or sidereal time.

¹⁷ Cfr. 1 Cor. VII. 5 sq.; Cat. Rom., P. II, c. 4, qu. 56; Innocent XI's Decree "Quum ad Aures," Feb. 12, 1679 (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1147); Missale Rom., De Defect, in Celebr. Missae, tit. 9, n. 5; Pseudo- Augustine, Append. Serm., 292 (at. 244 De Temp.), n. 3 (Migne, P. L., XXXIX, 2298).

¹⁸ Constit. Apost., VI, c. 27 (ed. Funk, Vol. I, p. 371); cfr. Struckmann, Die Gegenwart Christi in der hi. Eucharistie, pp. 207 sqq.; St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, Suppl., qu. 64, art. 3.

¹⁹ St. Augustine, Epist., 54 (a/. 118), n. 8: "It pleased the Holy Spirit that, in honor of so great a Sacrament, the Lord’s body should enter the Christian’s mouth before other foods; for this is why that custom is observed throughout the whole world." (Migne, P. L., XXXIII, 203). Missale Rom., De Defect, in Celebr. Missae, tit. 9, n. 1-4; Rit. Rom., tit. 4, c. 1, n. 3. —St. Thomas says (Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 80, art. 8, ad 5): "The Roman Church begins the day at midnight. Therefore, if anyone takes anything after midnight by way of food or drink, he cannot receive this Sacrament on the same day; but he can if it was before midnight." —The new Codex Iuris Can. reinforces the old law as follows (can. 858, § 1): "One who has not observed the natural fast from midnight cannot be admitted to the Most Holy Eucharist unless danger of death is urgent or there is a necessity of preventing irreverence toward the Sacrament."

The Eucharistic fast does not, however, bind those who are in danger of death, i. e., who suffer from a disease in which the Holy Eucharist is given as viaticum (which may be done repeatedly in the course of the same illness²⁰20). Nor does it bind when there is danger of a profanation of the Sacrament by unbelievers, or of scandal or infamy, or when a priest is compelled to complete the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass after the Consecration, either because he has "consecrated" and consumed water instead of wine (in which case he is obliged to reconsecrate and consume both species) or, for good reason, the wine only, or because he is overcome by sudden illness or death. It is of precept to complete a Mass once it has proceeded beyond the consecration of the bread, and in case of necessity it may be done by one who is no longer fasting. If the priest who finishes a Mass in place of another has not yet said Mass himself, he is not allowed to say another Mass, etiam ablutione non sumpta, unless he has the privilege of binating.²¹

²⁰ See the decision of the Holy Office of Sept. 7, 1897, and that of the S. Congregation of the Council, of Dec. 7, 1906. —Codex Iuris Can., can. 858, § 2; 864, § 3.

²¹ Missale Rom., De Defect, in Celebr. Missae, tit. 10, n. 5. —Cfr. St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mort, 1. VI, n. 287 sqq.

The Eucharistic fast, finally, is not binding on in- valids or on those who have been legitimately dispensed by the Pope. Invalids may receive Communion once or twice a week even if they are obliged to take some liquid food.²¹

²¹ Codex Iuris Canonici, can. 858, § 2.

— A Sacrament of the New Law is a sensible thing which, from the stable institution of Christ, has the power of effecting the sanctity or grace which it signifies.

No one is ignorant that there have been and still exist several usages, even ecclesiastical ones, of the word sacrament. But we assume the word in the technical usage of this book in the definition.

It is defined by faith in Trent, Session VII, canon 1, that there are seven sacraments, neither more nor fewer, truly and properly such, namely baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, extreme unction, order, and matrimony, and that all and each were instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord.

This definition does not prevent Christ, the author of the sacraments, from having been able to commit the ultimate determination of the elements of a sacrament to the Church. Concerning this matter dogmatic theologians are to be approached. This power of the Church is also the reason why moral theologians, solicitous for practical security, are accustomed, more than dogmatic theologians, to define the conditions of validity circumspectly and severely. The same power imposes on us also a diligent attention to the sacramental decrees which are issued by the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, through which the supreme authority of the Church is accustomed to express its mind in this matter.

As a sensible thing assumed for signifying, a sacrament is in the genus of sign. But it is proper to this sign that by signifying it operates, and indeed operates that which it signifies.

But it signifies sanctifying grace, whether first grace, when it first gives or restores it; or second grace, when it increases the same; then sacramental grace, special to the individual sacraments, that is, a special right to helps accommodated to the end of each sacrament.

But it signifies these things by means of the very title to having these things, which it places in the soul. This title, in three sacraments, constitutes a real, spiritual, indelible quality. That quality is called character, which, according to St. Thomas (3 p., q. 63, art. 3, c.), "is specially the character of Christ"... a certain participation of the priesthood of Christ, derived from Christ himself. But the sacraments by which it is imprinted are baptism, confirmation, and order. As often as these sacraments are validly conferred, that character is imprinted, although an obstacle can stand in the way of the further effect of grace.

Not only in these but in all sacraments, very many theologians, after St. Thomas, distinguish that which is sign only, or signifies and is not signified: the sacrament itself; that which is reality and sacrament, because it is simultaneously signified and further signifies, as character; finally, that which is reality only, or which is merely signified and does not signify: sanctifying and sacramental grace.

But what is the proper character of the three sacraments which imprint character, and what, in the other sacraments, is the title demanding grace, does not plainly agree even among those who think that in all sacraments there is reality and sacrament.

Moreover, a sacrament is a stable sign, or a sign instituted permanently in the Church militant. Wherefore the washing of feet at the Last Supper, the breathing by which Christ risen gave the Holy Spirit to the apostles, and the words of Christ to Magdalene and to the paralytic, "Your sins are forgiven you," although they signified the spiritual effect of grace, are not sacraments, since perpetual institution is lacking.

Finally, it effects or operates grace ex opere operato, that is, by its use and application through its own efficacy, and not ex opere operantis, or not from the act and disposition of the minister, which, even when it is required for the effect of the Sacrament, is not the cause, but the condition without which not.

— Properly speaking, the following are not sacraments:

1. The figures and sacraments of the Old Law: various purifications and consecrations of priests; the paschal lamb, and especially circumcision; both because they were not instituted by Christ and because they did not effect true sanctity. And although, from the received opinion of theologians, circumcision at one time took away original sin through true grace, it did this either ex opere operantis, in adults, or not ex opere operato simply and rigorously; for it did not contain grace as cause, because the fountain of grace had not yet flowed forth, that is, the merits of Christ had not yet been acquired through his passion; nor did it formally confer grace insofar as it was circumcision and from its own institution, but insofar as it was a profession of faith; nor did it confer it by force of its application and use, for it did not give it to everyone not placing an obstacle. But circumcision was a sign of incorporation into the people heir of temporal promises, which were a figure of the spiritual promises made to those who are children of Abraham not by flesh but by spirit, that is, to the Christian people.

2. Sacrifices both of the Old and of the New Law, because they are formally instituted not for conferring grace ex opere operato, but for exhibiting and rendering worship to God. Although the Sacrifice of the New Law, or the Mass, obtains grace ex opere operato for him for whom it is offered.

3. Martyrdom, because although it confers grace ex opere operato, it is not specially instituted for this end.

4. Sacramentals, as the blessing of an abbot, because precisely from their use and ex opere operato they do not confer grace.

5. Acts of virtues, because they do not confer grace but merit it, and they are not all sensible.

— Therefore the sacraments are divided:

1. Into sacraments of the living, which, instituted for nourishing or increasing grace, of themselves demand a subject already living or endowed with sanctifying grace; and of the dead, which, instituted for conferring first grace, do not require in the subject an antecedent state of grace. The sacraments of the dead are baptism and penance; extreme unction is of a certain mixed character; the other four are of the living. Yet in a true sense, even first grace derives from the eucharist, insofar as, before the reception of the eucharist, no one obtains grace except from some desire for it, "either through himself, as adults, or by the desire of the Church, as little ones" (St. Thomas, 3 p., q. 79, art. 1 ad 1).

2. Into sacraments necessary by necessity of means or of precept, and not necessary. Necessary of themselves for all are baptism and eucharist; necessary after grave sin is the sacrament of penance; necessary in a qualified way are confirmation and extreme unction; of simply free use are order and matrimony.

Necessity is considered with respect to individuals; for those which are of free option to individuals, that is, order and matrimony, are most necessary to the Church.

3. Into sacraments repeatable or not repeatable. Strictly, the latter are those which imprint character (c. 732, §1). From the present discipline, extreme unction cannot be repeated in the same danger of death.

4. Into formed sacraments, which are as it were completed by the effect of grace, and unformed or not formed sacraments, which, validly administered, nevertheless, because of a defect of disposition in the subject, do not confer grace on the subject. At least some, with the obstacle removed, revive or confer grace: this is certain concerning the sacraments which imprint character. Concerning the others the matter is less clear, but, with the eucharist excepted, it can probably be affirmed. Cf. below, n. 208.

— On the Matter and Form of the Sacraments. Sacraments can be taken by way of a physical composite or by way of an artificial composite. In the former way, they are compared by scholastic doctors with physical substances which consist of matter and substantial form. Matter is the more determinable part; form is the determining and perfecting part. Matter itself is distinguished as remote: the sensible thing, as, in baptism, water; in the eucharist, bread and wine; in extreme unction, blessed oil; and as proximate, or the same matter as employed in the sign: the very action of washing or immersing, of anointing, in baptism and extreme unction; the sacramental species remaining after the conversion, in the sacrament of the eucharist. Form is the words or what is put in their place, as, in matrimony, the sign of consent.

Here we are treating of the former account.

In the other way, or when sacraments are taken by way of an artificial composite, the matter and form themselves, or the things and words together, have themselves after the manner of matter, but the signification after the manner of form.

— On the Union of Matter and Form. A question to be solved presents itself spontaneously: what conjunction of matter and form is essential to a sacrament? This is the general rule. As much conjunction as is required that one sign be constituted, so much conjunction is required. But a sign which must signify commonly is to be judged from common estimation. Therefore there must be such conjunction between matter and form that, according to the moral estimation of men, with the nature of the individual sacraments considered, one affects the other, that is, that the words are judged to fall upon such a thing and to compose one sign with it. Hence:

Physical "simultaneity" is required in the eucharist alone, so that the words may be true: "For this is my body," etc.

Moral simultaneity strictly so called is necessary in baptism, confirmation, extreme unction, and order: that is, so that one sign may be constituted, the words must be pronounced and the matter must be applied morally at the same time. This is had without doubt if you have begun to pronounce the words before the application of the matter has had its end, or have begun to apply the matter before you have ceased to pronounce the form; indeed, if, without interval, the pronouncing follows the ablution or anointing, or the ablution or anointing follows the pronouncing. But if the matter is separated from the whole form by one Pater Noster, validity itself is already denied by St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 9.

In penance, which is by way of judgment, absolution can be delayed for a rather long time. And provided the circumstances demonstrate the connection between accusation and sentence, there is no reason why we should assign a maximum interval. Yet there are those who deny that so great a distance can intervene as can separate, in forensic judgment, the instruction of a case and its definition. This stricter opinion seems to be supported by the extrinsic authority alone of St. Alphonsus (l. 6, n. 9).

Finally, in matrimony, which is made by way of contract, and in which matter and form are found in mutual consent, it suffices, as in other contracts, that the consent of the one reach the morally persevering prior consent of the other.

— On the Truth or Integrity of Matter and Form.

1. The very value of the sacrament prevents matter or form from being changed substantially; but an accidental change will often be illicit. In this matter, the common estimation of men must be very much attended to. Matter is changed substantially when, according to common use and estimation, it differs in name and in reality from that which Christ prescribed. Thus raw material is not called bread, nor is that held as elemental water which is contained in the juice of a plant. Corruption of the form is to be called essential or accidental according as the same sense remains or does not remain. But it is corrupted essentially not only when the very sentence is formally changed, but also: a) when individual words are materially corrupted, so that they express nothing or something different; this occurs more easily in the base or root, that is, in the beginning, than at the ending, as if you should say matris instead of patris; b) if, because of an excessive interval, the words no longer seem to coalesce into one sentence; c) if not one single person pronounces the whole form, but several, one one part and another another part of the whole form. - On the contrary, the form may be able not to perish if you either omit, add, substitute, transpose, or, from defect of language, pronounce less well certain sounds which are plainly indifferent to the sense. Cases will be given concerning the individual sacraments.

2. A good intention does not avail to restore a signification which has been taken away by a change. But a signification which of itself is ambiguous can, from a manifest intention, be determined to one thing, so that the same material corruption may be held accidental if it appears to have proceeded from unskillfulness or distraction, while if done from a depraved intention or deliberately, it would have been substantial. Thus Pope Zacharias resolved the case concerning baptism. Cf. c. Retulerunt, 86, d. 4, Cons.

3. Without doubt, under one pronunciation of the form, several are validly baptized or absolved at the same time; and licitly indeed, in a case of urgent necessity; outside this, some hold it prohibited under mortal sin, others under venial sin. Cf. St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 29; d'Annibale, III, 235. - If while one applies the matter another pronounces the form, for example, "I baptize you," he utters a falsehood and therefore says it in vain, as the Holy See itself declared. Cf. n. 225. Nevertheless in extreme necessity this might be attempted under condition, because the person saying and the person doing perhaps are morally one, since the application of the matter and the pronunciation of the form are done in the name of the one Christ. But the sacrament stands if several ministers perform the whole, for example, if they absolve or consecrate together, or if one perfects one part, another another part, of a composite sacrament; for example, in extreme unction, one, with the congruent form, anoints the hands, another the feet (d'Annibale, l. c.); or, in the sacrament of order, one, after the litanies, imposes hands; another, toward the end of the Mass, by the third imposition of hands confers the power of forgiving and retaining sins.

— I. A Sacrament of the New Law is a sensible thing which, from the stable institution of Christ, has the power of effecting the sanctity or grace which it signifies.

We know by defined faith that there are seven sacraments properly such.

A sacrament is a sign which by signifying operates that which it signifies: that is, sanctifying grace, whether first or second, and sacramental grace. But these are signified by means of the title to having them, which it places in the soul. This title in three sacraments, baptism, confirmation, and order, is character, or a real, spiritual, and indelible quality. That it be imprinted, valid conferral of the sacrament suffices. A sacrament is said to be efficacious ex opere operato, insofar as it operates not from the act and disposition of the minister or subject, but by its use and application.

II. Sacraments are: of the living and of the dead, according to the primary end of their institution; necessary to individuals and not necessary; repeatable and not repeatable; formed, which are as it were completed by the effect of grace, and unformed, which, validly administered, because of a defect of disposition in the subject, do not confer grace on him. Those which imprint character, with the obstacle removed, revive or confer grace. The same can probably be affirmed concerning the other sacraments.

III. Sacraments consist of a more determinable part, or matter, and a determining and perfecting part, which is form. Matter is remote: the sensible thing; or proximate: the same as employed in the sign. Form is the words, or that which is put in the place of words, and of itself, in matrimony, any sign of consent.

Between matter and form so great a conjunction is required that, according to the moral estimation of men, they constitute one sign, through simultaneity which, according to the nature of the sacrament, can be required as physical, thus in the eucharist; or suffice as broadly moral, as in penance and matrimony; or as strictly moral, as in the other sacraments. A substantial change of matter, when it differs in name and reality from that which Christ prescribed, or of form, when the sense becomes none or another, stands in the way of the value of the sacrament; but an accidental change will for the most part be illicit. Intention cannot restore a signification taken away; but a manifest intention can effect that ambiguity be brought to the right signification. The matter must be applied by the minister pronouncing the form, if the form expresses the action of the minister. But the sacrament is valid if several, concelebrating, express the whole, or if, in extreme unction, one perfects one part, another another part, of a composite sacrament.

We subdivide this chapter into four articles: 1. on the name of sacrament; 2. on the real definition of a sacrament; 3. on the matter and form of the sacraments; 4. on the existence of the sacraments.

2. The word sacrament is employed in many and diverse senses by writers, both secular and sacred. There is no reason for us to linger long over the meanings in which secular writers use this word. For these meanings can easily be seen in any good Latin dictionary. The principal ones are: a) a pledge deposited by litigants in a sacred place; b) an obligation to military service; c) an oath of perseverance imposed upon soldiers.¹

In Sacred Scripture and among the ancient ecclesiastical authors, the word sacrament is employed in so many diverse senses that great circumspection is not rarely needed to perceive the author's true sense.² The principal and more frequent senses seem to be the following three:

1. Sacrament signifies the same thing as the Greek word μυστήριον, that is, a sacred hidden or secret thing.

In this sense the Incarnation is called "the sacrament of the will of God,"³ and St. Ambrose entitles his treatise on the Incarnation: Book on the Sacrament of the Lord's Incarnation. Likewise, the truths of faith are called a sacrament, and therefore St. Paul says: "To me, the least of all the saints, was given this grace ... to enlighten all as to what is the dispensation of the sacrament hidden from ages in God."⁴ Christ Himself is called "the great sacrament of piety."⁵ The holy Fathers also frequently employ the word sacrament in this sense. Thus, for example, St. Cyprian calls ecclesiastical union "the sacrament of unity." Hugh of St. Victor, writing on theology, gave it the title: On the Sacraments [that is, on the mysteries] of the Christian Faith.

Sometimes, but very rarely, the name sacrament is also taken for an evil secret or mystery, for example: "And the Angel said to me: Why do you wonder? I will tell you the sacrament of the woman and of the beast that carries her."⁶

2. Sacrament signifies a sign or symbol of some hidden sacred thing.

In this sense Christian matrimony is called by St. Paul⁷ a great sacrament, because it signifies the union of Christ with the Church. Likewise, the figures of the Old Testament, for example, manna and the passage of the Jews through the Red Sea, are called sacraments by St. Ambrose.⁸

3. Sacrament signifies human sanctification,⁹ so that a sacrament is not only a holy sign, but also a sign of sanctification actually to be given.

Several such signs were already possessed in the Old Testament, and therefore St. Thomas, speaking of the sacraments of the Old Law, says: "Those things are properly called sacraments which were employed for the worshipers of God for a certain consecration, by which, namely, they were in some manner deputed to the worship of God."¹⁰ Nevertheless, the sacraments of the Old Law were unable of themselves to produce the true interior sanctification of the recipient; but the sacraments of the New Law not only signify sanctification but also produce it ex opere operato. Moreover, a fuller discussion of the efficacy of the sacraments will return below. In the following articles, the name sacrament signifies nothing other than a practical sign of our sanctification.

¹ Fahneneid, military oath. Cf. Cicero, De offic. 1, 11; Pro domo 29; Pro Milone 27.

² In St. Cyprian alone, the word sacrament can be perceived as employed in ten diverse acceptations, namely: 1. for an oath; 2. for a profession of faith; 3. for the cause of our salvation; 4. for a prophetic figure; 5. for a symbol; 6. for a commemorative sign; 7. for a prophecy; 8. for a testimony; 9. for the deposit of faith; 10. for a bond. Cf. J. B. Ponkens in Bulletin d'ancienne litt. et archéol. chrét. II, 289, and especially Ghellinck, S.J., who with several associates wrote an entire learned work: Pour l'histoire du mot Sacramentum (Louvain 1924).

³ Eph. 1:9.

⁴ Eph. 3:8ff.

⁵ 1 Tim. 3:16.

⁶ Apoc. 17:7.

⁷ Eph. 5:32. Nevertheless, from this text it can be solidly proved that matrimony is a true sacrament of the New Law. Cf. below, n. 643.

⁸ De sacr. l. 1, c. 4ff. (Migne, Patr. lat. 16, 420ff.).

⁹ This acceptation is more common after St. Augustine, to whom the definition of a sacrament was attributed: it is a visible sign of invisible grace; yet this definition is found in St. Augustine not word for word, but only as to its sense (cf. Gietl, Die Sentenzen Rolands, p. 155). Hugh of St. Victor, who assuredly is eminent among theologians treating the sacraments, has these words: "Three genera of sacraments present themselves to be distinguished in a first consideration. For there are certain sacraments in which salvation principally consists and is received: the water of baptism and the reception of the Body and Blood of Christ. There are others which, although they are not necessary for salvation (because salvation can be had without them), nevertheless conduce to sanctification, because by these virtue can be exercised and more abundant grace can be acquired, such as the water of sprinkling, the reception of ashes, and similar things. Again there are other sacraments which seem to have been instituted for this alone: that through them those things which are necessary for sanctifying and instituting the other sacraments may in some manner be prepared and sanctified, whether concerning persons to be perfected in sacred orders, or in those things which pertain to the equipment of sacred orders to be initiated, and other things of this kind" (De sacr. l. 1, c. 7; Migne, Patr. lat. 176, 327).

¹⁰ S. theol. 1, 2, q. 102, a. 5.

3. The common opinion of theologians admits that there were true sacraments even in the Old Testament, which, although they were much more imperfect than the seven sacraments of the New Testament, nevertheless cannot be reduced to a mere analogy of sacrament.¹¹ Hence St. Thomas¹² simply teaches: "Before the coming of Christ it was necessary that certain sacraments be instituted," and the Council of Trent¹³ defines: "If anyone says that these same sacraments of the New Law do not differ from the sacraments of the Old Law except that the ceremonies are different and the external rites are different, let him be anathema." It is established, therefore, that there existed true sacraments both in the New and in the Old Law, and yet that there is an essential distinction between the two. Therefore, a quasi-generic definition is to be sought which includes all the sacraments both of the Old and of the New Law. The Scholastics labored greatly to find such a definition, but they departed into various opinions.¹⁴ The definition given by St. Thomas¹⁵ seems better to us:

Generic definition. A sacrament is a sign of a sacred thing insofar as it sanctifies men.

¹¹ The younger St. Thomas seems to have taught that the sacraments of the Old Law were not sacraments in a univocal sense with the sacraments of the New Law; nevertheless, when he had grown older, he retracted this opinion, as Cajetan, Dominic Soto, and John of St. Thomas clearly show (cf. Billuart, De sacr. diss. 1, a. 1).

¹² S. theol. 3, q. 61, a. 3.

¹³ Session 7, canon 2 on the sacraments in general (Denz., n. 845).

¹⁴ See Lugo, De sacr. in gen. disp. 1, sect. 1.

¹⁵ S. theol. 3, q. 60, a. 2.

4. This is explained. It is said, 1. A sacrament is a sign, and indeed a sensible sign. For in all the sacraments, even those of the Old Law, something sensible is contained, for example, circumcision, washing, anointing, etc., which signifies a spiritual effect. Hence the ancient Scholastics were accustomed to say: a sacrament is in the genus of sign and not in the genus of cause, because, namely, a sacrament taken formally does not cause but only signifies a supernatural effect. For this reason the sacraments of the Old Law indeed signified sanctifying grace, but, as "weak elements," they were unable of themselves to cause it; for grace proceeded not precisely from those sacraments but from faith in the Messiah to come. But the sacraments of the New Law not only signify but also cause sanctifying grace.¹⁶

It is said, secondly: of a sacred thing. This sacred thing is manifold. First, there is sanctifying grace. All the sacraments, both of the Old and of the New Law, signify sanctifying grace to be conferred. Hence Eugene IV taught in the Decree for the Armenians: "They [namely, the sacraments of the Old Law] did not cause grace, but they prefigured that it was to be given through the Passion of Christ."¹⁷ Then there is sacramental grace proper to each sacrament, as will be said below.

It is said, thirdly: insofar as it sanctifies men. All Catholic theologians teach: a) that the sacraments of the New Law either confer or increase sanctifying grace;¹⁸ b) that the sacraments of the Old Law did not confer sanctifying grace ex opere operato.¹⁹

St. Thomas²⁰ wrote to the point: "The sacraments of the Old Law did not have in themselves any power by which they operated to confer justifying grace, but they only signified the faith through which men were justified.... And therefore it seems better to say that circumcision, like the other sacraments of the Old Law, was only a sign of justifying faith.... In circumcision grace was conferred insofar as it was a sign of the future Passion of Christ." From these words of St. Thomas it is manifest that in circumcision and the other sacraments of the Old Law God conferred the sanctification of man, not indeed on account of those sacraments themselves, but insofar as they were professions of faith in the Christ to come. In another place the same Angelic Doctor expresses still more explicitly the same doctrine concerning circumcision, which is one of the sacraments of the Old Law: "In circumcision grace was conferred as to all the effects of grace, yet in another manner than in baptism. For in baptism grace is conferred by the power of baptism itself, which it has insofar as it is an instrument of the Passion of Christ already accomplished; but in circumcision grace was conferred not by the power of circumcision, but by the power of faith in the Passion of Christ, of which circumcision was a sign; so, namely, that the man who received circumcision professed that he received such faith, either an adult for himself or another for infants."²¹

Therefore, all the sacraments are practical signs of sanctifying grace. Since, however, in sanctifying grace there can also be considered its meritorious cause, namely, the Passion of Christ, and its end, namely, eternal glory, St. Thomas hence teaches that the sacraments signify three things, namely: the Passion of Christ, which is the meritorious cause of sanctification; sanctifying grace, which is the form of sanctification; eternal life, which is the ultimate end of sanctification.²²

¹⁶ Cf. below, n. 38.

¹⁷ Denz., n. 695.

¹⁸ Cf. below, n. 35.

¹⁹ Only a few Scotists, such as Mastrius (De sacr. disp. 1, q. 2, a. 2, n. 86) and Bosco (Theol. sacram. disp. 1, sect. 2, concl. 6, n. 65), taught the contrary concerning circumcision and the so-called sacrament of nature.

²⁰ S. theol. 3, q. 62, a. 6, corpus and ad 3.

²¹ Ibid., q. 70, a. 4.

²² Cf. ibid., q. 60, a. 3: "A sacrament is both a commemorative sign of that which preceded, namely, the Passion of Christ; and a demonstrative sign of that which is effected in us through the Passion of Christ, namely, grace; and a prognostic sign, that is, a sign foretelling future glory." The Angelic Doctor set forth these three things most beautifully in the antiphon O sacrum convivium: "The memory of His Passion is recalled, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us."

5. Corollaries. 1. The sacraments cannot be practical signs of sanctifying grace except by divine institution. For it entirely exceeds the capacity of any natural thing practically to signify something supernatural, such as sanctifying grace.

2. Not all sacred signs have the character of a sacrament. For example, the cross, sacred images, the passage through the Red Sea, manna, the bronze serpent, very many ceremonies, etc. The reason is that all these things are indeed sacred signs, but they lack a divine institution elevating them to practical signs of sanctifying grace.

3. Sacrifices also are not sacraments. The reason is that sacrifice is primarily ordered to worship to be offered to God Himself, whereas the sacraments are primarily ordered to the sanctification of men. Nothing prevents the same thing, accepted under a diverse aspect, from being both a sacrifice and a sacrament. Thus, in fact, the Eucharist in the New Law and the immolation of the paschal lamb in the Old Law are at once a sacrifice and a sacrament, but accepted under a diverse aspect.

4. The opinion of heretics concerning the sacraments is false, who teach that they are only testimonies of justice received (the Lutherans); or signs by which a man is distinguished from gentiles and Jews (the Anabaptists and Socinians); or certain pledges by which men bind themselves to Christ and openly profess that they wish to follow His religion (the Zwinglians); or external symbols of divine benevolence toward us and attestations of our fidelity toward God (the Calvinists); or commemorative signs of benefits received from God, which signs were introduced not by Christ Himself but by the Apostles and their successors (the Modernists).²³ Hence, according to all these heretics, no true causality of our interior sanctification belongs to the sacraments. Their opinions are false because they rest upon a false foundation, namely, that the justification of man is not effected through the infusion of sanctifying grace, but either through faith alone or through the mere imputation of the merits of Christ.²⁴

5. The definitions adduced by the Council of Trent and the Roman Catechism agree with the definition given. The Council of Trent defines a sacrament as "a symbol of a sacred thing and a visible form of invisible grace."²⁵ The Roman Catechism adduces two definitions: a) "A sacrament is a visible sign of invisible grace instituted for our justification";²⁶ b) "A sacrament is a thing subject to the senses which, by God's institution, has the power both of signifying and of effecting sanctity and justice."²⁷ The former definition of the Catechism applies to all the sacraments; but the latter definition, which has always been regarded as the most perfect, applies to the sacraments of the New Law, which alone can properly cause sanctifying grace.²⁸ Therefore, this definition is specific to these sacraments.

6. For the essence of any sacrament there are required: an external and sensible sign, interior grace, institution made by God, and a due minister. The institution and minister of the sacraments will be treated below in chapters 4 and 5, and interior grace below in chapter 3. But now the external and sensible sign must be explained more fully.

²³ Cf. Loisy, L'Évangile et l'Église, 3rd ed., c. 6. The errors of the Modernists concerning the sacraments are described in this manner in the encyclical Pascendi of 8 September 1907: "For the Modernists, the sacraments are bare symbols or signs, although not devoid of force. To indicate this force, they themselves use the example of certain words which are commonly said to have met with fortune, because they have acquired a power for propagating certain robust ideas which strike souls most forcefully." In the decree of the Holy Office Lamentabili of 3 July 1907, proposition 41 of the Modernists was proscribed: "The sacraments are directed only to this: that they recall to the mind of man the ever-beneficent presence of the Creator" (Denz., n. 2041).

²⁴ Drouven reports and refutes the opinions of the heretics exceedingly well, De re sacr. l. 1, c. 2; cf. also Schanz, Die Lehre von den Sakr. 1, § 4.

²⁵ Session 13, c. 3 (Denz., n. 876).

²⁶ Part 2, c. 1, q. 3.

²⁷ Ibid., q. 8.

²⁸ For other definitions given by St. Augustine, Hugh of St. Victor, etc., see Peter Ledesma, Summa, de sacr. 1.

After the essence of the sacraments has been sufficiently explained, their existence must be proved in a few words, and indeed not only in the New but also in the Old Testament. Theologians customarily distinguish three states of the human race in this matter: a) the state of original justice; b) the state of fallen nature until Christ; c) the state after the redemption of Christ.

26. a) The state of original justice is the state of our first parents in paradise before sin. It is the common opinion of theologians that no sacrament in fact existed in paradise, both because nowhere is even the least trace of the institution of sacraments at that time found, and because that state is thought to have endured for a very short time, and consequently sacraments would have been useless. Hence the matrimony of Adam and Eve, although called a sacrament by St. Paul,⁶⁶ was not a sacrament properly so called, conferring grace, but only a legitimate contract, as generally were all marriages before Christ (and now the marriages of unbelievers).

Theologians further ask whether sacraments could at least fittingly have been instituted in paradise. St. Thomas, and with him the Thomists, more probably answer in the negative.⁶⁷ Suarez, however, with certain others, holds the contrary. This question is of almost no practical utility and also of little importance. Hence, for the sake of brevity, we omit it.⁶⁸

⁶⁶ Eph. 5:32.

⁶⁷ Cf. S. theol. 3, q. 61, a. 2.

⁶⁸ See Billuart, l.c., diss. 2, a. 1; Chr. Pesch, Prael. dogm. VI, n. 398 sqq.

27. b) The state of fallen nature until Christ is customarily divided into two epochs, namely, the state before the written law and the state after the written law. The first epoch is customarily called the state of the law of nature, not because it excludes supernatural law, for in it the supernatural precepts of faith, hope, and charity had to be observed, but because at that time there was no written law from the positive will of God. That epoch endured from the expulsion from paradise until the Sinaitic law. The second epoch endured from the Sinaitic law until the advent of Christ.

In the first epoch there existed a remedy both for original sin and for actual sins, which remedy more probably was a sacrament.

A strict proof of this opinion indeed is found neither in Sacred Scripture nor in the definitions of the Church, but St. Augustine already taught: "Nor therefore is it to be believed that, even before circumcision was given, the servants of God, since faith in the Mediator who was to come in the flesh was within them, assisted their little ones by no sacrament of Him, although, for some necessary cause, Scripture willed what it was to remain hidden. For we also read of their sacrifices, by which assuredly that Blood was prefigured which alone takes away the sins of the world."⁶⁹ St. Thomas also taught the same.⁷⁰

Reasons of congruity can also be adduced: For sacraments are sensible signs of invisible sanctifying grace. But after the sin of Adam it was very fitting that signs of this kind be instituted by God. Therefore.... Proof of the minor: After the sin of Adam no one can be saved except through faith in Christ the Redeemer.⁷¹ But it is very fitting that this faith be manifested by sensible signs: 1. by reason of the corporeal nature in man, which was corrupted through sensible sin, so that from whence death arose, thence life might rise again; 2. by reason of the Redeemer, sensible in His humanity; 3. by reason of the sensible unity of the faithful. For wherever there is a visible society, there also ought to be some sensible distinctive sign. Therefore, it is very fitting that after Adam's sin sensible signs of invisible sanctifying grace, or sacraments, were instituted by God.

That at every time God with a true and sincere will willed to grant sanctifying grace to all follows from His universal salvific will. "(God) wills all men to be saved."⁷² But if God had not given some remedy against original sin, it is difficult to understand how a true possibility of eternal salvation would have been present for infants dying before the institution of circumcision. Since these things are so, all theologians unanimously teach that at least for the infants of that state there was some remedy of salvation, which is rightly called a sacrament. Whether some sacrament also existed for the adults of that epoch is denied by Suarez, Vasquez, Lugo, and others, but is rightly affirmed by St. Thomas⁷³ and the Thomists, because it scarcely seems possible that all men, even the uncultivated, without an external sign, would have been cleansed from actual sins committed by internal faith alone in Christ to come.⁷⁴

In the second epoch, that is, from the Sinaitic law until Christ, it is a morally certain and most common opinion that true sacraments were instituted by God, the denial of which would hardly escape the note of temerity. For it is established that in the Mosaic law God instituted many sacred ceremonies which regarded legal sanctification, and consequently at least indirectly also internal sanctification.⁷⁵ Circumcision especially procured internal sanctification.⁷⁶ The same is established from the Councils of Florence and Trent, which teach that the sacraments of the New Law differ greatly from the sacraments of the Old Law.⁷⁷ But if a difference is present, then the sacraments of the Old Law exist; for it would be absurd to say that the sacraments of the New Law differ from the sacraments of the Old Law if the latter did not even exist.

⁶⁹ Contra Iulian. l. 5, c. 11 (Migne, Patr. lat. 44, 809).

⁷⁰ S. theol. 3, q. 61, a. 3, and q. 65, a. 1 ad 7.

⁷¹ Cf. Rom. 3:22 sqq.

⁷² 1 Tim. 2:4.

⁷³ S. theol. 3, q. 65, a. 1 ad 7; IV Sent., dist. 1, q. 1, a. 2, sol. 3.

⁷⁴ Cf. Billuart, De sacr. diss. 2, a. 1, and Drouven, De re sacr. l. 1, c. 2.

⁷⁵ Cf. the Book of Leviticus.

⁷⁶ Cf. above, n. 4.

⁷⁷ Denz., nn. 695 and 845.

28. The number of the sacraments of the Old Law is not assigned in the same manner by theologians. All indeed admit that circumcision was a sacrament. Hence St. Augustine already said: "Circumcision was the sacrament of that time, which prefigured the baptism of our time."⁷⁸ But since only boys at least eight days old could receive circumcision, it was fitting that a similar remedy against original sin and a similar sign professing faith in the Messiah to come should exist for females and also for boys who died before the eighth day. This sign is customarily called by theologians the sacrament of the law of nature.⁷⁹

But just as through circumcision or the sacrament of the law of nature the whole people was consecrated to the worship of God, so in a special manner Aaron and his sons were consecrated to the priesthood or to the office of Levites.⁸⁰ A consecration of the Levites of this kind, which prefigured the sacrament of order, is commonly held by theologians to be a sacrament.⁸¹ A few, however, deny this. The eating of the paschal lamb prefigured our pasch, that is, Christ.⁸² Therefore it is commonly held to be a sacrament prefiguring the sacrament of the Eucharist. St. Thomas teaches the same concerning the eating of the loaves of proposition, which was permitted to priests alone and indeed in a sacred place.⁸³ Finally, in the Old Law there were various purifications from certain external uncleannesses and also expiations from sins.⁸⁴ All these things prefigured the sacrament of penance. Hence it can generally be said that there were four categories of sacraments in the Old Law, namely:

1. circumcision or the sacrament of nature, prefiguring baptism;
2. the eating of the paschal lamb or of the loaves of proposition, prefiguring the Eucharist;
3. diverse purifications and expiations, prefiguring penance;
4. the consecration of Levites and priests, prefiguring order.

But to three sacraments of the New Law, namely, confirmation, extreme unction, and matrimony, nothing corresponded in the Old Law. For "to the sacrament of confirmation, which is the sacrament of the fullness of grace, no sacrament can correspond in the Old Law, because the time of fullness had not yet arrived, since 'the law brought nothing to perfection.'⁸⁵ Likewise also to the sacrament of extreme unction, which is a certain preparation for entrance into glory, the approach to which was not yet open in the Old Law, the price [of redemption] not yet having been paid. Matrimony indeed existed in the Old Law insofar as it was an office of nature, but not insofar as it is the sacrament of the union of Christ and the Church, which had not yet been effected. Hence also in the Old Law a bill of repudiation was given, which is contrary to the nature of a sacrament."⁸⁶

⁷⁸ De anima l. 2, c. 11, n. 15 (Migne, Patr. lat. 44, 504).

⁷⁹ Cf. S. theol. 3, q. 70, a. 4 ad 3.

⁸⁰ Cf. Ex. c. 29 and Lev. c. 8.

⁸¹ Cf. S. theol. I-II, q. 102, a. 5.

⁸² 1 Cor. 5:7.

⁸³ Lev. 24:9. Cf. St. Thomas, l.c.

⁸⁴ Lev. c. 12 sqq.; Num. c. 19 sqq.

⁸⁵ Heb. 7:19.

⁸⁶ S. theol. I-II, q. 102, a. 5 ad 3.

29. c) That in the New Law sacraments exist, and indeed sacraments distinct from those of the Old Law, is defined as of faith in the Councils of Florence and Trent.⁸⁷

Reasons of congruity. The existence of the sacraments indeed cannot be strictly proved from natural reason, since they are altogether supernatural gifts; nevertheless, several reasons of fittingness can be adduced, for example: 1. it is very congruous that grace be conferred upon man, who is composed of body and soul, through sensible signs, such as the sacraments instituted by Christ; 2. the sacraments are greatly serviceable for strengthening the visible society of the Church, promoting the worship of religion, retaining vividly the memory of the Passion of Christ, exercising our humility, and professing the faith.⁸⁸

The Roman Catechism⁸⁹ enumerates seven reasons of congruity why it was fitting for the sacraments to be instituted:

1. That they may assist the weakness of human understanding. From sensible signs man more easily perceives the existence and efficacy of interior grace.
2. That they may raise up slowness in believing. For our faith is aroused by external signs.
3. That a ready and certain medicine may exist for driving away the diseases of the soul and preserving salvation. For the fruit of the Passion of Christ is communicated more certainly through the sacraments than through perfect contrition and other means.
4. That they may be symbols of Christianity and the true religion, and bonds of the holy society. For by the sacraments received, Christian men are distinguished and joined together in the visible Church.
5. That they may be a profession of our faith.
6. That they may be incitements to faith and charity.
7. That they may be things arousing humility. For through the sacraments pride is subdued, since man is compelled to subject himself to sensible elements in order to obey God.

⁸⁷ Cf. above, n. 27, and also the following chapter, where there will be discussion of the number of the sacraments.

⁸⁸ Cf. S. theol. 3, q. 61, aa. 1 and 4.

⁸⁹ Part 2, c. 1, q. 7.

We divide this chapter into two articles: 1. on the primary effect of the sacraments, namely, grace; 2. on the secondary effect, namely, the character, which is produced by certain sacraments.

Preliminary note. We entitle the present chapter On the Institutor rather than On the Cause of the Sacraments, because, as St. Thomas notes beforehand at question 64 of the third part of the Summa theologica, the cause of the sacraments is twofold: namely, by authority and by ministry. The first is the principal cause and can be called the institutor; the other is the instrumental cause and can be named the minister of the sacraments. We now treat of the principal cause, or the institutor of the sacraments, and afterward of their instrumental cause, or minister.

48. That God alone is the principal author of all the sacraments, both of the Old and of the New Testament, is almost self-evident. For no one except God can determine sensible signs with which grace is joined (as in the Old Testament), or which instrumentally cause sanctifying grace (as in the New Testament). Hence St. Thomas teaches: "God alone works the interior effect of the sacrament [therefore, a fortiori, the sacraments themselves], both because God alone enters into the soul, in which the effect of the sacrament exists, ... and because grace, which is the interior effect of the sacrament, is from God alone."¹⁸⁷ "The sacraments of the New Law are more worthy than the sacraments of the Old Law. But all the sacraments of the Old Law were instituted by God. Therefore, much more strongly, all the sacraments of the New Law have their institution from Christ Himself."¹⁸⁸

God is so the principal author of all the sacraments that He cannot communicate to any creature the authoritative power of instituting sacraments. For "the power of authority communicated to someone would draw him beyond the bounds of a creature; because it cannot be that a creature is the principal agent with respect to the most noble effect by which we are joined to the ultimate end, such as grace, through which the remission of sins is effected. And therefore all say that the power of authority could be communicated to no creature."¹⁸⁹

Besides the authoritative power of instituting sacraments, theologians, with St. Thomas¹⁹⁰ leading the way, speak of an authority of excellence in instituting sacraments, which belongs to Christ as man, or to His humanity, and indeed for four reasons: 1. because the power of the Passion of Christ as man operates in the sacraments; 2. because the sacraments are administered in the name of Christ; 3. because, as the excellent instrument of the divinity, He could institute sacraments; 4. because He could grant the effect of the sacrament, namely, sanctifying grace, even without a sacrament, namely, by His command alone. Briefly, therefore, it can be said: Christ as God is the principal author; but as man, the excellent ministerial author of all the sacraments.

¹⁸⁷ S. theol. 3, q. 64, a. 1.

¹⁸⁸ Supplement, q. 29, a. 3, from IV Sent., dist. 23, q. 1, a. 1.

¹⁸⁹ IV Sent., dist. 5, q. 1, a. 3, sol. 1.

¹⁹⁰ S. theol. 3, q. 64, a. 3.

49. Thesis 1. All the sacraments of the New Law were immediately instituted by Christ before His Ascension.

This thesis, which is held by some theologians (for example, Bl. Bellarmine, Becanus, Gonet) as pertaining to the faith, is at least theologically certain. Before the Council of Trent certain theologians thought that some sacraments were not immediately instituted by Christ. Thus Hugh of St. Victor, Roland, and the Master of the Sentences judged that extreme unction was instituted by the apostles after the Ascension of Christ; Alexander of Hales,¹⁹¹ deceived by a remarkable error, thought that confirmation was instituted in the Council of Meaux in the year 845, although in the canons of that Council there is nothing concerning the institution of confirmation. St. Bonaventure¹⁹² thinks that the sacraments of confirmation and extreme unction were instituted by the apostles. The Quaracchi Editors assert, however, that this opinion was later corrected by him.

Since the Holy Fathers, as we saw above, did not give so clear a definition of a sacrament, nor indicate their sevenfold number, but enumerated among the sacraments things which certainly are sacramentals instituted by the Church (for example, the consecration of a church, the anointing of a king, etc.), neither could they clearly teach that all the sacraments were immediately instituted by Christ. All taught that baptism and the Eucharist were instituted by Christ; indeed, the most ancient author of the pseudo-Ambrosian book On the Sacraments teaches in express words: "Who is the author of the sacraments except the Lord Jesus? These sacraments came from heaven."¹⁹³

Since certain Modernists, such as Loisy,¹⁹⁴ spread errors concerning the origin of the sacraments, Pius X in the Decree Lamentabili condemned proposition 40: "The sacraments had their origin from this, that the apostles and their successors, under the persuasion and impulse of circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ."¹⁹⁵

The immediate institution of all the sacraments by Christ is proved:

1. From the Council of Trent: "If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord ... let him be anathema."¹⁹⁶ Although in this canon it is not expressly said that Christ immediately instituted all the sacraments, for the Council did not wish to condemn the opinion of several Catholics admitting only a mediate divine institution, nevertheless that this is the mind of the Council follows from three things:

a) After the Council almost no Catholic theologian dared openly to deny immediate institution.

b) The same Council¹⁹⁷ defined that extreme unction was instituted by Christ and promulgated by St. James. Therefore, even extreme unction, concerning which there exists the greatest difficulty of all, was only promulgated and not instituted by an apostle, but was instituted by Christ Himself. A fortiori, therefore, the other sacraments were immediately instituted by Christ.

c) The same Council¹⁹⁸ declares that the Church cannot change the substance of the sacraments. Therefore, a fortiori, it cannot institute the sacraments, and this not even by the authority of Christ, because the existence of such conferred authority is not established.

2. From theological reasons. a) Nowhere do either the apostles or the Church attribute to themselves a delegated power of instituting sacraments, but rather they deny this. Therefore, Christ alone is the author of the sacraments. The apostles called themselves ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God, but never institutors of the sacraments. On the contrary, St. Paul forcefully rebuked the Corinthians who disputed by whom each had been baptized, arguing that all were baptized in the name of Christ.

b) Just as God, the author of the Old Law, instituted all its sacraments, so Christ, the author of the New Law, Himself instituted all the sacraments.

c) The sacraments, as instruments necessary for salvation, pertain to the very foundation of religious worship and of the Church. But it is very fitting that the author of the Christian religion and Church Himself determine these foundations.

¹⁹¹ S. theol. 4, q. 9, member 1; cf. Pourrat, La théol. sacr., c. 6, § 4, p. 308.

¹⁹² IV Sent., dist. 7, a. 1, q. 1, and dist. 23, a. 1, q. 2.

¹⁹³ In Migne, Patr. lat. 16, 439.

¹⁹⁴ L'Évangile et l'Église, c. 6, n. 2.

¹⁹⁵ Denz., n. 2040.

¹⁹⁶ Sess. 7, can. 1 on the sacraments in general (Denz., n. 844).

¹⁹⁷ Sess. 14, can. 1 on extreme unction (Denz., n. 926).

¹⁹⁸ Sess. 21, c. 2 on Communion (Denz., n. 931).

50. Thesis 2. Christ not only immediately instituted all the sacraments of the New Law, but also so specifically determined their matter and form that it is not lawful to change them substantially.

This doctrine follows from the first proposition as a corollary. For since the essence of each sacrament consists in matter and form,¹⁹⁹ He who immediately instituted the sacraments also had to determine their form and matter. Consequently, all theologians living after Trent teach that the determination of matter and form was made by Christ; but they dispute among themselves how far this determination extends. A threefold determination is customarily distinguished, namely, individual, specific, and generic. Individual determination reaches all and each of even the accidents; specific determination reaches only substantial things; finally, generic determination establishes only the effects of the sacraments.

a) It is indeed established among all that Christ did not determine the individual accidents to be employed in the administration of the sacraments, because in the course of time these accidents have been sufficiently changed, and even now they differ greatly in the Latin and Eastern Church. Hence, without any doubt, matter and form, or rather the sacraments, were not directly determined by Christ in the individual, that is, as to all qualities, even accidental ones. Thus, for example, whether baptism is performed by immersion or infusion; whether consecration is performed in unleavened bread or not, etc., was not directly determined by Christ.

b) Theologians dispute whether Christ determined the matter and form of the sacraments generically or specifically. Christ would have made this determination generically if, for example, He had said to the apostles: I establish seven sacraments, namely, baptism, confirmation, etc., and I will that you employ matter and form suitably signifying the effect of each sacrament, so that in baptism washing from original sin is signified, in confirmation strength for firmly resisting the devil, in the Eucharist nourishment of the soul, etc. If Christ had chosen this manner, He would still always remain the true and immediate author of the seven sacraments, since He would have willed that there be seven determinate modes of conferring grace through sacraments.

Christ is said to have determined the matter and form of the sacraments specifically if, besides the generic institution explained in this manner, He also prescribed the substantial elements of each sacrament, for example, baptism is to be administered with water and the form: "I baptize you, etc."; confirmation with an anointing of chrism, the imposition of the bishop's hand, and the form: "I sign you with the sign of the cross, etc." Accidental changes of matter and form, however, were entrusted by Christ to the Church, whence certain accidental differences even in matter and form exist between the Latin and Eastern Church.

¹⁹⁹ Cf. above, n. 9.

51. The opinion teaching that the specific determination was made by Christ seems preferable. For if Christ had determined the sacraments only generically, the Church would necessarily have the authority to change the matter and form of the sacraments substantially; but this is denied by the Council of Trent.²⁰⁰ Thus, for example, if Christ had instituted the sacrament of confirmation only generically, the Church could decree that any oil whatever be employed in place of chrism, and, in place of the customary form, any other form whatever signifying the conferral of strength. Moreover, there is the authority of St. Thomas,²⁰¹ St. Alphonsus,²⁰² and many theologians of great authority. Behold the words of the Angelic Doctor: "Because the sanctification of man is in the power of God who sanctifies, it does not belong to man to assume by his own judgment the things by which he is sanctified, but this must be determined by divine institution. And therefore in the sacraments of the New Law ... it is necessary to use things determined by divine institution." Finally, the dignity of the sacraments is increased by this specific determination. For since Christ, from His infinite goodness, instituted the sacraments as the principal means of our salvation, it is very fitting to the dignity of these means that they be ordained by their Founder Himself, not in a generic and vague manner, but in a specific manner.

²⁰⁰ Sess. 21, c. 2 on Communion (Denz., n. 931).

²⁰¹ S. theol. 3, q. 60, a. 5.

²⁰² Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 12.

52. There are several theologians²⁰³ who indeed concede that in certain sacraments, for example in baptism and the Eucharist, the substance of the matter and form was determined by Christ, but not in all, and notably not in the sacrament of order, since in the Eastern Church it is administered without the tradition of the instruments, with the imposition of hands alone.²⁰⁴ Although this doctrine has some slight probability, nevertheless it is not so apparent why Christ, in the sacrament of order, which is so excellent and necessary, permitted that liberty which He denied in the other sacraments. Therefore, it must be said either that the imposition of hands alone is of the essence of the sacrament of order, or that even in the Eastern Church there is a tradition of the instruments, namely, an indirect one, since the ordinand must touch the altar upon which the instruments have been placed. (Which opinion is to be preferred may be seen below in the tract on order, n. 594.)

No serious difficulty can arise against the doctrine explained from clandestine marriages, which were valid before the Council of Trent but not afterward. For the legitimate contract and consent of the spouses always was and is the essence of the sacrament of matrimony. By the impediment of clandestinity introduced by the Council of Trent, the Church changed absolutely nothing concerning this essence, but merely decreed that spouses ordinarily cannot validly express matrimonial consent except before their proper pastor and two witnesses.

²⁰³ Cf. Haine, Theol. mor. elementa IV, De sacr. in gen., q. 11.

²⁰⁴ Among moderns Pourrat somewhat modifies this opinion (La theol. sacr., chap. 6, § 1, p. 274), following the footsteps of Cardinal Newman: "Christ immediately instituted all the sacraments; but all the sacraments were not given by the Savior to the Church fully constituted. Concerning several, particularly those essential to Christianity, baptism and the Eucharist, for example, Christ explained Himself completely.... As for the others, the Savior laid down their essential principles; development was to show the apostles and the Church what the Master had willed to do. Jesus, in fact, could not say everything to His apostles: 'You cannot bear it now.'... One then understands why the Church, according to the testimony of history, did not possess, altogether from the beginning, a full and entire consciousness of certain sacraments.... Jesus immediately and explicitly instituted baptism and the Eucharist; He immediately but implicitly instituted the five other sacraments." This opinion indeed seems very dangerous and not greatly dissimilar to proposition 40 condemned in the Decree Lamentabili (cf. above, n. 49).

St. Thomas III, q. 60, a. 1 and 2.

3. Sacrament according to the name etymologically signifies that which makes sacred, or a means of making sacred; whence it is denominated from order to something sacred and to sanctity. In Greek it is called mysterion, which signifies that which is hidden; but it sounds almost the same: for sacred or divine things are wont especially to be secret.

But because something sacred exists in many ways, and order to sanctity exists in many ways, the signification of sacrament is manifold. For just as healthy is said not only of the animal which properly has health, but also by analogy of the face or color which is a sign, and of medicine which is a cause of health, so sacraments are called not only those things which have in themselves some hidden sanctity, but all those things which have toward that sanctity either the order of a sign or of a cause, or any other relation whatever. Hence the word sacrament signifies in ecclesiastical speech:

a) divine truths, sacred in themselves, exceeding the light of reason,¹ and especially those which in the ancient Church were hidden from the non-initiated;

¹ Mt. XIII, 11: "To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven"; Eph. I, 9: "that He might make known the sacrament of His will"; likewise III, 3, 9; Col. I, 27; I Tim. III, 16; Wis. II, 22; VI, 24; I Cor. XIII, 2.

b) figures, parables, similitudes, symbols by which supernatural realities are proposed to us;² in which sense St. Augustine often spoke;³

² Apoc. I, 20: "the sacrament of the seven stars"; XVII, 7: "I will show you the sacrament of the woman"; Eph. V, 32: "a great sacrament in Christ and in the Church"; Dan. II, 18, 30, 47.

³ De Civitate Dei, book X, 5: "A visible sacrifice is a sacrament, that is, a sacred sign, of an invisible sacrifice"; Contra Faustum, book XIX, 11, ceremonies of external worship, and book II On the Merits and Remission of Sins, rites imposed on catechumens are called sacraments; ep. to Marcellinus 138, n. 7: "signs, when they pertain to divine things, are called sacraments."

c) ceremonies or rites and signs instituted for the worship of God, by which man is sanctified with sanctity and initiated into sacred things.⁴

⁴ I Cor. IV, 1: "Let a man so account us as ministers of Christ and dispensers of the mysteries of God."

In profane speech it is taken: a) for every secret, insofar as it is not to be violated but to be kept as if it were sacred: thus in Tob. XII, 7, it is read: to hide the sacrament of the king is good; b) for an oath, especially of soldiers toward the republic, because it is made by something sacred, and because it is not to be violated but is to be kept as something sacred; c) for the money of litigants deposited in a temple, because there it is kept as a sacred thing.

Now for many centuries, by the usage of theologians and of the Church, the word sacrament has become especially proper to sanctifying signs;⁵ whence in the present treatise it is taken in this sense: "properly," says St. Thomas, q. 60, a. 2, "a sacrament is said, according as we now speak of sacraments, to be that which is a sign of a sacred thing insofar as it is sanctifying men."

⁵ In the twelfth century Hugh of St. Victor says that the sacraments contain grace; the Summa Sententiarum, that they confer it; Peter Lombard, that they cause it. This doctrine was received by common usage and approved by the Council of Trent. And it has a positive foundation in the Fathers, although among them the sense of the word sacrament is very indeterminate. For they describe sanctifying signs, recalling a visible symbol in which there is the power of the Holy Spirit and invisible grace. Cf. Tertullian, On Baptism IV; Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit, I, 77; Augustine, Questions on the Heptateuch, III, 84.

4. Division of the treatise. - The treatise is divided into five parts: on the essence of the sacraments, on necessity or existence, on effects, on cause, and on number.

The first part is: On the essence of a sacrament: 1. on the notion and signification of the sacramental sign; 2. on the parts of the sacramental sign: a) on matter and form, b) on the union of matter and form; 3. on the determination of the sacramental sign: a) on the cause determining matter and form; b) on the change of matter and form.

The second part is: On the necessity of the sacraments in the present order, before original sin, before and after Christ.

The third part is: On the effects of the sacraments: A. on grace: 1. on grace caused by the sacraments: a) on habitual grace making one pleasing, b) on special or sacramental grace, c) on unequal grace caused; 2. on the mode by which grace is caused: a) on the efficient causality of the sacraments, b) on the instrumental causality of the sacraments, c) on the causative power of the sacraments, d) on the causality of the sacraments of the Old Law; 3. on the time at which grace is caused; B. on character: 1. on the existence of character; 2. on the essence of character; 3. on the sacraments imprinting character.

The fourth part is: On the cause of the sacraments: 1. on the instituting cause; 2. on the administering cause or minister: a) on the various ministers, b) on the faith and sanctity of the minister, c) on the intention of the minister, d) on those to whom the sacraments are to be administered; 3. on the receiving cause or subject: a) on the conditions of valid reception, b) on the conditions of licit reception.

The fifth part is: On the number of the sacraments: 1. on the sevenfold number; 2. on the order of the sacraments, or comparison with one another.

There follows an appendix: on the ceremonies of the sacraments and sacramentals.

The theory concerning the sacraments in general is not exhibited in the Scriptures or in the Fathers, but only doctrine concerning each one; nevertheless it has its foundation in St. Augustine; and it was built up by the Scholastics of the twelfth century, who began to consider all the sacraments after the manner of one.⁶

⁶ Concerning the Sacraments there can usefully be consulted: St. Thomas, in III, q. 60-65, with the commentaries of Cajetan, John of St. Thomas, Sylvius, the Salmanticenses, Nugno Cabezudo, Billuart; likewise Peter de Ledesma, Summa de Sacramentis; Drouin, De Re Sacramentaria; among the Jesuit scholastics, St. Robert Bellarmine, Suarez, and de Lugo; among recent dogmatic theologians, Franzelin, Billot, Heinrich-Gutberlet, Hugon, De Baets, Van Noort, Pohle, Diekamp, Del Val, Sasse; likewise Haine, Principia dogmatico-moralia universae theologiae sacramentalis; De Smet, Tractatus dogmatico-moralis de Sacramentis in genere; Chardon, Histoire des Sacrements; Hahn, Die Lehre von den Sakramenten in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung; Oswald, Die dogmatische Lehre von den h. Sakramenten; Probst, Sakramenten und Sakramentalien in die drei erste Jahrhunderten; Pourrat, La Theologie sacramentaire; Schanz, Die Lehre von den h. Sakramenten der Katholische Kirche; Gihr, Die h. Sakramente der Katholische Kirche; for practical questions, St. Alphonsus and modern manuals, such as Ballerini, Lehmkuhl, Marc, Aertnijs-Damen, Genicot-Salsmans, Noldin-Schmitt, Prummer, Tanquerey, Vermeersch; among canonists, Cappello, Tractatus canonico-moralis de Sacramentis, I; among orators, Monsabre, Les Sacrements.

St. Thomas III, q. 60, a. 1, 2, 3.

5. Definition of sacrament. - Several definitions of sacrament are handed down,¹ which nevertheless can all be reduced to two. The first is: sacraments are ceremonial practical signs of human sanctification. In this definition there is indicated:

¹ Gregory the Great, on chapter 16 of book I of Kings: "A sacrament is that in which, under the covering of visible things, divine power more secretly works human salvation." - Hugh of St. Victor, book I On the Sacraments, part 9, c. 2: "A material element, outwardly proposed sensibly, representing from likeness, signifying from institution, and containing by sanctification invisible and spiritual grace." - The Master of the Sentences: "A sacrament is that which is so a sign and form of invisible grace, that it bears its image and exists as a cause." - Council of Trent: "A symbol of a sacred thing and a visible form of invisible grace, having the power of sanctifying," sess. 13, c. 3. - Catechism of the Council of Trent: "A sacrament is a thing subject to the senses which, from the institution of God, has power both for signifying and for effecting sanctity and justice," or according to the formula composed from Augustine: "A visible sign of invisible grace, instituted for our justification." - Theological Catechism for Ordinands: "A practical sign of a sacred thing (sanctifying)." - Scotus: "It is a sensible sign effectively signifying the grace of God, or a gratuitous effect of it, from divine institution, ordained to the salvation of man as wayfarer." - Sylvius: "A sacrament of the Old Law is a sacred sign figurative of grace to be given through the passion of Christ. A sacrament of the New Law is a visible form of invisible grace, having the power of sanctifying from the institution of God." Or: a visible sign of invisible grace divinely instituted for our sanctification, as is said in law and in St. Canisius.

A. The genus to which the sacraments belong: namely, they are signs, and indeed external signs which signify by a likeness of sensible things.

B. That which is proper to them and by which they differ from other signs, namely:

1. They are ceremonial signs,² that is, sacred signs on the part of the thing signifying, instituted permanently by law, belonging to public and ordinary worship.

² Augustine, Against Faustus, book XIX: "They are signs by which the faithful are gathered together into one name of religion" and are distinguished from others; whence they ought to be sensible.

Thus they differ a) from all signs which, although they do not pertain to worship, nevertheless represent divine things, such as martyrdom, and also all creatures;

b) from symbols which are not instituted by law, such as images of Christ, of the Cross, of the Saints;

c) from those things which are not instituted permanently and in perpetuity, such as the fiery tongue on the day of Pentecost, and the signs by which Christ remitted sins.³

³ Hence the following are not sacraments: the passage through the Red Sea, the rock pouring forth waters, the manna, the bronze serpent, the immolation of Isaac, the words of Christ constituting the apostles priests or working miracles, the baptism of John, the descent of the dove, the washing of the feet, the breathing upon the disciples, extraordinary charisms.

2. They are practical signs, that is, efficacious signs, conferring that which they signify.

Thus they are distinguished from merely speculative signs, representing divine things, for example for the instruction of the people, such as likenesses of mysteries, the image of the cross, and the accidental ceremonies of the sacraments.⁴

⁴ Likewise the words of Scripture; and those ceremonies of the Old Law which signified the sanctity of Christ by which He is holy in Himself, not that by which He sanctifies.

3. They are signs of human sanctification, and indeed of the hidden sanctification by which man is joined to God as supernatural end; whence they are sacred also on the part of the thing signified.

Thus they are distinguished both from sacramentals, such as the consecration of an altar and the sprinkling of blessed water, which signify a disposition toward sanctity;⁵ and from sacrifice, which is the sign of the interior affection by which man devotes himself to God, but not of sanctification to be conferred through it: for the direct end of sacrifice is that by its action God be honored, but the end of a sacrament is that by its reception man be sanctified.

⁵ Other examples are: tonsure, absolution from censures, religious profession, exorcism, the blessing of marriage, the consecration of a virgin, the blessing of an abbot, the washing of the feet.

Sanctification is twofold: one interior, which is effected through grace making one pleasing and through the infused virtues, by which man becomes capable of eternal life: this belongs to the New Law; the other external and legal, which consists in external consecration, purification, insertion into the people of God, deputation to sacred ministries (Heb. IX, 13), and which is at the same time figurative of the former: this is proper to the Old Testament. But the sacraments effect the sanctity proper to that economy to which they belong, whence arises the fundamental difference between the sacraments of the Old and New Law: the latter signify and effect interior sanctity in the present; the former signified and effected in the present legal sanctity, by which someone before the law is held as pure, holy, fit for the offices of religion, and by the conferral of this they were signs, figures, types, and real promises of Christ the Savior whom they proclaimed as about to come, and of future interior sanctification to be conferred through the passion of Christ and the sacraments of the New Law.⁶

⁶ Cf. I-II, q. 103, a. 2. - Hence q. 61, a. 4, ad 3: "Those things [of the Old Law] were fitting for prefiguring grace; but these things [of the New Law] are fitting for showing grace as present." And Augustine, on Psalm 73: "Those things only promised and signified; but these give salvation."

The sacraments of human sanctification in the Old Law are enumerated: circumcision, the initiation of priests, the eating of the paschal lamb and of the loaves of proposition, several expiations and purifications. But the following are not sacraments: the consecration of the tabernacle or of vessels, sacrifices, expiations of houses.

6. Another definition of St. Thomas. - The definition given above indicates that by which sacraments are distinguished from other signs, namely, that they are practical signs; but it is not altogether complete, because several things are signified by the sacraments which are not produced by them. Hence St. Thomas hands down another definition: A sign of a sacred thing, insofar as it is sanctifying men (a. 2); in which these last words, "insofar as it is sanctifying men," are referred not to the sign but to the sacred thing; whence the sense is: a sign of a sacred thing according as this is the cause of our interior sanctification.

For a sacrament is properly said to be that which is ordained to signify our sanctification. But in it "three things can be considered: namely, the very cause of our sanctification, which is the passion of Christ; and the form of our sanctification, which consists in grace and the virtues; and the ultimate end of our sanctification, which is eternal life. Therefore all these things are signified by the sacraments"; for they signify a sacred thing insofar as it sanctifies, that is, the cause of sanctification insofar as it produces its effects. But this is the essential difference between a sacrament of the Old and of the New Law, that the former signified Christ as about to come and future sanctity; but the latter represents redemption already accomplished and present sanctity, whence it is "both a commemorative sign of that which preceded, namely, the passion of Christ, and a demonstrative sign of that which is effected in us through the passion of Christ, namely, grace, and a prognostic, that is, a prenunciative sign of future glory" (a. 3). But the sacraments of the Old Law prenunciated all these things.

Thus in Baptism are signified at once grace, which is the seed of glory, and the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, according to Rom. VI, 3-6; in Confirmation is signified the mystery of Christ crucified, which to the Jews is a scandal and to the Gentiles foolishness (I Cor. I, 23); in Matrimony is signified the union of Christ and the Church, and Christ loved the Church and delivered Himself for her, that He might sanctify her (Eph. V, 25-32); the Eucharist is "the sacred banquet, in which the memory of the passion is recalled, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us" (cf. I Cor. XI, 24-25; John VI, 50-59).

Similarly in the Old Law, circumcision (Gen. XVII, 10; Rom. IV, 11) signified the cause of sanctification, the advent of Christ in the flesh from the seed of Abraham; the form of sanctification, the grace of Christ binding concupiscence; and since it was done on the eighth day, which is the day of Christ's resurrection, it also represented the end of sanctification, future resurrection and glory. Likewise the paschal Lamb signified Christ to be immolated, the refreshing grace of the Eucharist, and salvation to be obtained by the blood of Christ.

7. Corollaries. - From the aforesaid it is easily understood:

1. Why St. Thomas places the sacraments in the genus of sign, but not in the genus of cause: a) because the sacraments do not cause except insofar as they signify; b) because the sacraments also signify sacred things which they do not cause.

2. It is also understood that the word sacrament is not an univocal term but an analogous one, which is said perfectly and simply of the sacraments of the New Law, imperfectly and in a certain respect of the sacraments of the Old Law.⁷ For they differ either a) in the very signification of sanctity, which they signify practically and simply, or only speculatively and in a certain respect; or b) in the very sanctification which they effect, which is either true and perfect sanctity, or only an imperfect shadow of it.

⁷ "Sacrament is not divided through the sacraments of the Old and New Law as a genus through species, but as an analogous term into its parts, as healthy into having health and signifying it: but a sacrament simply is that which causes sanctity; that which is only a sign is not a sacrament except in a certain respect, and therefore to be a cause can be placed in the definition of sacrament, just as having health is placed in the definition of healthy," St. Thomas, on IV Sentences, d. 1, q. 1, a. 1, qc. 3, ad 5. And in the Summa, III, q. 62, a. 1, ad 1: "The sacraments of the New Law are at once causes and signs; and hence it is that, as is commonly said, they effect what they figure. From this it is clear that they have the ratio of sacrament perfectly insofar as they are ordained to something sacred, not only by way of sign but also by way of cause."

3. Sacraments a) in order to Christ, are certain remains of the divine Incarnation, by which Christ left us a memorial of Himself and applies to us His merit and the fruits of His passion. Whence they are said to have flowed from His side and to have streamed forth from His most Sacred Heart, together with the Church (Augustine, on John, tr. 120, n. 2);

b) in order to the Church, they are tokens by which the faithful are distinguished from infidels; bonds by which the members of the Church are gathered into one visible body; instruments of divine life and sanctity; and therefore they belong to the essential constitutive elements of the Church;

c) as to men, they are fountains of salvation, medicines which heal wounds, instructions and teachings by which man is led by sensible things to spiritual things;

In this dissertation one must treat: 1. of the nature of the Eucharist; 2. of the Minister; 3. of the Subject; 4. of the reservation and worship of the Eucharist.

We shall investigate the nature of the Eucharist in a twofold article. Speech will be in the first on its notion and effect; in the second on its constituents, that is, on its matter and form.

1509. DEFINITION. The Eucharist, that is, good grace, is the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, under the species of bread and wine, divinely instituted for the spiritual refreshment of the soul.¹⁸

It is said 1. is a Sacrament; "for in it there are external signs and signs subject to the senses; it then has the signification and efficacy of grace; moreover, concerning the institution of Christ neither the Evangelists¹⁹ nor the Apostle²⁰ leave a place for doubting."²¹

It is said 2. of the Body and Blood of Christ, under the species of bread and wine: for the Tridentine Synod teaches that "in the nourishing Sacrament of the holy Eucharist, after the consecration of bread and wine, Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and man, is contained truly, really, and substantially, under the species of those sensible things."²²

It is said 3. divinely instituted for the spiritual refreshment of the soul: by which words the principal effect of this Sacrament is expressed. For "just as earthly bread nourishes the body, so heavenly bread nourishes the soul, and makes it grow in divine love."²³

1510. Since, therefore, the Most Holy EUCHARIST consists both of the body of Christ and of the species under which the body of Christ lies hidden, if it is asked in what precisely the essence of this Sacrament is situated, St. Alphonsus responds: "There are several opinions, but two more received. Some say the essence of the Eucharist consists directly in the species of bread and wine; and that the body of Christ pertains to the Sacrament only obliquely, that is, as something extrinsically connoted. Others say that it consists directly equally in the species and in the body of Christ. Each opinion is probable."²⁴

But if it is asked IN WHAT MANNER the Body of Christ begins to become present, it must be said that it becomes present neither by production from nothing, nor by being brought from heaven, but "by the conversion of the whole substance of bread into the substance of the Body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of wine into the substance of His Blood; which conversion has fittingly and properly been called TRANSUBSTANTIATION by the holy Catholic Church."²⁵

1511. Principles. I. The whole CHRIST under each species, and under any part of each species, is REALLY PRESENT. The first part of the proposition is of faith; likewise the second, if it is understood of separated parts of the species.²⁶ But if it is understood of continuous parts, before separation has been made, it is certain, and altogether to be held.²⁷

The COUNCIL OF TRENT speaks thus aptly to the matter: "This faith has always been in the Church of God, that immediately after consecration, the true body of Our Lord and His true blood exist under the species of bread and wine, together with His soul and divinity; but the body indeed under the species of bread, and the blood under the species of wine, by force of the words; but the body itself under the species of wine, and the blood under the species of bread, and the soul under each, by force of that natural connection and concomitance by which the parts of Christ the Lord, who has now risen from the dead, no longer to die, are joined among themselves; moreover the divinity, on account of that admirable hypostatic union of it with the body and soul. Wherefore it is most true that just as much is contained under either species as under both: for whole and entire Christ exists under the species of bread, and under any part of that species; likewise whole under the species of wine, and under its parts."²⁸

Therefore Christ EXISTS in the Sacrament in a singular and altogether ineffable MANNER, which St. Thomas thus expresses: "The Body of Christ is in this Sacrament by way of substance, that is, by the manner in which substance is under dimensions... But it is manifest that the nature of substance is whole under any part of the dimensions under which it is contained, just as under any part of air there is the whole nature of air, and under any part of bread there is the whole nature of bread. And this indifferently, whether the dimensions are actually divided, as when air is divided or bread is cut, or even are actually undivided, but divisible in potency."²⁹

And hence it is why some teach that the whole specific notion of this Sacrament is saved in the species of bread or wine alone, taken separately. This opinion is indeed probable; but the opposite is more probable, since only through each species is signified a BANQUET or refreshment of food and drink, in which the specific notion or essence of this Sacrament consists.³⁰

It is asked: Whence is the NUMERICAL UNITY of this Sacrament taken?

Resp. Some say it is taken from the unity of the body of Christ; others from the physical continuation of the parts themselves of the species; finally others, and more probably, from the moral conjunction which the species have while they are proposed or taken after the manner of one thing. Whence, if diverse consecrated species, or several parts of the same species, are proposed at the same time and on the same altar, or ministered to the same person, there will be one Sacrament; but if the same species are divided, and proposed on diverse altars, or ministered to diverse persons, or to the same person at diverse turns morally distinct, there will be diverse Sacraments.³¹

1512. II. The Eucharist is a PERMANENT Sacrament. "That excellent and singular thing is found in it, that the remaining Sacraments then first have the power of sanctifying when someone uses them; but in the Eucharist the Author Himself of sanctity is before use; for the Apostles had not yet received the Eucharist from the hand of the Lord, when nevertheless He Himself truly affirmed that what He was giving was His Body."³²

Q. When does the body of Christ CEASE to be under the species?

Resp. It ceases when so great a change of the species has been made as would have had to be made in order that the substance of bread and wine in unconsecrated species would be corrupted.³³

Hence: 1. If a little consecrated wine is mixed with other wine, at least of the same species, as happens in the first ablution, Christ does not cease to be there. If the wine is very diverse, it is disputed whether from the mixing of the species such a change arises as would suffice to destroy the substance of consecrated wine. Yet, in this doubt, it must be held that the species are not corrupted. But if to consecrated wine there is mixed a liquid of another species, for example water, in so great a quantity that the accidents of wine are corrupted, namely in such a way that the substance of wine, if it were present, could not be conserved, Christ ceases to be present under those species.¹

2. The species, in one receiving the Sacrament, are consumed sooner or later according to the greater or lesser digestive power. Yet commonly, in a healthy man, the species are judged to be corrupted at least after a quarter hour from Communion, even in a priest.² Otherwise in a sick person, who even after an hour can reject the species plainly incorrupt.

3. "Species rejected by vomiting, if they are such that under them bread or wine can exist, are truly to be adored; and if they are again taken, they again confer grace, as Cardinal de Lugo teaches."³

1513. III. The EFFECT of the Eucharist is the NOURISHMENT of souls through the perfection of charity. The Most Holy Eucharist indeed has this in common with the other Sacraments of the living, that it confers an INCREASE OF GRACE, but not first grace except per accidens, as was said above, n. 1395. But its proper effect is that this increase of grace imports the refreshment of the soul, namely for fostering charity and perfecting UNION with Christ, as He Himself promised in John 6:57, saying: "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him."

But since this nourishing Sacrament has the notion of FOOD, "therefore, every effect which material food and drink makes with respect to bodily life, namely that it sustains, increases, repairs, and delights, this whole thing this Sacrament does with respect to spiritual life." Thus St. Thomas.⁴

Therefore the principal EFFECTS of the Eucharist in the SOUL, besides the increase of grace, are the following:⁵

1. REMISSION OF VENIAL SINS (it repairs); for this Sacrament, according to Trent,⁶ "is an antidote by which we are freed from venial faults and preserved from mortal sins." "But the Salmanticenses think with others that Communion of itself destroys venial sins from the work worked, through the very infusion of grace by which the soul is refreshed. But Tournely says better that the Sacrament destroys venial sins not immediately of itself, but by means of an act of charity which it excites in the soul."⁷ And in the same way it remits temporal punishment due for sins.

2. PRESERVATION FROM MORTAL SINS (it sustains); as is established from the praised words of Trent. But the Eucharist preserves us from death of the soul through the help of sacramental grace, by which devotion is excited, temptations are more strongly resisted, demons are put to flight, etc. Indeed, grave authors assert that from the reception of the Eucharist the soul is fortified by such external protection that God does not permit it to be living in occasions in which it would fall into sin.⁸

3. INCREASE OF VIRTUES (it increases); for just as the body through natural food is not only conserved, but also grows, so similarly the soul through supernatural food, that is, the Eucharist, is not only sustained, but also strengthened and enriched with a supply of graces, by which the exercise of all virtues, especially charity, is promoted more and more.

4. SPIRITUAL SWEETNESS (it delights); and this effect indeed is infallible, unless it is impeded on account of the fault of the recipient. But this sweetness consists in a certain cheerfulness of the will for accomplishing all things which are known to be pleasing and acceptable to God (cf. n. 536).

5. ATTAINMENT OF GLORY, according to that of Christ (John 6:59): "He who eats this bread will live forever." "By the grace of this Sacrament, namely, the faithful, while they pass this life, enjoy the highest peace and tranquillity of conscience; then, recreated by its power, not otherwise than Elias, who by the strength of the hearth-baked bread walked even to the mountain of God Horeb, when the time of departing from life has come, ascend to eternal glory and beatitude."⁹

1514. Nor do the effects of the Eucharist extend to the soul alone, but also to the BODY itself, as the Fathers teach. But they are the following:

1. THE QUIETING OF CONCUPISCENCE and of the tinder of sin. But the Eucharist works this quieting partly by putting demons to flight, lest they excite species of a shameful object, partly by repressing the powers of the humors, mitigating ardor, etc.¹⁰

2. The future RESURRECTION AND GLORY of the body, on account of a special title, namely because of the union of our bodies with the life-giving flesh of Christ, which is the cause of our resurrection, as Christ promised, saying in John 6:55: "I will raise him up on the last day."

It is asked: Whether the Eucharist, insofar as it is a Sacrament, can profit OTHERS than those receiving?

Resp. 1. It cannot profit DIRECTLY and from the work worked; because it was instituted by way of food; but food does not profit except the one taking it. 2. It can profit INDIRECTLY and from the work of the worker, both the living by way of impetration, and the departed by way of satisfaction and suffrage, if namely the one communicating offers this act of religion to God in their favor. Add that the prayers which accompany or follow Communion are more acceptable to God than those which are poured forth at another time. Whence the Congregation of the INDEX, under Innocent X, condemned the book of Theophilus Raynaud, who attacked the custom of communicating for the departed.¹¹ See the dogmatic authors.

We must treat: 1° of the nature and efficacy; 2° of the matter and form; 3° of the Minister; 4° of the subject of the Eucharist.

The Eucharist is defined: The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, under the species of bread and wine, for the spiritual refreshment of souls. It is established from Trent.¹

1278. Questions. - Query 1° How long does Christ remain really present in the Eucharist?

Resp. He remains as long as the species remain entire; but he ceases to be present under them immediately when the species are so corrupted that, according to the estimation of men, they no longer seem to be bread and wine. - Then, by the law established by God in the institution of this Sacrament, there is substituted for the species the same matter which would succeed to the corrupted bread and wine.²

Query 2° How long are the sacred species thought to remain entire, i.e. not corrupted, after the taking of the Sacrament?

Resp. It is not established. The mechanical dissolution of the species is carefully to be distinguished from their corruption or chemical change. The former is not considered here, since it does not remove the real presence. The latter is a little slower or quicker according to the different digestive power of different men and the different circumstances of the same man, both internal (for example, the condition of the stomach) and external (for example, the temperature of the sky). Hence an absolutely universal answer can scarcely be handed down. Capellmann the physician¹ thinks that with those things which are vomited before a half-hour has elapsed after Communion, even of lay persons, the same thing should be done which the Church prescribes must be done with species not yet corrupted. But this certainly must be done when the species are still discerned, although several hours after Communion have elapsed.

Query 3° What are the effects of the Sacrament of the Eucharist in the soul?

Resp. The principal ones are the following, namely: 1° an increase of sanctifying grace, which constitutes the principal effect of the Eucharist. For, according to the words of Christ:² My flesh is truly food, this Sacrament was instituted as spiritual nourishment; and nourishment supposes life in him who receives it; hence it comes to pass that through this nourishment the very life of the soul, which consists chiefly in sanctifying grace, is strengthened and increased; 2° the obtaining of eternal glory; for Christ promises this: If anyone shall eat of this bread, he shall live forever;³ 3° a most abundant bestowal of actual graces, which flow from habitual grace and infused habits;

4° weakening of evil habits and amendment of vices, especially of lust; 5° remission of venial sins: this is established from Trent,¹ where the Eucharist is called an antidote, by which we are freed from daily faults, and are preserved from mortal sins; 6° remission of the temporal punishment due to sin; not indeed of all of it, but according to the mode of devotion and fervor, as St. Thomas says;² 7° special union with Christ and with his members, as is clear from John:³ He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood, abides in me and I in him; 8° preservation from future sins, both because, charity being increased through this food, the soul becomes stronger against corrupt nature, and because it is an efficacious memory of the Lord's Passion, through which the demons have been conquered.⁴

Query 4° Can the Eucharist ever blot out mortal sin?

Resp. More probably affirmatively. See n. 1208, Q. 2°.

A Sacrament is a sensible sign, permanently instituted by Christ for signifying and conferring grace. Hence three things are necessarily required in every sacrament, namely the sensibility of the sign, divine institution, and the force of producing grace promised by Christ.

All sacraments are perfected by three things: 1st. by things as matter; 2nd. by words as form; 3rd. by the person of the Minister confecting the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does.

Besides habitual grace common to all, the sacraments also produce grace which is called sacramental, and which is nothing else than habitual grace itself with the connotation of helps for obtaining the special end for which each sacrament was instituted, if due conditions are not lacking.

The sacraments operate ex opere operato, that is, by force of the sacramental action independently of the work of the one operating, namely of the Minister and of the subject of the sacraments. Hence they are essentially distinguished from sacramentals, which are certain sacred things or actions instituted by the Church, as are holy water, blessings, etc.

Sacraments are distinguished thus according to various properties:

1st. Necessary or not necessary; the first are either necessary by necessity of means or necessary by necessity of precept. Necessary by necessity of means, in reality or in vow, at least implicit, are Baptism, which is the gate of the Church and of the kingdom of heaven, and Penance for those who have fallen into mortal sin after Baptism; necessary by necessity of precept are all the rest, excepting Order and Matrimony, which are not necessary for private individuals but only for the community.

2nd. Those imprinting or not imprinting a character in the soul. Baptism, Confirmation, and Order imprint a character; the rest do not imprint one.

3rd. Sacraments of the dead or of the living, according as by force of their institution they first confer sanctifying grace, as are Baptism and Penance, or suppose it and only increase it, as must be held concerning the other sacraments.

Question 1. Can sacraments of the dead ever confer second grace?

Resp. Affirmatively, and indeed in a twofold case: 1st. when only venial sins or mortal sins already remitted are subjected to the keys; 2nd. when a penitent, guilty of mortal sin, approaches the Sacrament of Penance with perfect contrition, or when an adult, likewise perfectly contrite, receives Baptism, because perfect contrition with only the vow of the Sacrament of Penance or of Baptism justifies a man.

Question 2. Can sacraments of the living sometimes be able to confer first grace?

Resp. Affirmatively, more probably, not indeed through themselves, as is plain from their institution, but accidentally; for it can happen that someone guilty of mortal sin, unaware of this, approaches a sacrament of the living in good faith, attrite; moreover in these circumstances a sacrament of the living pours grace into the soul and therefore destroys sin. For sacraments always confer grace on those not placing an obstacle; but an obstacle is not placed by him who approaches attrite in good faith. Cf. St. Thomas, 3, q. 71, art. 7, ad 2; and q. 79, art. 3. - St. Alphonsus, n. 268. - De Augustinis, de Sacram. in genere, Thesis 19, p. 272.

Question 3. What are the effects of sacramental grace proper to each sacrament, besides sanctifying grace common to all?

Resp. 1st. The effect of the grace of Baptism is to remit every fault and penalty of fault, to illumine the mind, to diminish concupiscence, and to make the soul fruitful unto Christian works. But this habitual grace brings to the baptized person a right of obtaining helps by which he may happily attain these effects.

2nd. The effect of the grace of Confirmation is strength for constantly professing the faith, where there shall be need, and for defending it when opportunity is given. And therefore it brings to the soul a right to helps by which it may furnish this.

3rd. The effect of the grace of the Eucharist is to nourish spiritual life, to increase the same, to generate a distaste for worldly things, to draw toward union with God, and therefore to bring a right to graces by which communicants may be able to attain all these things.

4th. The effect of the grace of Penance is to remit sins committed after Baptism, and to confer strength for avoiding sins and for persevering in the state of grace, and a right to helps suitable for furnishing these things.

5th. The effect of the grace of Extreme Unction is to take away the remains of sins, to lighten the soul of the sick person, to strengthen confidence, to render the inconveniences of illness less troublesome, indeed even at times to restore health of body where it will have been expedient for the salvation of the soul, to bestow strength for repelling extreme temptations, and to confer a right to helps proportionate to these things.

6th. The effect of the grace of Order is to render the Ministers of Christ fit for sacred ministries, so that they may perform these with due piety, and to confer a right to helps suitable for these things.

7th. The effect of the grace of Matrimony is to restrain disordered concupiscence, to bestow strength for sustaining the burdens of the conjugal state, for preserving conjugal fidelity, and for educating offspring in a Christian manner, and therefore to confer a right to helps necessary for fulfilling these things.

I. QUESTION I. What is a sacrament of the new law? ANSWER. It is a sign of a sacred thing inasmuch as it sanctifies men, says St. Thomas, III, q. 60, art. 2. A sacrament therefore is reduced to the genus of sensible sign. But a sign, adds St. Augustine, Book 2, On Christian Doctrine, chapter 1, is a thing which, beyond the appearance which it presents to the senses, causes something else to come into knowledge. One sign is insensible, such as is the character which Baptism, Confirmation, and Order imprint; another sensible, which is perceived by the senses, such as is the baptismal ablution. Again, one sign is natural, another instituted by free will.

II. The sacraments of the new law are signs not speculative but practical, instituted by God, which signify the grace which they produce.

III. QUESTION II. What are the parts of the sacraments of the new law? ANSWER. Two: matter and form. These names do not occur among the ancient Fathers; nevertheless the Church, both Greek and Latin, adopted these words as accommodated to the explaining of sacramental things. Under the name of matter are understood not only the sensible things themselves, but also sensible actions, such as unction, ablution, confession, consent expressed by nod or by word. One matter is remote, as water in Baptism; another proximate, as the ablution.

IV. QUESTION III. Did Christ the Lord determine the matter and form of Baptism and of the Eucharist? ANSWER. All theologians affirm that Christ determined the matter and form of this twofold sacrament not only in general, but in species also. That water was determined by Christ as the matter of Baptism, St. John testifies, chapter 3: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, and so forth. That Christ likewise determined bread and wine as the matter of the Eucharist, St. Matthew, chapter 26, and the other Evangelists testify. The form of Baptism Christ designated in these words: Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Matthew 28. The form of the Eucharist he determined, Matthew 26: This is my body. This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins. And as regards this there is no disagreement among theologians.

V. QUESTION IV. Did Christ determine the things and words of the other five sacraments in species? ANSWER. There is a twofold opinion among Catholic theologians. The first affirms it. For the matter of Confirmation is had in Acts, chapter 8: Then they laid their hands upon them. The remote matter of the sacrament of penance is sins; the proximate, the acts of the penitent; the form, the words of the priest. The matter of extreme unction is the unction of oil; the form, prayer: Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. James 5. The matter of Order is the imposition of hands; the form, prayer: These they set before the apostles: and they praying, imposed hands upon them. Acts 6. The matter of matrimony is the mutual delivery of bodies: They shall be two in one flesh. Of the form it will be spoken in its place.

VI. It is therefore plain that Christ the Lord determined the matter of these five sacraments in species. For he himself is the institutor of all the sacraments, as Trent defined, session 7, canon 1: If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the new law were not all instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema. And although the Council did not define that Christ was the immediate institutor, it nevertheless seems necessarily to follow.

VII. The authors of the second opinion object, contending that Christ designated the matter of Confirmation and of Order in general, but not in species. Since, they say, no mention is had of chrism or unction as the matter of Confirmation in Acts, chapter 8. Nor in the first seven centuries of the Church were the instruments to be touched held out as the matter of the sacrament of Order. The theologians of the former opinion answer that the imposition of hands is the matter as it were essential of each sacrament; but that the unction and the instruments are accidental matter, or an accidental rite added by the Church. They add that in Confirmation chrism was employed in the first centuries of the Church, and that the instruments are a rite of the Latin Church, since the Greek Church confers sacred Orders by the imposition of hands alone. And yet the Latin Church holds the sacred Ordinations of the Greek Church as valid. Therefore in each Church the imposition of hands is the essential matter, and the rest are accidental rites.

VIII. QUESTION V. What change of matter or of form renders a sacrament null? ANSWER. Change is twofold: one substantial, the other accidental. Substantial change alone renders a sacrament null. This change can be made in various ways. Water frozen and turned into snow or hail, although physically the same, nevertheless in the theological sense brings in a substantial change in respect of Baptism, since it is inept for the use of washing. Blessed chrism changed into chrism not blessed brings in a substantial change. Natural wine changed into distilled spirit is not apt matter for the Eucharist. Fr. Claude La Croix, Book 6, part 1, no. 24, defends that frozen wine is matter for the Eucharist, and praises Fr. Suárez. Other theologians deny it.

IX. QUESTION VI. In how many ways can a sacramental form be varied? ANSWER. Soto enumerates eight. First, by a diverse language. Second, by the addition of some word. Third, by the taking away of some word. Fourth, by the corruption of words. Fifth, by the transposition of words. Sixth, by the interpolation of words. Seventh, by synonymous words. Eighth, by equivocal words. Diversity of language and diverse synonyms bring in only an accidental change. The same is to be said of the transposition of words, and of an addition which does not take away the former sense. The interruption of words likewise does not bring in an absolutely substantial change, unless it destroy the sense. The corruption of words at the beginning of a word takes away the sense, as is plain in the word Patris, in which if you change the letter P into M, the word matris results. But at the end of a word a substantial change is commonly not made. That you may be able to discern whether the change be substantial or accidental, hold before your eyes the obvious sense of the words. When this is not changed, the change is accidental. Let this other rule cleave to your memory: In conferring the sacraments, while the question is of validity, the safer part is to be embraced. But any deliberate change, whether in the matter or in the form of the sacraments, carries with it a greater or lesser fault according to the diversity of the change.

X. QUESTION VII. Is it lawful in performing the sacraments to use doubtful matter or form? ANSWER. In sacraments which are necessary by necessity of means to salvation, such as are Baptism and Penance, the use of doubtful matter or form is lawful when extreme necessity urges, as theologians commonly teach. But outside the case of extreme necessity such use is unlawful; nay, even with extreme necessity urging, such use is unlawful in those sacraments which are not necessary by necessity of means to salvation.

XI. QUESTION VIII. Is the use of a conditional form lawful? ANSWER. The conditional form is this: If thou art not yet baptized, I baptize thee, and so forth. It is agreed among theologians that in the first centuries of the Church the conditional form was unknown. This began to obtain about the thirteenth century of the Church; at length in the fourteenth century the custom of this conditional form, extreme necessity urging, became common among all the Churches of the Latins, and was inserted into the body of law on the authority of Gregory IX. First this form was employed in the conferring of Baptism. Before Trent there is no mention of that form in the administration of Penance. After Trent several authors began to employ it even outside the case of necessity, as when confessors doubt whether the penitent be sufficiently contrite. Which custom I do not approve, and it will be rejected in its place. With extreme necessity therefore urging, the use of the conditional form is lawful in the administration of Baptism. Of the sacrament of Penance it will be spoken below.

XII. QUESTION IX. How many are the sacraments of the new law? ANSWER. The Lutherans and Calvinists today admit only two sacraments, Baptism and the Eucharist. Their error the Council of Trent condemned, session 7, and defined that there are seven sacraments of the Catholic Church, which are Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Order, and Matrimony. Obvious are the testimonies of the Scriptures by which this sevenfold number is proved, which for brevity's sake I pass over.

XIII. QUESTION X. What is the efficacy of the sacraments in conferring grace? ANSWER. The Council of Trent, session 7, canon 8, defined these things: If anyone shall say that grace is not conferred by the sacraments of the new law themselves ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for obtaining grace, let him be anathema. The manner of producing grace is twofold, namely ex opere operantis and ex opere operato. It is produced ex opere operantis when God confers it in view of the faith, piety, or merit of him who receives or administers the sacrament. We say that grace is produced ex opere operato when it is produced by the force and efficacy of the external sacramental sign itself, instituted by Christ the Lord and applied in a congruous manner, apart from the merit of the recipient or of the administrator. It is nevertheless necessarily required that a man about to receive the sacraments should in fact prepare his soul by dispositions of faith and piety.

XIV. Ignorantly and malignantly do the heretics carp at this phrase ex opere operato, since it is excellent and necessary for confuting their error and for showing that the sacraments of the new law are not mere external signs, but efficacious signs which by their own force derived from Christ's passion produce grace. See more in Vol. VIII, Book 1, sole dissertation, chapter 8.

XV. QUESTION XI. Do the sacraments of the new law produce grace physically or morally? ANSWER. St. Thomas and all his disciples defend that the sacraments of the new law, which, as Trent defined, produce grace ex opere operato, are instruments physically concurring to the production of grace. This opinion is the more conformable to Trent, and seems the more probable to me. But since it is scholastic and of little use for the forming of morals, I do not discuss it further. See more in the place cited.

XVI. QUESTION XII. What is the grace which the sacraments of the new law confer? ANSWER. Grace is twofold, habitual and actual. The former indeed inhering in the soul and permanent; the latter is called a transient motion. The grace which is conferred by force of the sacraments is something intrinsic and inhering in the soul, distinct from a flowing and transitory motion, as was defined in the Council of Trent, session 6, chapter 7, against the heretics who blurt out that the wicked are justified by an exterior imputation alone. If anyone shall say that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and charity which is poured forth in their hearts and INHERES in them, let him be anathema. More fully does he explain this at chapter 7. The Council abstained from the word habit and quality; but it defined that grace is something intrinsically inhering in the soul.

XVII. QUESTION XIII. Do the sacraments of the new law, besides sanctifying grace, confer some peculiar grace which is called sacramental? ANSWER. Theologians distinguish a twofold grace. One common to all the sacraments, the other proper to each. The common opinion is that the individual sacraments, besides the grace common to all the sacraments, confer some peculiar grace. The notion of that peculiar grace is hidden from us. The sacraments confer it of themselves when there is altogether the same disposition on the part of the recipients. But if the disposition be diverse, they produce it greater or less.

XVIII. QUESTION XIV. Whether the sacraments of the living can by accident produce first grace? ANSWER. The sacraments of the dead are Baptism and Penance, which of themselves produce first grace. The other sacraments are called of the living, because they presume men alive in grace; and these of themselves confer second grace. Theologians dispute whether these sacraments of the living can by accident confer first grace. The common opinion affirms it with St. Thomas, III, q. 79, art. 3.

XIX. QUESTION XV. Whether the sacraments of the new law imprint a character? ANSWER. Besides the effect of grace, three sacraments of the new law — Baptism, Confirmation, and Order — imprint a character, as all Catholics teach against the innovators and heretics, whose error Trent condemned, session 7, canon 9. That character is something real and permanent in the soul indelibly. The curious and useless questions of the scholastics on this matter I pass over.

XX. QUESTION XVI. How do the sacraments of the new law differ from the sacraments of the old law? ANSWER. The evangelical sacraments differ on several titles from the Mosaic sacraments. The sacraments of the old law conferred grace ex opere operantis only, as the common opinion teaches; but the evangelical produce it ex opere operato, as we have seen. I omit many other differences.

XXI. QUESTION XVII. Whether Christ the Lord immediately instituted all the sacraments? ANSWER. Some of the ancient scholastics maintained that the Apostles by Christ's concession instituted some sacraments. But the common and true opinion teaches that all and singular the sacraments were immediately instituted by Christ the Lord. Innumerable are the testimonies of the Scriptures which prove this. St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 3, says: What then is Apollo? and what is Paul? The ministers of him whom you have believed. And again, chapter 4: Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God. And at last, session 7, canon 1, Trent defines: If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the new law were not all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, let him be anathema.

Peter, a missionary called to a dying man, fortified him with the last sacraments and the blessing at the point of death. As Peter was about to leave the dying man’s room after the sacraments had been administered, he was called back by the dying man, who said: “Father, I made a bad confession.” After the confession was heard again and absolution given, Peter doubted whether or not he ought to repeat the other sacraments and the blessing. Hence it is asked:

1. What is an unformed and a formed sacrament?

2. When the obstacle has been removed, does an unformed sacrament revive?

3. When does one who has been blessed at the point of death gain the indulgence by the papal blessing?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. What is a formed and unformed sacrament?

A formed sacrament not only has everything required for its validity but the requisite dispositions are present in the recipient, so that it produces grace when it is received. An unformed sacrament is validly received, but for want of the necessary dispositions in the recipient it does not at the time produce grace in the soul.¹

81 *

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 17.

2. Does an unformed sacrament produce grace when the impediment to grace is removed?

Baptism, Confirmation, Order, when received unformed, according to the common opinion, produce grace in the soul on removal of the obstacle. Many authorities teach the same with respect to Matrimony and Extreme Unction. Penance probably does. The Eucharist does not.²

2 Ibid., p. 18.

3. When does the last blessing take its effect?

The last blessing takes effect at the moment of death. It may be given immediately after Extreme Unction and then its effect is suspended until the moment when death takes place.³

3 Lehmkuhl, vol. ii, n. 709.

4. The case. Peter, a missionary, had given a dying man the last sacraments and the papal blessing. When he was leaving the room the dying man called him back and told him that the confession which he had just made was a bad one. Peter heard his confession again and absolved him, but was in doubt as to whether he should repeat the other sacraments and the papal blessing. He should not repeat Extreme Unction for it can be received only once in the same sickness, and the doctrine of reviviscence makes repetition unnecessary. Nor need he repeat the last blessing, for it will take its effect at the moment of death. He may and should administer Holy Communion again for the previous Holy Communion was sacrilegious.