Validity independent of the minister's faith and holiness

Neither faith nor the state of holiness and friendship with God is necessary in the minister for the validity of the sacraments which he confers. This is of faith, and it was defined by the Council of Trent. The sacraments do not depend for their effect on the good or bad dispositions of the minister, as they derive their efficacy from the institution and the merits of Christ. They produce their effect ex opere operato, not ex opere operantis. However, one who has been consecrated and deputed to be a dispenser of the mysteries of God is bound to fulfil his office in a worthy manner. Holy things must be treated holily. The minister acts in the name of Christ; he becomes the instrument of Christ for the sanctification of the souls of others by means of the sacraments; he would be greatly wanting in reverence and decency if, while engaged in so holy a task, his own conscience were stained with grievous sin. An enemy of God himself, he is guilty of great presumption in undertaking such holy functions. A consecrated minister who solemnly administers a sacrament while conscious of being in a state of mortal sin certainly sins grievously. The question whether a lay person who in case of necessity baptizes another or contracts marriage in the state of sin himself sins grievously, as being an unworthy minister of the sacrament, is much disputed among divines. Many weighty authorities excuse such a minister from grave sin because he is not under so strict an obligation to put himself in the state of grace before administering a sacrament as is one who has been set aside and consecrated to that office. All citizens are bound to defend their country when threatened, but there is a special obligation to do so incumbent on those who, like soldiers, have undertaken that duty. Similarly, all should indeed treat the sacraments with proper respect, but consecrated ministers are specially bound to do so while fulfilling their office. So that it.is a probable opinion that a lay person who baptizes in sin in a case of necessity, or one who marries and so ministers the sacrament in sin to the other party, does not thereby sin grievously. For the same reasons it is also probable that even a consecrated minister who while in sin administers Baptism privately in case of necessity does not sin mortally, for he then acts as a private person, not as a consecrated minister.

“If anyone shall come to us from any heresy whatsoever, let nothing be innovated except that which has been handed down, that a hand be imposed upon him unto Penance; since the heretics themselves, properly speaking, do not baptize one another when coming to them, but only admit them to communion. It is not to be asked who he is who baptized, because he who has been baptized could obtain grace, the Trinity of names—the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit—having been invoked. The name of Christ avails greatly, so that whoever and wherever he has been baptized in the name of Christ may immediately obtain the grace of Christ. What we have received from the Apostles, this we follow.” Decree of Stephen I against the Rebaptizers.

“Concerning the Africans, because they use their own law, so that they rebaptize, it has been determined that if anyone shall come from heresy, they shall question him concerning the Creed; and if they shall ascertain that he was baptized in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, only a hand shall be imposed upon him, so that he may receive the Holy Spirit. But if, when questioned, he shall not answer this Trinity, let him be baptized.” First Council of Arles, 314, canon 8, on the Baptism of heretics.

“Concerning those who at times call themselves Cathari, that is, pure, but come to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, it has seemed good to the holy great Synod that, hands having been imposed upon them, they thus remain in the clergy.… Concerning the Paulianists who thereafter fled to the Church, it has been established that they be wholly rebaptized. But if any were in the number of clerics in time past, if indeed they shall appear free from fault and reproach, after being rebaptized let them be ordained by the Bishop of the Catholic Church.” First Synod of Nicaea, year 325, chapters 8 and 19, on the Baptism of heretics.

“On the very first page of your letter you indicated that very many baptized by the Arians were hastening to the Catholic faith, and that certain of our brethren wished to baptize them again; this is not lawful, since both the Apostle forbids this to be done and the canons contradict it, and the general decrees sent to the provinces by my predecessor Liberius of venerable memory after the Council of Rimini was annulled prohibit it. We join them, together with the Novatians and other heretics, to the assembly of Catholics through the invocation alone of the sevenfold Spirit by the imposition of a Bishop’s hand, as was established in the Synod; and the whole East and West also observe this. It is by no means fitting that you too deviate henceforth from this path, if you do not wish to be separated from our college by a synodal sentence.” Decrees of Liberius and Siricius on the Baptism of heretics, in Siricius, Epistle I to Himerius of Tarragona, ch. 1.

“Since the Church in many places, and especially in the Teutonic regions, long labored under heresy and schism, and, if all those who were ordained by those heretics and schismatics had to be annulled, certain Churches would seem to be wholly stripped of their clerics, We, following the decrees of the Holy Fathers concerning those who were ordained under Acacius and Bonosus and the Donatists, have decreed by statute that all Bishops who were ordained under this schism shall remain in their honors, unless they are usurpers or criminals. But with regard to the other Orders, the power shall rest with the Bishops, so that those whose life appears approved may remain in their grade.” Decree of Paschal II at the Lateran Council, year 1116.

“That those coming from the Novatians or Montenses be received through the imposition of hands alone, because, although baptized by heretics, they were nevertheless baptized in the name of Christ.” Innocent I, Epistle 2 to Victricius of Rouen, ch. 11.

From the Nicene canon, Paulianists coming to the Church are to be baptized, but not Novatians; “The manifest reason declares that this was therefore distinguished with respect to these two heresies, because the Paulianists by no means baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; but the Novatians baptize with those same tremendous and venerable names, nor among them has a question ever been raised concerning the unity of divine power, that is, of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” Innocent I, Epistle 17 to the Bishops of Macedonia, ch. 5.

“…We likewise by no means reject the Sacraments which are celebrated in it, through the cooperation of the inestimable and invisible power of the Holy Spirit, although they are administered by a sinful priest while the Church receives him; nor do We detract from ecclesiastical offices or blessings celebrated by him, but with benevolent spirit embrace them as though from a most just man, because the wickedness of a Bishop or priest harms neither the Baptism of an infant, nor the conferral of the Eucharist, nor the other ecclesiastical offices celebrated for subjects.” Profession of faith of the Waldensians prescribed by Innocent III.

“The fourth blasphemy of impious men of this kind (the Fraticelli), breaking forth from the poisonous fountain of the aforesaid Waldensians, holds that priests who have even been rightly and lawfully ordained according to the form of the Church, but are weighed down by any crimes whatsoever, cannot effect or confer the ecclesiastical Sacraments.” Error condemned by John XXII in a Constitution issued in the year 1318.

“4. If a Bishop or priest exists in mortal sin, he does not ordain, does not consecrate, does not effect, does not baptize.” Articles of John Wycliffe condemned at the Council of Constance.

“22. Likewise, whether he believes that a wicked priest, with due matter and form and with the intention of doing what the Church does, truly effects, truly baptizes, and truly confers the other Sacraments.” Articles concerning which persons suspected of the errors of Wycliffe and Hus are to be questioned.

207. Principles. - I. For the validity of the Sacraments neither faith ¹ nor probity, or the state of grace, is required in the minister. This is clear 1º from the practice and perpetual tradition of the Church, which never wished those baptized by heretics and the wicked to be rebaptized. It is clear 2º from the definition of the Church. - Trent, sess. 7, Can. 12, and Can. 4, on Baptism.

¹ ** Understand faith here as perfect or Catholic. For some persuasion or notion, at least by which the minister knows that he is carrying out the rite of Christians, seems necessary for having a sufficient intention.

II. But for the licit administration of the Sacraments, faith and probity are required in the minister, at least if he has been consecrated for conferring Sacraments, and confects them solemnly, that is, with the entire rite prescribed by the Church. Therefore he who ministers Sacraments in mortal sin sins gravely; for a minister destitute of faith or wicked inflicts a grave injury upon God and Christ, by treating holy things unworthily and, so far as lies in him, by contaminating them. Moreover, since the Minister of the Sacraments represents Christ the primary Minister, who is the Holy of Holies, and bears His person, it is necessary that he also be holy.

St. Thomas III, q. 64, a. 5, 6, 9 and 10.

75. Principle I. For the validity of a sacrament, in the minister there is not required faith or sanctity. - The latter is of faith, from the Council of Trent, sess. 7, can. 12; the former, however, is of faith for Baptism from Trent, sess. 7 on Baptism, can. 4, and for the other sacraments is theologically certain from the common consent and practice of the Church, and is deduced from arguments similar to those for Baptism.

It is proved:

1. If faith or sanctity were required, this would be either from the nature of the sacrament and of ministerial power, or from the positive will of Christ. But:

A. Not the first: The sacraments do not operate by the power of the merits or faith of the minister, but by divine power and from the merits of Christ (John I, 33; I Cor. III, 4, 5, 7; I, 13). But these cannot be impeded by the malice of man, even of the minister. Therefore his faith or sanctity is not required from the nature of the sacrament or of ministerial power.

"Ministers," says St. Thomas, "operate instrumentally in the sacraments, because in a certain way there is the same ratio of minister and instrument.... An instrument does not act according to its proper form and power, but according to the power of that by which it is moved. And therefore it is accidental to an instrument, insofar as it is an instrument, whatever form or power it has, apart from that which is required for the ratio of instrument; just as that the body of a physician, which is the instrument of a soul having art, be healthy or infirm.... Whence the ministers of the Church can confer the sacraments, even if they are evil" (a. 5). "Moreover, just as charity pertains to the proper power of man, so also does faith. Whence just as it is not required for the perfection of a sacrament that the minister be in charity..., so the faith of the minister is not required for the perfection of the sacrament; but an unbeliever can provide a true sacrament, provided that the other things are present which are of the necessity of the sacrament" (a. 9).

B. Nor is it required by the positive will of Christ, as is proved from perpetual tradition. This is evident:

a) from the disciplinary controversy between St. Cyprian and St. Stephen, Roman Pontiff: the former, according to the custom introduced by Bishop Agrippinus, one of his predecessors, rebaptized those baptized by heretics and schismatics, because he held these sacraments as invalid; against him St. Stephen, invoking the common usage of the Church, forbade rebaptizing, indeed threatened St. Cyprian with excommunication;

b) from the dogmatic controversy, held in the fourth century, between St. Augustine, whom the whole Church approved, and the Donatists, who held as invalid the sacraments conferred by sinners, at least public ones;

c) from the Councils of Arles (314), can. 8; Nicaea I (325), can. 8 and 19; and Constantinople I (381), can. 7, which command that certain heretics be admitted without rebaptism; from the Council of Carthage I (348) and Laodicea, can. 78; Constance, sess. 45, a. 4 against Wicleff, and a. 22 of the profession of faith for the Wicleffites and Hussites; likewise from the decrees of Innocent III in the profession of faith for the Waldensians; of John XXII against the Fraticelli; of Eugene IV in the decree of union.

2. If no one without interior faith and sanctity validly conferred the sacraments, there would be perpetual uncertainty and anxiety of salvation among the faithful.

Let it be noted that the sacrament of Penance, outside the moment of death, is invalidly ministered by schismatics and heretics, not from defect of faith but from defect of jurisdiction.

76. Principle II. For the liceity of the confection and ministration of a sacrament, in the minister there is required the state of grace; indeed he commits the mortal sin of sacrilege who, in the state of mortal sin, a) as minister, b) acting from the office to which he was consecrated, c) places a sacramental action by which he ministerially sanctifies. - This is certain.

It is proved:

1. From the Roman Ritual, which expressly asserts this, tit. I, n. 3 and 4:

"Since in the Church of God nothing is held more holy, or more useful, and nothing more excellent, or more divine, than the Sacraments instituted by Christ the Lord for the salvation of the human race, the Pastor or any other Priest to whom their administration belongs must remember above all that he handles holy things, and that at almost every moment of time he ought to be prepared for the office of so holy an administration. Wherefore he will perpetually take care to conduct his life uprightly, chastely, and piously; for although the Sacraments cannot be stained by the impure, nor can their effect be impeded by depraved ministers, nevertheless those who minister them impurely and unworthily incur the guilt of eternal death. Therefore the Priest, if he is conscious to himself of mortal sin (which God forbid), must not dare to approach the administration of the Sacraments, unless first he repents in heart; but if he has the availability of a confessor, and the consideration of time and place permits, it is fitting that he confess."

2. From reason: It is a grave irreverence toward God and the sacraments to be an unclean instrument of God for producing most holy effects; for right order demands that the deputed minister, by reason of his office, be conformed both to the Lord, according to Lev. XIX, 2: Be holy, because I am holy; and to the sanctity of the thing which he perfects. Namely, he commits irreverence who in the name of Christ acts with God for the salvation of men, while he himself is an enemy of God.

Whence St. Thomas: "There is no doubt that evil men presenting themselves as ministers of God and of the Church in the dispensation of the sacraments sin. And because this sin pertains to irreverence toward God and contamination of the sacraments, insofar as it is on the part of the sinner - although the sacraments according to themselves are uncontaminable - it follows that such a sin from its genus is mortal"¹ (a. 6).

¹ Insofar as it is on the part of the minister himself, says Cajetan, that action is stained, since it is treated as profane, not as sacred. One who sacrilegiously eats the Body of the Lord does not discern it from other foods but receives it as profane food, says Paul; the same happens in one ministering unworthily.

But when one of the three aforesaid conditions is lacking, the gravity of the sin is not proved with sufficient certitude; nevertheless it is venial, because to exercise a sacred office in the state of sin always includes some irreverence.

77. Corollaries. - From the foregoing it follows:

1. A minister in the state of sin a) solemnly baptizing commits mortal sacrilege; b) baptizing privately is not proved to sin mortally, because he does not act from office, as minister, but as any Christian; c) a fortiori if a midwife or layperson baptized in a case of necessity.

2. One ministering in the state of sin Penance, Extreme Unction, Confirmation, or Order sins mortally, because he always presents himself as minister. Yet he would not sin if in an unforeseen case time did not remain for eliciting an act of perfect contrition, or for confessing before he administers a sacrament which cannot be deferred. This is extremely rare, because almost always at least some moment of time remains.

3. A priest who confects the Eucharist in the state of mortal sin sins gravely; but he who only distributes it is not proved with certitude to sin mortally, because the distribution of communion is not a sacramental action causing grace and sanctifying, but merely applying the sacrament, nor is it an action strictly ministerial, because one offering communion is not in the strict sense a minister acting from intention in the name of Christ.

4. A pastor assisting at marriage in the state of sin does not sin mortally, because he is not the minister of the sacrament. Contracting parties in the state of sin sin mortally insofar as they receive the sacrament unworthily, but not insofar as they minister, because they are not ministers specially constituted.

5. Those are not proved to sin mortally who in the state of sin a) exercise the diaconate, subdiaconate, or minor orders; or b) perform sacramentals or blessings; or c) confect the chrism of Confirmation or the oil of the sick; or d) hear confession but do not absolve, or before absolution become contrite; or e) transfer the Holy Eucharist, or lift it from the ground, or bless the people with it; or f) touch corporals, chalices, relics, etc.; or g) preach, unless by reason of scandal if they are public sinners. The reason is that all those actions do not tend proximately to the sanctification of the soul.

78. Observations. - 1. One who in the state of sin ministers several sacraments without interruption probably does not commit as many sins as there are sacraments, because they constitute only one morally single action, one ministration.

2. A minister conscious of mortal sin must, before he ministers a sacrament, dispose himself for grace, either by confession, which is more advisable, or by perfect contrition, for the eliciting of which it suffices to apply moral diligence. But if there is question of confecting the Eucharist, since at the same time it must be received, by the precept of the Church he is bound first to confess, however contrite he may seem to himself (Council of Trent, sess. 13, c. 7, and C.I.C., can. 807).

3. According to the Roman Ritual, cited place, the pastor or any other priest to whom by office the administration of the sacraments belongs is bound always to keep himself prepared to minister them in grace; whence even if in a case of necessity he does not sin mortally by ministering a sacrament, nevertheless he will sin because, by not repenting, he exposes himself to the danger of ministering the sacraments unworthily or in the state of sin. The same is to be said of priests for whom occasions of ministering are ready at hand, such as those who minister in large hospitals or camps or parishes. The same is to be said of midwives, but under venial sin.

4. Besides the state of grace, there is regularly required in the minister: both that he have the legitimate faculty of administering the sacrament, by which he is deputed by the Church to this, or due ordinary or delegated jurisdiction or license, because the ministration of the sacraments of itself is the office of a pastor; and that he not be specially prohibited from this by censure, irregularity, or another impediment.

79. Cooperation in illicit ministration. - Since good dispositions in the minister are required for licitly ministering the sacraments, there follows in the recipient an obligation, from charity and religion, not to receive them except from a worthy minister, so that both scandal, by asking for the sacrament, and cooperation in irreverent ministration of the sacrament, by receiving it, may be avoided. - And indeed he sins gravely:

1. Who asks for or receives a sacrament from one who is going to minister it invalidly or doubtfully, because this is directly to induce or to cooperate in an intrinsically evil action.

2. Who asks for or receives from a heretical or schismatic minister, because this would be communication in divine things; the case of extreme necessity is excepted for Baptism and Penance, and, if this is lacking, for Extreme Unction, unless however this would be held as a profession of heresy or schism (I, n. 755).

3. Who asks for or receives from a censured minister who is to be avoided, unless in danger of death, and indeed for all the sacraments, if other ministers are lacking (can. 2261, § 3).

4. Who asks for or receives from an evil minister, unless there is a reasonable cause of necessity or utility, and unless there is question of Holy Communion, which does not exceed venial sin. - But to ask from a tolerated minister, who is not in the state of sin, is not a sin.

Let it be noted: a) It does not suffice that the minister be held evil from conjectures or empty rumors; but his malice must be morally certainly established; wherefore it does not suffice that someone know that he sinned mortally, for example yesterday, since today he can be supposed amended, unless it is certainly established that he is habitual or is remaining in a voluntary proximate occasion.

b) Since another's malice harms no one in his own right, hence to ask a sacrament from an evil minister is licit, and sometimes obligatory, if a just cause is present, especially if another who can or will minister is lacking (can. 2261, § 2). Any reasonable cause whatever suffices, even a slight one, if there is question of a tolerated minister who from office is bound to minister, as when a parishioner wishes to receive the sacraments according to Christian custom (a. 6, ad 2); if there is question of other ministers, a cause sometimes graver is required, such as, according to St. Alphonsus, Theologia Moralis, book VI, n. 89: 1. if the precept of confession or communion presses; 2. if from delaying reception danger of sin threatens; 3. if otherwise you must remain in mortal sin; 4. if a jubilee to be gained occurs (or a plenary indulgence in a place where these would be rare); 5. if you wish to apply Mass for a deceased friend; 6. if otherwise you must long be without communion or a skilled director.