Who can validly receive a sacrament

THE sacraments were instituted to sanctify the souls of men and thus to prepare them for heaven. Only living men, then, can validly receive the sacraments; dead men or other beings cannot receive them validly. Death takes place when the soul is separated from the body, but we do not know the precise moment when that separation takes place. Except putrefaction, there are no absolutely certain signs of death, and it is quite probable that the soul remains united to the body for some time after all apparent signs of life have disappeared. Under these circumstances recent medical men and divines hold that it is lawful to administer the last sacraments to one who has to all appearances been dead for an hour or two. This is especially the case when death is the result of some sudden accident. Men only, not women, are capable of receiving the sacrament of Orders, and only those who have committed actual sins after Baptism can validly receive the sacrament of Penance. As the sacraments were instituted for the Church of Christ, of which men become members by Baptism, this sacrament is a necessary condition for the valid reception of the others.

No special disposition or intention is required on the part of infants, who have not come to the use of reason, and of imbeciles for the validity of the sacraments which they are capable of receiving. As they have not the use of reason they are incapable of disposing themselves for the reception of the sacraments, and yet the Church has been accustomed to give them the sacraments. The practice of the Church in such matters has the very greatest authority, as the Angelic Doctor says: ““ The custom of the Church has the greatest authority, and it should always be followed in all things, because even the teaching of Catholic Doctors receives its authority from the Church. So that we must rather stand by the authority of the Church than by the authority of Augustine or Jerome, or of any Doctor soever.”¹+ With reference to infant Baptism the Council of Trent passed the following decree: “ If anyone saith that little children, for that they have not actual faith, are not, after having received Baptism, to be reckoned amongst the faithful; and that for this cause they are to be rebaptized when they have attained to years of discretion; or that it is better that the Baptism of such be omitted than that while not believing by their own act they should be baptized in the faith alone of the Church; let him be anathema.”²

¹ Summa, 2-2, q. 10, a. 12.

² Sess. vii, c. 13, de Bapt.

I. Only man as a wayfarer is capable of receiving the sacraments. Therefore angels and the dead are excluded. Nevertheless not every wayfaring man is capable of receiving all the sacraments; namely:

1. Every man not yet baptized is capable of Baptism (can. 745, § 1).

2. Every baptized person is capable of Confirmation and the Eucharist (canons 786, 853).

3. Every baptized male is capable of Order (can. 968).

4. Every baptized person who has fallen after Baptism is capable of Penance (can. 902).

5. Every baptized person able to enter into a contract is capable of Matrimony (cf. can. 1035).

6. Every baptized person who, after having attained the use of reason, is in danger of death because of illness or old age is capable of Extreme Unction (can. 940, § 1).

227. • The subject of a Sacrament is called he who receives the Sacrament, and is capable of the effect of the Sacrament.

The subject of the Sacraments is only man as wayfarer; because, as is plain from Sacred Scripture and tradition, the Sacraments were instituted for wayfaring men alone. Yet not all men are capable of all the Sacraments. For neither women can receive the Sacrament of Order, nor children not yet using reason can receive the Sacraments of Penance and Extreme Unction.

The reason a priori why only wayfaring man is capable of the Sacraments is the will of Christ the Lord, the institutor of the Sacraments. But the reason of fittingness is that according to the order of present Providence, only wayfaring man is capable of first grace or an increase of grace; but of this kind are not the Blessed or souls detained in purgatory, for whom the measure of glory corresponding to the grace which they had in mortal life has already been determined. But the damned are much less capable of grace, as being already separated from God for eternity. With these things posited, we must treat of the requisites both for the valid and for the licit reception of the Sacraments.

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.

86. Notion. The subject of the sacraments is said to be the one who receives a sacrament and its effects.

General principle. The subject of the sacraments is man alone in the wayfaring state; nevertheless, not every man can receive all the sacraments.

Thus it is from the will of Christ. The reason for the first part is that man alone in the wayfaring state is capable of receiving sanctifying grace or its increase. For the angels and the souls of the departed are already at their terminus, and have immutably either acquired or lost eternal salvation. When the Eucharist is called the "bread of angels," it is by no means indicated that the angels receive the Eucharist as men do, but that the same Christ who is our food through the sacrament is, as it were, the sweetest and most efficacious food of the angels through the beatific vision.³²⁰ St. Paul³²¹ speaks of those who are baptized for the dead. These words are somewhat obscure, but no interpreter has judged that, according to St. Paul, those who died without baptism can receive the effect of baptism if someone living on earth were baptized in their place. St. Paul perhaps speaks of some superstitious and false rite then in use, or the sense is that those faithful are baptized so that they may rise with the dead unto eternal beatitude.

The reason for the other part of the principle is that not every man has the qualities required for all the sacraments. Thus a woman cannot validly receive the sacrament of order, nor can a healthy man receive the sacrament of extreme unction.

With these things premised, we treat first the valid and then the licit reception of the sacraments.

³²⁰ Cf. S. theol. 3, q. 80, a. 2 ad 1.

³²¹ 1 Cor. 15:29.

87. Diverse conditions are required for validity in the diverse sacraments. In general, however, the following things are to be noted concerning all the sacraments:

1. The faith and probity of the recipient are not required for the validity of any sacrament, penance excepted. Hence those who received baptism or order as formal heretics are not to be rebaptized or reordained. In the sacrament of penance, however, true contrition or at least attrition is required for validity, and this assuredly cannot be had without faith and probity, at least begun.

2. Neither internal nor external attention is required for the validity of the sacraments, provided that the intention discussed below was present. Hence, for example, if someone is voluntarily distracted or intent upon other works while he receives sacramental absolution, he indeed sins, but receives it validly.

3. Valid baptism of water previously received is required for the validity of all the other sacraments. For baptism is the gate of all the sacraments.

4. No personal intention is required in infants and the perpetually insane for receiving the sacraments of which they are capable. For the Church then supplies the necessary intention.³²² Infants can validly receive baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, and order.³²³ According to the present discipline of the Church, however, no sacrament other than baptism, and in some regions confirmation, is customarily administered to infants and the perpetually insane.

5. In adults having the use of reason, some intention is required for the validity of all the sacraments, the Eucharist excepted, and it is diverse for the diverse sacraments. It is said: the Eucharist excepted, which, since it consists in a permanent thing, that is, in the consecrated species, as regards validity depends upon no intention either of the one ministering or of the one receiving. Hence one who were to receive the Eucharist under narcosis or in a complete loss of consciousness, or one who were to consume a host which he does not know to be consecrated, would indeed consume the true body of Christ, but only materially and without fruit if every intention were lacking.

The necessity of intention on the part of the recipient is inculcated by Innocent III,³²⁴ who rejects the opinion of those who teach that the sacraments can be conferred at least validly not only upon those sleeping and the insane, but also upon the unwilling and those contradicting, saying: "But it is contrary to the Christian religion that anyone always unwilling and altogether contradicting should be compelled to receive and preserve Christianity." St. Thomas,³²⁵ speaking of baptism, teaches: "If in an adult the intention of receiving the sacrament were lacking, he would have to be rebaptized." The reason a priori is the will of Christ instituting the sacraments in this manner, which will is gathered from the doctrine and practice of the Church and is very consonant with the essence and dignity of the sacraments. For the sacraments are the most worthy means of conferring grace. Now, it is most fitting that a man capable of the use of reason receive them voluntarily, and not merely passively or under compulsion.

The quality of the required intention is diverse for the diverse sacraments, as will be explained below when the individual sacraments are discussed. In general, however, it can be said: A lesser intention is required in the subject than in the minister of the sacraments; hence an actual and virtual intention is not required, but a habitual intention also suffices, that is, one once possessed and not retracted.³²⁶ Three sacraments, however, are excepted, namely: a) matrimony, in which at least a virtual intention is required, since the contracting parties themselves are also the ministers of that sacrament; b) according to the discipline now in force, the same holds for sacred ordination, since through it a man undertakes a new state and new grave burdens; likewise, c) for penance, in which the acts of the penitent, and notably contrition, must be present at least virtually while sacramental absolution is given.

As regards the sacraments of baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, and extreme unction, an implicit habitual intention suffices for validity, that is, one which is included in the Christian life or, if it concerns baptism, in the resolution to undertake the Christian life. But that will alone which is present in every contrition or attrition, namely, of doing the things necessary for salvation, does not seem to suffice. Hence, for example, a missionary can baptize a dying pagan deprived of his senses, provided that the latter previously manifested a resolution to undertake the Christian life³²⁷ or to receive baptism. But if such a resolution never was and is not present, baptism seems unable to be administered. Nevertheless, certain modern authors, for example, Vermeersch³²⁸ and Cappello,³²⁹ notwithstanding the response of the Holy Office of March 30, 1898, think that an unbeliever dying and deprived of his senses can be baptized under the condition, "if you are capable," provided that scandal is avoided. The reason is that in extreme necessity it is lawful to baptize even doubtfully validly.

As regards the objections deduced against the necessity of intention from certain historical facts, see Billuart.³³⁰ The councils, however, enumerate only the matter, form, and intention of the minister as essentially required for all the sacraments because the personal intention of the subject is not in reality required in all the sacraments, for example, in the baptism of infants.

³²² Cf. S. theol. 3, q. 68, a. 9 ad 1.

³²³ Cf. St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 81.

³²⁴ C. 3, X 3, 42.

³²⁵ S. theol., l.c., a. 7 ad 2.

³²⁶ Cf. St. Alphonsus, l.c.

³²⁷ Cf. Holy Office, March 30, 1898 (Collectan. de Prop. Fide, n. 1993).

³²⁸ Theol. mor. III, 243.

³²⁹ De sacr. I, 243.

³³⁰ De sacr., diss. 6, a. 1.

91. The subject of a sacrament is its true cause, but a material cause. - The one receiving is not, as the minister is, the efficient cause which gives power to the sacraments, but the material cause, insofar as, if the one receiving or some disposition in him is lacking, there is not a subject capable of receiving the immediate effect of the sacrament, and consequently the sacrament does not have its signification and is invalid.

The subject is man as wayfarer, who alone is capable of receiving grace through a sensible sign; for Baptism it is every such man; for Confirmation and the Eucharist, one baptized; for Order, a baptized male; for Matrimony, one baptized who has the use of reason; for Penance, one baptized who has sinned; for Extreme Unction, one baptized who has sinned and is sick.

92. Principle I. For the validity of a sacrament there is required in an adult, besides capacity, the intention of receiving the sacrament, or what Christ instituted and the Church does, or what Christians receive. - The reason is that, just as no adult is justified and saved without his own consent, as the Council of Trent says, sess. 6, c. 7, so neither does he receive the means of salvation, nor is he initiated into newness of life or consecrated to God: for these things must be received by an adult in a human manner.

So the Third Council of Carthage (a. 397) and the First of Orange, can. 12 (a. 441); Innocent III, l. 3, t. 42, cap. Mai. de Bapt.; and then all theologians; the Roman Ritual; Instruction of the S.C.P.F., June 23, 1830; and decree of the Holy Office, November 28, 1900. In children this intention is supplied by the intention of Christ and of the Church.

Nor does the Council of Florence stand in the way, urging only three things: matter, form, and the intention of the minister; for the Council 1. wished only to express those things which have themselves actively toward perfecting the sacraments; - 2. it treats of those things which are necessary for all sacraments; but now the one receiving is not required for perfecting the Eucharist; likewise intention is not required in little children.

93. Principle II. The required intention is habitual, i.e., actual and not retracted; and indeed, of itself a habitual implicit intention of receiving the sacrament suffices, or of receiving what Christ instituted and the Church does, or what Christians receive. - In the subject, the intention of receiving the sacrament, or the positive consent of the will, is a condition, required for its validity, that the reception of the sacrament may be voluntary; whence:

A. On the part of the act or of the subject, a lesser intention suffices than in the minister:

1. An actual or virtual intention is not required, which has influence as a cause or active principle, and not as a mere condition: for the one receiving is not the active principle of the sacrament, but only its passive subject; whence in him there is not required an intention which would be the principle of a human action.

2. But there is required, and there suffices, an implicit habitual intention, once had and persisting in the present, as not having been retracted.

3. But a merely interpretative intention does not suffice, which is in no way had, but which would only be had if the thought occurred: namely, by which someone would will, but does not yet will.

But if at times they say that an interpretative intention in some way suffices, there is a dispute about words: they speak thus improperly, and they do not understand a merely interpretative intention concerning the future, but one presumed concerning the present, by which someone, according to his habitual knowledge and present disposition of living in a Christian manner, would explicitly ask for the sacrament if it were asked of him; - but that is an implicit habitual intention, which, on account of present conjectural signs, is presumed to be present.

They say, however, that for Penance and Matrimony a virtual intention is required, because the subject must place human acts; - but that is not required precisely in the subject, for receiving those sacraments, but for placing part of the sacramental sign, namely, the matter which the one receiving must supply, and indeed at the moment at which he supplies it: for the matter consists in human acts, for which at least a virtual intention is required.

The Eucharist, since it is permanent, is valid without the intention of the one receiving: nevertheless this is required for valid sacramental reception.

B. On the part of the object, the same intention is required as in the minister: for the subject must voluntarily receive the same thing which he ministers. It is, namely, the will of receiving the sacrament or rite as sacred, at least implicitly, for example, of receiving what Christ instituted, or what the Church does, or as Christians or Catholics receive, or of living or dying according to Christian custom; - but the sole intention of saving oneself contained in contrition does not suffice, whatever some have said.

1. For this intention is not sufficiently determined; for it is not more determined to one means of salvation, for example, Baptism or Penance, than to others, for example, ex opere operantis; indeed, if it sufficed, almost every man would have the intention of receiving Baptism: for everyone, even a Mohammedan or a Jew, even one who has never heard of Baptism, can have such an intention, and yet who can say that he has the will of embracing the Christian religion? Namely, that one has the will of saving himself, but through the Jewish or Mohammedan religion, not through the Church and the sacraments of Christ. For one who adheres to another opposed religion cannot be judged to have the implicit will of embracing the religion of Christ through Baptism. Whence through the centuries there was no custom of baptizing such persons in their last moments, as now some attempt to introduce.

Similarly, a heretic who does not admit the sacrament of Penance, indeed positively refuses to receive it, has the will of saving himself; how could it be said with any probability that by this very fact he wills to receive Penance?

2. Such an intention is not absolute, but merely conditioned concerning the future: for the will of receiving a sacrament, say Baptism, is contained in contrition only conditionally. This is only the will of observing the precepts, but is not immediately the will of Baptism; immediately it is the will of examining the religion of Christ if it is proposed, and, if it is known to be true, of receiving Baptism; whence one who has this will immediately intends to fulfill the known precepts, and would will Baptism if its obligation were known, but he does not know this and does not will it. Therefore one who has only the will of salvation cannot validly receive the sacraments.¹ With this will, indeed, one can belong to the soul of the Church through grace and charity, but not to the social body of the Church, and consequently cannot receive Baptism and, a fortiori, the other sacraments: for these are social bonds by which we are joined to the body.

¹ Hence it cannot be said with Génicot that by the Holy Office only a certain mode of acting is recommended.

Therefore, just as for conferring a sacrament a certain general intention of saving or sanctifying does not suffice, but a determined intention of sanctifying through such a determined means or sacrament is required, so for receiving a sacrament the general will of salvation does not suffice, but a determined intention of saving oneself through a determined sacrament is demanded.

3. Hence in all ecclesiastical documents there is constantly presupposed in the one receiving not only the will of salvation, but the intention of receiving the sacrament. Thus the Ritual, t. 2, c. 3, n. 1: "let him be baptized only knowingly and willingly; and in danger of death, if he is unable to ask for Baptism, it is required that he have manifested in some probable way the intention of receiving Baptism"; which words the Code repeats, can. 752, and it also requires that an adult "ask for Baptism, each one by his own movement of soul" (can. 745). In the same way the Ritual prescribes, t. 5, c. 1, n. 8: "Extreme Unction cannot be given except to a faithful person" (can. 940), and n. 11: "to the sick who, when they were in possession of their mind, asked for it at least implicitly or would probably have asked for it" (can. 943). And the Holy Office, to the question "whether a missionary can confer Baptism in the article of death upon a Mohammedan adult who in his errors is supposed to be in good faith (and therefore has the will of saving himself), if he has already lost advertence...," answered, March 30, 1898: "Concerning Mohammedans dying and already deprived of their senses, one must answer as in the decree of the Holy Office, September 18, 1850: If previously they have given signs of willing to be baptized, or in the present state by a nod or in another way have shown the same disposition, they can be baptized under condition, insofar, however, as the missionary, after considering all the circumstances of things, has thus prudently judged." From this response it is clear that the Holy Office does not esteem the contrary opinion as probable, since it is held as not to be attended to in practice.²

² So Suarez, Lugo, Noldin, Marc, Prümmer, Umberg.

94. Practical conclusions. - In practice, an implicit habitual will of receiving the sacrament is had:

1. for Baptism, in the will of receiving the Christian religion or of being a Christian and living as a Christian;

2. for Confirmation, in the will of being a perfect Christian or of living or acting as a good Christian;

3. for Viaticum and Extreme Unction, in the will of dying according to Christian custom or of not dying without the sacraments; and this also suffices for Penance, in the article of death, provided some confession of sins or manifestation of contrition has preceded.

But such a will does not suffice, and an explicit one is required:

a) for receiving Holy Communion in other circumstances, because the will of living as a Christian does not contain the will of receiving the sacrament of the Eucharist so often and at such a time;

b) for Order and Matrimony, in which a new state with new offices must be undertaken.

95. Corollaries. - From what has been said it follows that the sacrament is invalid:

1. which someone receives with a neutral intention, neither consenting nor dissenting but conducting himself negatively;

2. which someone receives in simulation, with essential fiction, for example, playfully and mockingly;

3. which is received through mere force, with the soul resisting.

On the contrary, it is validly conferred upon those sleeping, drunk, fallen into madness, deprived of the senses, who previously had the intention of receiving those things; but it is illicit unless in probable danger of death, or unless the impediment of the use of reason is perpetual.

Julius, recently appointed a missionary in a certain district in England, was visiting Catherine, a widow of rather advanced age. When Julius asked whether she was a Catholic, she affirmed that she was, but at the same time said that she had once been an Anglican. “By whom were you received into the Church?” Julius asks. “By no one, but I came,” the other replied, “for while an Anglican I always heard that each was essentially the same Church of Christ; hence I began to go to your church, where I receive the sacraments every month. For now I am a true Catholic, and I know that Anglicanism is infected with heresy and schism.” Asked further whether she had been baptized, she said that she supposed this had been done to her as an infant in the neighboring Protestant church to which she would have belonged, but that her parents had almost entirely neglected religion. Julius said nothing else to Catherine, but inquired of the minister whether her name was in the register of those baptized in that Protestant church. When no indication of it was found, he proceeded to Catherine’s house, where he found her stricken by a sudden illness and deprived of her senses. He wished to know what he should do in the case, and what he should do if Catherine recovered. Hence it is asked:

1. Who can validly and lawfully receive the sacraments?

2. What is the relation of

Baptism to the other sacraments?

3. What must be done when someone is received into the Church?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. Who can receive the sacraments validly and lawfully?

In adults the intention to receive the sacraments is necessary for their validity. For the lawful reception of the sacraments of the living the state of grace is necessary, and for the lawful reception of the sacraments of the dead faith, hope, and attrition. No intention or disposition is necessary in those who have not the use of reason for the reception of the sacraments of which they are capable.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, p. 41 ff.

2. What is the relation of Baptism to the other sacraments?

The valid reception of Baptism is necessary for the valid reception of the other sacraments.²

3. What is to be done when a convert is received into the Church?

Inquiry must first be made about the baptism of the new convert. If it is certain that he has never been baptized, after a profession of faith he should be baptized absolutely. If it be doubtful whether he was ever baptized he must make a profession of faith, be baptized conditionally in private with holy water without the ceremonies in England, be conditionally absolved from censures, and then from sin after a full confession of his whole life. If he has been validly baptized already, he should make a profession of faith and be absolved from censures.³

4. The case. One may seriously doubt whether

‘Ibid., p. 41.

' Form for the Reception of a Convert, edited by the Bishop of Newport.

Catherine had ever been baptized. She herself supposed that she had been, but she had no positive information on the point; her parents were careless about religion, and her name was not to be found in the parish register. She should therefore be baptized conditionally again. If she is in danger of death, this should be done at once, though she is not conscious, and then she should be absolved conditionally and anointed. If she is not in danger of death, the priest should do nothing till she recovers. After recovery in any case she should be formally received into the Church according to the method described above, for as she had not formed an express intention of receiving Baptism, the validity of the Baptism administered while she was unconscious would be doubtful, even if she had not been baptized in infancy. Whether the sacraments which she had been in the habit of receiving every month were valid or not would depend on whether she had been validly baptized. Her reception of them was not lawful, but her good faith excused her.