Skip to main content

Full text of "Theology of the sacraments : a study in positive theology"

See other formats 


THEOLOGY  OF  THE 
SACRAMENTS 

A  STUDY  IN  POSITIVE  THEOLOGY 


BY    THE 


VERY  REV  P.  POURRAT,  V.G. 

Rector  of  the  Theological  Seminary  of  Lyons  (France) 


AUTHORIZED  TRANSLATION  FROM 
THE  THIRD  FRENCH  EDITION 


ST.    LOUIS,    MO.,    AND    FREIBURG    (BADEN) 

PUBLISHED  BY  B.  HERDER 

1910 


JUN241959 


N1HILOBSTAT. 


St.  Louis,  die  30,  Nov.  1909 

F.  G.  HOLWECK, 

Censor  Librorum 


IMPRIMATUR. 


St.  Louis,  die  i,  Dec.  1909. 

O.  ].  S.  HOOG,  V.G. 


Copyright,  1910,  by  Joseph  Gummersbach 


Becktold  Printing  and  Book  Mfg.  Co..  St.  Louis.  Mo. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  FIRST  EDITION 

Liberal  Protestantism  triumphantly  affirms,  in  the 
name  of  history,  that  the  Catholic  dogmas  concerning 
the  Sacraments  are  purely  human  doctrines,  and  even 
that  these  Christian  rites  were  borrowed  from  Pagan 
ism.  Other  errors  have  also  been  put  forth  of  late  in 
regard  to  the  relation  of  history  to  sacramentary  the 
ology. 

Called  upon  by  his  functions  to  submit  those  biased 
and  exaggerated  doctrines  to  a  critical  examination, 
the  author  has  carefully  studied  the  facts  with  the 
aid  of  a  rigorously  scientific  method.  The  result  of 
this  impartial  examination  has  been  to  show  that  an 
exclusively  Christian  inspiration  presided  over  the  ori 
gin  of  our  dogmas  regarding  the  Sacraments  and  over 
the  origin  of  those  Sacraments  themselves,  and  that 
between  the  scriptural  and  patristic  data  in  this  matter 
and  the  sacramentary  definitions  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  there  exists  a  conformity  sufficient  to  satisfy 
any  reasonable  mind. 

Very  competent  persons,  whose  authority  has  special 
weight  with  the  writer,  thought  that  this  work  which 
had  been  useful  to  many,  might  be  useful  to  others 
too.  For  this  reason  is  the  present  volume  published. 


This   study   of  positive   sacramentary   theology   is 
based  on  the  traditional  conception  of  the  development 

iii 


iv  PREFACE 

of  dogma,  that  which  St.  Vincent  of  Lerins  outlined 
in  the  fifth  century,  which  Newman  has  set  forth  so 
powerfully  in  modern  times,  and  which  the  Vatican 
Council  has  made  its  own :  "  Sacrorum  . 
dogmatum  is  sensus  perpetuo  est  retinendus,  quern 
semel  declaravit  Sancta  Mater  Ecclesia,  nee  unquam 
ab  eo  sensu,  altioris  intelligentise  specie  et  nomine, 
recedendum.  Crescat  igitur  et  multum  vehementerque 
proficiat,  tarn  unius  hominis,  quam  totius  Ecclesise, 
setatum  et  sseculorum  gradibus,  intelligentia,  scientia, 
sapientia :  sed  in  suo  duntaxat  genere,  in  eodem  scilicet 
dogmate,  eodem  sensu,  eademque  sententia."  1 

This  doctrine  of  the  development  of  dogma  finds 
indeed  in  sacramentary  theology  a  particularly  striking 
application.  For  the  historical  development  of  the 
Catholic  dogma  coincides  fairly  well  with  its  logical 
development. 

It  was  the  Trinitarian  doctrines  which  first  and  al 
most  exclusively  absorbed  the  thoughts  of  ecclesiastical 
writers  of  the  first  four  centuries.  Then  in  the  fifth 
and  sixth  centuries,  the  Nestorian,  Pelagian  and 
Monophysite  heresies  obliged  the  Church  to  fix  the 
attention  upon  the  Christological  dogma,  and  upon 
those  concerning  original  sin  and  grace.  Only  after 
wards  did  Christian  thought  turn  to  the  formal  con 
sideration  of  those  means  of  grace  and  of  remission 
of  sin  which  are  the  Sacraments. 

Therefore,  while  the  development  of  the  Trinitarian, 
Christological  and  Soteriological  dogmas  was  almost 
entirely  completed  during  the  patristic  period,  that  of 
the  sacramentary  dogmas  went  on  more  slowly.  It 

1  Constitutio  de  fide  catholica,  cap.  4,  De  fide  et  ratione,  Cf. 
can.  3,  De  fide  et  ratione.  DENZINGER,  Enchiridion  symbolorum 
et  definitionum,  nos.  1647,  1665.  (New  edition,  nos.  1800,  1818). 


PREFACE  v 

was  worked  out  in  the  Middle  Ages,  by  the  Scholastic 
theologians  who  are  the  representatives  of  Catholic 
tradition  in  their  time,  as  the  Fathers  are  in  the  first 
centuries. 

But  although  the  development  of  the  dogmas  of  the 
Sacraments  was  rather  late,  the  Sacraments  themselves 
have,  from  the  very  beginning,  been  used  by  the 
Church  which  received  them  from  Jesus  Christ.  <:t  The 
rites  which  possess  the  power  of  producing  grace  have 
always  been  practised  in  the  Church.  To  each  cere 
mony  was  joined  a  traditional  doctrine  which  ex 
plained  its  nature  and  effects.  .  .  .  But  the  sys 
tematic  and  philosophic  form  (of  the  doctrine)  did 
evolve."  This  quotation  from  the  Abbe  de  Broglie  2 
expresses  well  the  manner  in  which  the  dogmas  of  the 
Sacraments  developed ;  they  are  for  the  most  part  the 
oretical  expressions  of  the  practice  of  the  Church  with 
regard  to  the  Sacraments.  The  well-known  saying 
"  Lex  orandi,  lex  credendi "  finds  here  its  full  justifica 
tion. 

The  reader  then  will  not  be  tempted  to  conclude 
from  the  rather  late  formation  of  the  theology  of  the 
Sacraments  to  the  late  appearance  of  the  Sacraments 
themselves.  Such  an  inference  would  be  absolutely 

wrong. 

* 
*  * 

Some  brief  remarks  on  the  Latin  theologians  of  the 
twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries,  who  developed  the 
theology  of  the  Sacraments,  will  not  perhaps  be  out  of 
place  here. 

During  the  twelfth  century,  three  schools  particu- 

2  DE  BROGLIE,  Conferences  sur  la  vie  surnaturelle,  t.   iii,  Les 
Sacrements,  pp.  306-307. 


vi  PREFACE 

larly  contributed  to  the  formation  of  the  theology  of 
the  Sacraments  as  well  as  to  the  formation  of  Scholas 
tic  theology  properly  so  called :  the  school  of  Abelard, 
the  school  of  St.  Victor  and  that  of  Peter  Lombard. 

The  recent  works  of  Fr.  Denifle  3  and  Fr.  Gietl  3a 
have  shown  the  existence  of  an  Abelardian  school 
which  exercised  a  great  influence  upon  most  of  the 
writers  of  the  age.  In  spite  of  the  numerous  errors 
which  he  taught,  and  the  condemnations  which  he  re 
ceived,  Abelard  had  shown  his  disciples  the  good  use 
which  they  could  make  of  dialectics  in  theology.  He 
had  also  formulated  some  pregnant  principles  on  the 
Sacraments,  which  served  in  no  small  degree  to  di 
rect  subsequent  writers.  Fr.  Gietl,  in  his  edition  of 
the  Sentences  of  Roland  Bandinelli,  who  was  after 
wards  Pope  Alexander  III,  has  shown  how  greatly 
indebted  the  latter  was  to  the  school  of  Abelard. 

Even  the  school  of  St.  Victor,  whose  mystical  ten 
dencies  differ  so  much  from  those  of  the  school  of 
Abelard,  did  not  escape  entirely  from  its  influence. 
If  the  work  which  Fr.  Gietl  did  for  the  Sentences  of 
Roland  were  done  for  the  treatise  De  Sacramentis 
Christiana  Fidel  of  Hugh,4  this  would  be  evident. 
Besides,  the  Summa  Sententiarum^  attributed  for  a 
long  time  and  falsely  to  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  is  equally 
indebted  to  Abelard.6  Still,  while  drawing  inspiration 

3  Abalard's  Sentenzen  und  die  Bearbeitung  seiner  Theologia, 
in    Archiv    fur    Literatur    und    Klrchengeschlchte    Mittelalters, 
Freiburg  in  B.,  1885,  t.  i.,  pp.  402  sq.,  584  sq.,  584  sq. 

sa-Die   Sentenzen  Rolands  nachmals  Papstes  Alexander  III, 
Freiburg  in  B.,  1891,  Einleitung,  pp.  21-34. 

4  MIGNE,  P.L.,  clxxvi,  174-618. 

5  MIGNE,  P.L.,  clxxvi,  42-174. 

6  Cf.    PORTALIE,    Dictionnaire    de    Theologie    catholique,    art. 
"Abelard,"  i,  53-54. 


PREFACE  vii 

from  Abelardian  sources,  the  school  of  St.  Victor 
brought  to  the  theology  of  the  Sacraments  important 
personal  contributions.  Thus  it  prepared  the  way  for 
the  work  of  the  Master  of  the  Sentences. 

In  composing  his  fourth  book  of  the  Sentences,1 
Peter  Lombard  utilized  the  data  of  the  Abelardian 
school,  enriched  by  the  precise  statements  and  develop 
ments  of  the  school  of  St.  Victor.  As  we  shall  re 
mark  frequently  in  this  volume,  his  chief  merit  con 
sisted  in  synthesizing  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  expounded  by  his  predecessors,  into  one  har 
monious  whole  and  confirming  it  by  texts  from  the 
Fathers.  The  work  of  the  Master  of  the  Sentences 
was  particularly  fruitful;  and  from  it  dates  sacramen- 
tary  theology  properly  so-called.  The  development  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments  was  completed  in  the 
thirteenth  century  by  the  great  Scholastic  theologians 
of  the  order  of  St.  Francis  and  of  St.  Dominic. 
Peter  of  Poitiers  (fi2O5),  William  of  Auxerre 
(f  1223),  and  some  other  writers  of  the  beginning  of 
the  thirteenth  century  contributed,  by  their  works,  to 
this  theological  progress.  But  their  share  in  the  work 
appears  insignificant,  when  compared  to  that  of 
the  Franciscans,  Alexander  of  Hales,  St.  Bonaventure 
and  Duns  Scotus,  and  that  of  the  Dominicans,  Albert 
the  Great  and  St.  Thomas. 


The  method  employed  in  this  study  of  the  theology 
of  the  Sacraments  need  not  be  explained  nor  justified, 
for  it  has  been  in  vogue  since  the  seventeenth  century.8 

7  P.  L.,  cxcii,  839-943. 

8  Cf.  Bulletin  de  Litterature  Ecclesiastiquc,  June,  1906,  pp.  169- 
170. 


viii  PREFACE 

Certain  particular  features,  however,  make  some  ex 
planation  necessary. 

Contrary  perhaps  to  the  historical  method,  the  state 
ment  of  the  Catholic  doctrine,  defined  by  the  Council 
of  Trent,  is  placed  at  the  beginning  of  each  question, 
instead  of  occupying  the  place  which  belongs  to  it 
chronologically.  Desire  for  clearness  has  rendered 
this  process  necessary.  Experience  proves  that  when 
one  takes  up  a  complete  history  of  dogma  without  re 
calling  in  the  beginning  the  definition  of  the  Church, 
minds  are  easily  misled.  Moreover,  it  was  indispensa 
ble,  in  the  beginning  of  each  chapter,  to  differentiate 
clearly  the  Catholic  doctrine  which  is  imposed  de  fide, 
from  mere  opinions  of  theologians.  This  can  be  ac 
complished  only  by  explaining,  at  the  very  beginning, 
the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Nor  has  this 
method  in  any  way  prejudiced  the  claims  of  the  most 
rigorous  critical  spirit,  which  has  presided  over  this 
historical  treatise  of  sacramentary  theology. 

There  will  be  found  in  the  course  of  the  volume 
mention  of  the  works  which  have  been  consulted.9 

9  P.  SCHANZ,  Die  Lehre  von  den  heiligen  Sacramenten  der 
katholischen  Kirche,  Freiburg  im  B.,  1893. 

OSWALD,  Die  dogmatische  Lehre  von  den  heiligen  Sacramenten 
der  katholischen  Kirche,  vierte  Aufl.,  Minister,  1877. 

PROBST,  Sacramente  und  Sacramentalien  in  den  ersten  drei 
lahrhunderten,  Tubingen,  1872. 

HAHN,  Die  Lehre  von  den  Sacramenten,  1864. 

GRONE,  Sacramentum  oder  Be  griff  und  Bedeutung  vom  Sacra 
ment  in  der  alien  Kirche  bis  zur  Scholastik,  Brilon,  1853. 

SCHATZLER,  Die  Lehre  von  der  Wirksamkeit  der  Sacramente 
ex  opere  operato  in  ihrer  Entwicklung  innerhalb  der  Scholastik 
und  ihrer  Bedeutung  fur  die  christliche  Heilslehre,  Miinchen 
1860. 

BACH,  Die  Siebenzahl  der  Sacramente,  Regensburg,  1864. 

HAAS,  Die  nothwendige  Intention  des  Ministers,  Bamberg,  1869. 


PREFACE  ix 

Useful  as  they  were  to  us,  we  have  never  felt  that 
these  works  dispensed  us  from  the  study  of  the  texts 
themselves.10  Besides,  the  field  of  positive  theology 
of  the  Sacraments  has  been  as  yet  but  little  explored. 
Often  we  have  been  obliged  to  traverse  it  without  a 
guide. 

We  have  employed  in  the  course  of  this  work  the 
expression,  "  the  Church  became  conscious  of  her  dog 
ma."  Conscious,  is  here  a  synonym  for  "  explicitly 
cognizant."  When  the  Church,  that  is  the  pastors  and 
the  faithful,  acquires  an  explicit  knowledge  of  dogma, 
she  may  be  said  to  become  conscious  of  it,  since  for 
her,  the  dogma  then  passes  from  the  implicit  to  the 
explicit  stage.  This  terminology  is  convenient  and  im 
plies  no  innovation. 

Some  may  think  perhaps  that  the  time  was  not  yet 
come  to  make  an  historical  synthesis  of  the  theology 
of  the  Sacraments,  since  the  history  of  the  Sacraments 
is  not  fully  completed.  But  to  wait  until  the  science 
is  fully  developed  before  attempting  a  scientific  syn 
thesis,  would  be  to  wait  indefinitely.  The  needs  of  the 
human  mind  are  such  as  to  call  from  time  to  time  for 
a  synthesis  of  results,  even  at  the  cost  of  later  modifi 
cation.  Now  the  history  of  the  Sacraments  has  been 
sufficiently  studied,  from  the  seventeenth  century  to 
our  day,  to  justify  an  attempt  at  synthesizing;  all  the 
more  that  here,  contrary  to  what  obtains  in  other 
sciences,  we  have  the  infallible  definitions  of  the 
Church,  which  forever  remain  as  so  many  acquired 
results  for  theological  science.  We  do  not  pretend, 

10  Unless  otherwise  stated,  the  writers  anterior  to  the  thirteenth 
century  are  cited  from  the  Patrology  of  Migne.  Denzinger's 
new  edition  referred  to  is  the  tenth  edition,  1908. 


x  PREFACE 

therefore,  to  have  accomplished  a  definitive  work  — 
far  from  it.  We  have  simply  wished  to  be  of  service 
to  our  readers.  Heaven  grant  that  this  desire  may 
be  realised ! 

LYONS,  June,  1906. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  THIRD  EDITION 

This  third  edition  has  been  brought  up  to  date, 
profiting  by  the  latest  studies  that  have  been  pub 
lished  on  the  Sacraments.  In  conformity  to  a  desire 
that  has  been  expressed,  a  general  synthesis  of  the 
development  of  the  sacramental  doctrines  has  been 
added  at  the  end  of  the  volume,  permitting  the  reader 
to  seize  at  one  glance  the  principal  features  of  this 
development.  The  analytical  method  has  been  adopted 
in  the  work.  This  method  separates  the  different 
questions  of  sacramentary  theology,  and  has  doubtless 
the  disadvantage  of  failing  to  show  this  general  de 
velopment,  and  of  exposing  us  to  repetition.  But  it 
has  in  its  favor  that  it  agrees  with  the  plan  of  the 
treatise  on  the  Sacraments  in  general;  it  also  allows 
of  a  more  detailed  and  complete  exposition  of  this 
complex  history  than  would  a  synthetic  study. 

Since  the  publication  of  the  first  two  editions  of 
this  work,  there  has  appeared  the  decree  of  the  Holy 
Office  Lament  abili  sane  exitu.  Propositions  xxxix-li 
concern  the  sacramentary  doctrines.  They  condemn 
the  evolutionary  and  naturalistic  theories  which  have 
been  put  forth  of  late  on  the  origin  of  the  Sacraments. 
According  to  these  theories,  Jesus,  either  because  of  a 
belief  in  the  proximity  of  the  eschatological  King 
dom,  or  because  of  different  reasons,  had  no  intention 
of  instituting  either  Church  or  Sacraments.  The 
Church  was  established  without  the  foreknowledge 

xi 


xii  PREFACE 

and  the  intention  of  the  Savior.  The  Sacraments 
came  into  being  because  of  the  need,  found  in  every 
religion,  of  expressing  itself  in  external  worship : —  the 
need  created  its  organ.  The  Apostles  and  their  suc 
cessors  "  under  the  inspiration  and  the  force  of  cir 
cumstances  and  events  "  instituted  the  Sacraments,  and 
attached  them  arbitrarily  to  some  thought  or  word  of 
Jesus,  thus  giving  to  the  Savior  intentions  which  He 
never  really  had.11 

Such  theories,  diametrically  opposed  to  the  defini 
tions  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  as  well  as  to  the  results 
of  sound  criticism,  have  —  needless  to  say  —  nothing 
in  common  with  this  attempt  at  explaining  the  origin 
of  the  Sacraments.  May  this  essay  recall  to  minds, 
troubled  by  the  present  religious  crisis,  that  it  is  possi 
ble,  without  exceeding  the  bounds  of  orthodoxy,  to 
give  appropriate  solution  to  the  new  problems  which 
have  arisen. 


11  Prop.  XL:  Sacramenta  ortum  habuerunt  ex  eo  quod  Apos- 
toli  eorumque  successores  ideam  aliquam  et  intentionem  Christi, 
suadentibus  et  moventibus  circumstantiis  et  eventibus,  inter- 
pretati  sunt. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

PAGE 
A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED I 

§  I.  Elaboration  of  the  Concept  of  Efficacious  Symbol 
ism  with  regard  to  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist, 
by  writers  prior  to  St.  Augustine I 

§       II.    The  Augustinian  Definition  of  a  Sacrament    .     .     22 

§  III.  The  Definition  of  a  Sacrament  according  to  Me 
diaeval  writers 34 

§  IV.  The  definition  of  a  Sacrament  according  to  the 

Theologians  subsequent  to  the  Council  of  Trent  47 

CHAPTER  II 

THE    COMPOSITION    OF    THE    SACRAMENTAL    RITES    .       .      $1 

§  I.  The  Theory  of  a  Sacramental  Sign  before  St. 

Augustine 53 

§       II.    The  Augustinian  Theory  of  the  Sacramental  Sign    59 

§  III.  The  Composition  of  the  Sacraments  during  the 

I2th.  Century  —  Peter  Lombard 66 

§  IV.  The  Conception  of  Matter  and  Form  of  a  Sacra 
ment  in  the  I3th.  Century 72 

§  V.  The  Conception  of  Matter  and  Form,  after  the 

I3th.  Century 78 

CHAPTER  III 

THE  EFFICACY  OF  THE   SACRAMENTS    .       ...      93 

§         I.     The  Definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent  ....     93 
§       II.    The  Efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  at  the  Beginning 

of    the    Church 96 

§      III.    The  Earliest   Speculations  concerning  the  Efficacy 

of  the  Sacraments  —  Tertullian  and  Origen   .     .   108 
§      IV.    The  Part  of  the  Minister  and  that  of  the  Subject 

in  the  Efficacy  of  the  Sacraments 116 

a. —  The  Baptismal  Controversy  —  St  Cyprian  and 

Pope   St.    Stephen 117 

b. —  Donatism  —  St.  Optatus  and  St.  Augustine  .     .  130 
xiii 


xiv  CONTENTS 


§  V.  The  Efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  in  the  Early  Part 
of  the  Middle  Ages  —  Reordinations  —  The  Sac 
raments  Administered  by  those  that  are  Excom 
municated —  The  Heresies  of  the  I2th.  Century  156 

§  VI.  The  Formula  Ex  Opere  Operate.  The  Problem 
of  the  Causality  of  the  Sacraments  during  the 
I3th.  Century 162 

§  VII.  The  Protestant  Sacramental  System  and  the  Defini 
tions  of  the  Council  of  Trent 177 

§  VIII.  The  Actual  Controversy  about  the  Causality  of  the 

Sacraments 184 

§      IX.     Grace  Produced  by  the   Sacraments 196 

CHAPTER  IV 

THE      SACRAMENTAL      CHARACTER      ....    204 

§         I.    The  Teaching  of  the  Church 204 

§  II.  From  the  Beginning  of  the  Church  to  St.  Augus 
tine —  Three  Sacraments  Not  Repeated  —  The 

Doctrine  of  the  Sphragis 208 

§      III.    The   Augustinian   Doctrine 226 

§  IV.  The  Silence  of  the  Early  Middle  Ages  concerning 
the  Sacramental  Character  —  The  complete  de 
velopment  of  the  Dogma  at  the  beginning  of  the 

I3th.     Century 234 

§  V.  The  Nature  of  the  Sacramental  Character  —  Alex 
ander  of  Hales  and  St.  Thomas  — Duns  Scotus 
and  Durandus  of  St.  Pourgain 245 


CHAPTER  V 

THE    NUMBER    OF   THE   SACRAMENTS    ....    256 

§  I.  The  Teaching  of  the  Church 256 

§  II.  The  Number  of  the  Sacraments  in  the  Patristic 

Period 259 

§  III.  The  Attempts  of  the  Early  Middle  Ages  .  .  .263 
§  IV.  The  Number  of  the  Sacraments  in  the  Twelfth 

Century  —  Peter  Lombard 268 

§  V.  The  Fitness  of  the  Number  of  the  Sacraments  — 

The  Interventions  of  the  Church 277 

§  VI.  The  Protestant  Heresy  and  the  Orthodox  Greek 

Church 289 


CONTENTS  xv 

CHAPTER  VI 

PAGE 
THE    DIVINE    INSTITUTION    OF    THE    SACRAMENTS    .       .    2Q5 

§  I.  The  Definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  the 
Theological  Hypotheses  on  the  Manner  of  the 
Divine  Institution  of  the  Sacraments  —  New 
man's  Hypothesis 295 

§  II.  The  Divine  Institution  of  the  Sacraments  Accord 
ing  to  Scripture 302 

§  III.  The  Dogma  of  the  Divine  Institution  according  to 
the  Fathers  — The  Thesis  of  Liberal  Protestant 
ism  on  the  Origin  of  the  Sacraments  ....  316 

§      IV.    The  Dogma  of  the  Divine  Institution  According  to 

the  Theologians 334 

a. —  The  Fact  of  the  Divine  Institution  of  the  Seven 

Sacraments    is    Affirmed 334 

b. —  The  Manner  of  the  Divine  Institution  of  the 
Sacraments 336 

CHAPTER  VII 

THE   INTENTION   OF   THE    MINISTER   AND   THE   RECIPIENT    .    34$ 

§         I.     Doctrine  of  the  Church 346 

§  II.  From  the  Beginning  up  to  St.  Augustine,  the  Min 
ister  of  the  Sacrament  is  considered  as  the  Rep 
resentative  of  Christ  or  His  Church  —  The  Ordi 
nations  imposed  by  force  in  the  Fourth  and  Fifth 
Centuries 350 

§  III.  The  First  Speculations  of  the  Intention  of  the 
Minister  and  that  of  the  Recipient  of  the  Sac 
rament  —  St.  Augustine 361 

§      IV.     The  Dogma  of  the  Intention  in  the  Twelfth  and 

Thirteenth     Centuries 371 

§        V.    The  Controversy  on  the  Purely  Exterior  Intention 

—  Ambrose    Catharinus,    O.    P 385 

§  VI.  The  Qualities  Required  in  the  Intention  of  Minis 
ter  and  of  Subject 392 

Conclusion 396 

Index 407 


CHAPTER  I 

A    SACRAMENT   DEFINED 

A  sacrament  is  defined  as  an  efficacious  symbol  of 
grace.  The  notion  of  an  efficacious  symbol  was 
worked  out  by  the  ecclesiastical  writers  of  the  third 
and  fourth  centuries,  in  connection  with  Baptism  and 
the  Eucharist.  The  first  to  attempt  a  technical  defini 
tion  of  a  sacrament  was  St.  Augustine;  but  his  for 
mula  contains  only  the  generic  term  of  the  definition : 
"A  sacrament  is  a  sign  of  grace."  It  was  for  the 
theologians  of  the  twelfth  century  to  complete  the 
Augustinian  formula  by  adding  the  specific  idea:  A 
sacrament  is  an  efficacious  sign  of  grace.  Since  the 
Council  of  Trent,  theologians  have  but  set  forth  with 
more  detail  the  formula  of  the  mediaeval  writers. 

There  appear,  then,  in  the  progressive  development 
of  the  definition  of  sacrament,  four  distinct  stages: 
the  pre-Augustinian  elaboration  of  the  concept  of  effi 
cacious  symbolism;  the  Augustinian  definition;  the 
formula  of  the  twelfth  century  writers;  and,  finally, 
that  of  theologians  since  the  Council  of  Trent. 

§  I.  Elaboration  of  the  Concept  of  Efficacious  Symbolism 
with  regard  to  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  by  writers  prior 
to  St.  Augustine. 

The  faith  of  the  Church  in  the  production  of  an 
invisible  spiritual  effect  through  Christian  rites,  could 
not  but  lead  to  the  notion  of  an  efficacious  symbol. 
It  was  altogether  natural  that  the  faithful  should  come 

i 


2  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

to  look  upon  the  ceremony  as  symbolical  of  the  ef 
fects  which  it  produces,  and  this  idea  is  to  be  met 
with  even  in  the  Apostolic  writings.  St.  Paul  applies 
it  to  Baptism,  and,  in  some  sense,  to  the  Eucharist 
and  to  Matrimony.  It  is  our  purpose  to  study  its  his 
tory  first  in  the  Greek,  and  then  in  the  Latin  literature. 


"  Know  you  not,"  says  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans,1 
"  that  all  we  who  are  baptized  in  Christ  Jesus,  are 
baptized  in  His  death  ?  "  The  waters  of  Baptism  into 
which  the  new  converts,  baptized  then  by  immersion, 
were  plunged  totally  to  wash  them  of  their  sins,  sym 
bolize  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  sepulchre  wherein 
He  was  entombed.  The  neophyte  emerging  from  the 
baptismal  bath,  whence  he  has  received  a  new  life 
which  he  ought  never  to  lose,  represents  Christ  com 
ing  forth  from  the  tomb,  living  also  a  new  life  and 
henceforth  immortal.2  The  baptismal  immersion, 
therefore,  typifies  death  to  sin,  the  death  of  the  old 
man  buried  in  the  waters,  as  Christ  in  the  tomb;  the 
emersion  is  the  birth  of  the  new  and  regenerated  man. 
The  baptismal  ceremony  is  then  a  symbol  of  Christ's 
death  and  resurrection,  and  as  well,  of  the  death  to 
sin  and  of  the  supernatural  regeneration  of  the  Chris 
tian  soul. 

Again,  in  the  Eucharist  St.  Paul  discerns  a  sym 
bolism  from  which  the  Fathers  are  to  derive  a  great 
deal  of  inspiration.  The  Eucharistic  bread,  which  is 
the  body  of  the  Lord,3  is  also  the  symbol  of  the  unity 

1vi,  13. 

2  Rom.  vi,  4-1 1. 

8 "  For  he  that  eateth  and  drinketh  unworthily,  eateth  and 
drinketh  judgement  unto  himself,  not  discerning  the  Body  of 
the  Lord." — /  Cor.  x,  29. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  '3 

of  the  Church,  the  mystical  body  of  Christ.  "  For  we 
being  many  are  one  bread,  one  body,  all  that  partake 
of  one  bread."  4  The  Eucharist  then  is  symbolical  of 
the  union  which  it  effects  among  the  faithful. 

This  Pauline  conception  of  the  Church  as  the  mys 
tical  body  of  Christ,  serves  also  as  a  foundation  of  the 
symbolism  of  Christian  marriage  set  forth  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.5  In  matrimony  Christ  is 
represented  by  the  husband,  "  the  head  of  the  woman," 
and  the  Church,  by  the  woman  who  is,  so  to  speak, 
the  husband's  body.  "  Therefore,  as  the  Church  is 
subject  to  Christ,  so  also  let  the  wives  be  to  their  hus 
bands  in  all  things."  On  the  other  hand,  the  husbands 
"  ought  to  love  their  wives  as  their  own  bodies,"  even 
as  "  Christ  also  loved  the  Church,  and  delivered  Him 
self  up  for  it."  This  intimate  union  of  the  espoused, 
likened  also  to  the  union  of  the  body  with  its  head,  is 
founded  on  the  words  of  Genesis:  " Erunt  duo  in 
came  una."  But  these  words,  when  applied  to  Christ 
and  His  Church,  have  for  St.  Paul  a  deeper  and  more 

mysterious    significance :      To   jjuvar^piov   TOVTO  fteya    «mi>. 

The  text  of  Genesis  is  but  half  understood,  unless  mar 
riage,  which  makes  of  man  and  wife  one  flesh,  be  con 
sidered  as  typifying  the  inviolable  union  between 
Christ  and  His  Church. 

These  first  outlines  of  sacramental  symbolism  will 
be  the  starting  point  of  all  later  theories.  St.  Igna 
tius  of  Antioch,  when  making  allusion  to  the  Eucha 
rist,  is  not  content  with  an  affirmation  of  the  real 
presence,6  but  to  be  more  explicit,  takes  up  and  de- 

4  7    Cor.    x.    17.     Cf.    P.    BATIFFOL,    Etudes    d'Histoire    et    de 
Theologie  positive,  L'Eucharistie,  Paris,  1905,  pp.  13  ss. 
5v,  22-23. 

*Smyr.  vii,  i,  The  Docetae  "abstain  from  the  Eucharist  and 
2 


4  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

velops  the  symbolism  outlined  by  St.  Paul.  The  here 
tics  whom  he  combats  are  dangerous,  not  merely  be 
cause  of  their  errors,  but  as  well  by  reason  of  the  divi 
sions  and  schisms  which  they  cause  in  the  Churches  of 
Asia;  hence  St.  Ignatius  urges  the  faithful  to  remain 
in  union  with  their  bishops.  The  Eucharist  is  pro 
posed  to  them  as  the  type  and  motive  of  that 
union  which  ought  to  exist  between  Christians  and 
their  pastors.  "  Those  who  belong  to  God  and  to 
Jesus  Christ,  the  same  are  they  who  are  with  the 
bishop.  Be  not  deceived,  brethren,  the  schismatics 
will  have  no  place  in  the  Kingdom  of  God.  See  to  it 
then  that  you  receive  the  one  only  Eucharist,  for  there 
is  but  one  flesh  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  one 
chalice  in  the  unity  of  His  blood,  one  altar,  even  as 
He  has  but  one  episcopate,  one  priesthood  and  one 
deaconship."  7 

The  Didache,8  though  it  does  not  betray  the  same 
preoccupations  as  the  Ignatian  Epistles,  contains  the 
same  idea,  though  much  less  accentuated. 

Sacramental  symbolism  then  in  its  rudimentary 
stage  dates  back  at  least  from  the  very  beginning  of  the 
Church.  Its  appearance  at  so  early  a  period  explains, 
in  great  part,  the  use  of  the  word  "  pvaTypiov  "  which 
served  very  soon  to  designate  Christian  rites.9 

from  prayer  because  they  would  not  acknowledge  that  the  Eu 
charist  is  the  Flesh  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  which  suffered 
for  our  sins  and  was  raised  to  life  by  the  Father  in  His  good 
ness."  Cf.  TIXERONT,  La  Theologie  anteniceenne,  Paris,  1905, 
p.  143. 

7  Philad.  iii,  2-4.  Cf.  Ephes.  xx,  2.  The  Eucharistic  sym 
bolism  of  St.  Ignatius  has  been  exhaustively  studied  by  P.  BATIF- 
FOL,  op.  cit.,  pp.  122  ss. 

six. 

9  ST.  JUSTIN,  I  Apol.,  29.  ORIGEN,  Contra  Cels.,  iii ;  P.G.,  xi,  999. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  5 

The  sacramental  theories  properly  so  called  did  not 
appear,  however,  until  the  third  century,  with  Cle 
ment  and  with  Origen  particularly,  at  Alexandria. 
The  Alexandrian  atmosphere  was  admirably  suited  to 
the  production  of  them.  Neo-Platonic  philosophy, 
which  made  so  much  of  symbolism,  had  habituated  its 
devotees  to  seek,  under  the  literal  sense  of  a  writing 
or  beneath  the  external  appearance  of  an  object,  deeper 
and  more  mysterious  realities.  To  them  the  phe 
nomenal  world  is  but  a  sign  or  indication  of  an  intel 
ligible  world  concealed  within.10  Thus  they  attached 
so  much  importance  to  the  study  of  mere  symbols 
whence  Scriptural  allegorism  in  particular  derives  its 
principles. 

"  A  sign,"  says  Origen,  "  is  a  visible  something  that 
suggests  the  idea  of  another  invisible  thing"  (signum 
dicitur  cum  per  hoc  quod  videtur  aliud  aliquid  indi- 
catur).  Jonas  coming  forth  from  the  whale's  belly 
is  a  sign  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  Circumcision 
commanded  by  God  to  Abraham,  typifies  the  spiritual 
circumcision  of  the  heart  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks, 
Philip,  iii,  3.11  A  sign  (cr^dov)  is  distinguished 
from  a  prodigy,  re'pas:  a  prodigy  is  an  extraordi 
nary  doing,  intended  to  excite  the  admiration  of 


The  word  nwr-fipiov  signified,  among  the  Greeks,  both  a  secret 
doctrine  and  a  symbolical  religious  ceremony  which  only  the 
initiated  were  permitted  to  know  and  understand.  Naturally 
then  the  Christian  truths  revealed  by  God  to  the  world,  and 
Christian  ceremonies  came  to  be  called  nvvT'/ipia.  Since  the 
fourth  century  the  word  nwT-fipLov  has  become  the  usual  expres 
sion  for  designating  the  Sacraments.  The  Greek  terminology 
was  introduced  into  the  West  chiefly  by  St.  Ambrose  in  his 
treatise  De  Mysteriis.  Even  to  this  day,  we  speak  of  the  Eucha 
rist  as  the  Holy  Mysteries. 

10  Cf.  ZELLER,  Philosophic  der  Griechen,  vol.  iiib,  p.  251. 

11  In  Epist.  ad  Rom.,  iv,  2;  P.G.,  xiv,  968. 


6  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

men,  while  the  sign  is  but  commonplace  and  merely 
turns  our  thoughts  to  something  other  than  itself.12 
The  waters  of  Baptism  recall  the  death  to  sin  which 
they  typify:  they  are,  as  St.  Paul  says,  the  grave 
in  which  we  die  and  are  buried  with  Christ.13  So  too 
the  baptismal  bath  symbolizes  the  complete  purification 
of  the  soul  now  cleansed  from  all  its  stains.  But  it  is 
not  merely  a  symbol ;  it  is  also,  thanks  to  the  all-pow 
erful  invocation  of  the  adorable  Trinity,  to  him  who 
gives  himself  to  God  the  beginning  and  source  of  the 
divine  gifts.14 

The  application,  however,  of  symbolism  to  the 
Eucharist  as  made  by  Origen  was  less  happy,  for  it 
was  found  to  be  incompatible  with  traditional  real 
ism.15  The  Eucharist  is  not,  as  Baptism,  simply  an 
efficacious  symbol  of  a  spiritual  effect :  it  is  a  symbol 
containing  the  reality  which  it  symbolizes,  namely,  the 
body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  Now  such  a  concep 
tion  of  Eucharistic  symbolism  could  make  its  appear 
ance,  only  when  the  doctrine  of  the  conversion  of  the 
bread  and  the  wine  should  have  been  developed.  In 
the  meantime  writers  will  be  tempted  to  apply  sym- 

12  In  Joan.,  xiii,  60;  P.G.,  xiv,  521. 

13  In  Epist.  ad  Rom.,  v,  8;  Ibid.,  1037. 

14  In  Joan.,  vi,   17,   Td  5td  rov  vdaros  \ovrpbv,  ffVfi^oXov  rvyx&vov 
KaOapffiov  ^u%^?,  Trdvra  pvirov  airb  KaKias  diroirXwofievris. . .  P.G.,  xiv, 

257- 

15  The  Eucharistic  faith  of  the  Church  has  always  been  belief 
in  the  real  presence.     Yet  there  was  a  time  when  no  scientific 
expression  of   this  belief  existed ;   this  could  come  about  only 
gradually.     The   crudeness   of  these  early   speculations   is   suffi 
ciently   explained   by  the   very   difficulties   of   the   subject.     Cf. 
BATIFFOL,  L'Eucharistie,  p.  181,  ff.    TIXERONT,  pp.  275,  301.     (See 
also  POURRAT,  The  Teaching  of  the  Fathers  on  the  Real  Pres 
ence.) 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  7 

holism  to  the  Eucharist  in  about  the  same  way  as  to 
Baptism. 

As  we  have  seen,  it  is  from  the  invocation  of  the 
adorable  Trinity  that  Origen  would  derive  the  whole 
efficacy  of  Baptism.  Likewise  it  is  from  the  prayer 
said  over  the  bread,  that  is  to  say,  from  the  words 
of  the  institution  and  of  the  epiclesis,  that  the  Eucha 
rist  has  the  sanctifying  effect  which  it  produces  in  him 
who  communicates  with  proper  dispositions.16  As  to 
the  Eucharistic  bread,  "  that  sanctified  food/'  it  is,  as 
the  baptismal  ablution,  a  symbol  indeed,  but  a  symbol 
the  meaning  of  which  is  as  yet  undetermined.  At 
times  it  is  symbolical  of  the  teaching  of  Christ,  the 
teaching  which  nourishes  souls  and  makes  glad  our 
hearts,17  and  again  it  is  the  "  typical  and  symbolical 
body  of  Christ."  1S  The  Eucharistic  bread  is  no  more 
a  pure  symbol  than  is  the  baptismal  ablution,  since,  like 
it,  its  effect  is  sanctification.  Thus  we  see  that  Origen 
is  not  a  symbolist  merely.  Yet  he  does  not  affirm  that 
this  symbol  contains  the  body  of  Christ;  the  truth  is 
that  he  did  not  grasp  the  difference  that  exists  be 
tween  the  symbolism  of  Baptism  and  that  of  the  Eu 
charist. 

Indeed,  his  disciples  also  failed  in  this  at  first.  Eu- 
sebius  of  Caesarea  and  several  others  speak  frequently 
of  the  Eucharistic  bread  and  wine  in  such  ambiguous 

16  In  Matt.,  xi,  14.     P.G.,  xiii,  949. 

17  In  Matt.  Commcntariorum  series,  85,  P.O.,  xiii,   1734,  1735. 
This  idea  had  already  been  set  forth  by  CLEMENT  (Peed.  I,  vi), 
from  whom  Origen  borrowed  it. 

18  Kcu  ravra  fikv  (i.e.,  that  which  has  been  said  of  the  sanctified 
bread)   Trepi  TOU  TVTTLKOV  Kal  ffvpfioXiKov  <r<a/j,aTos, —  In  Matt.,  xi,  14, 
P.G.,  xiii,  952. 


8  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

terms  as  types  and  symbols  of  Christ's  body  and 
blood.19 

However  a  reaction  in  the  name  of  traditional 
realism  set  in  against  this  Eucharistic  symbolism  of 
Origen.  The  Cappadocians  are  distrustful  of  it,  and 
St.  Basil  is  even  careful,  when  speaking  of  the  Eu 
charist,  to  avoid  every  symbolistic  formula.  As  for 
the  Antiochians,  they  are  altogether  opposed  to  it. 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  protests  against  all  Eucha 
ristic  symbolism  whatsoever  :  "  Christ  did  not  say, 
'  This  is  a  symbol  of  My  Body,  and  this  is  a  symbol 
of  My  Blood,'  but  He  did  say,  '  This  is  My  Body  and 
this  is  My  Blood/  He  teaches  us  to  abstract  from 
the  nature  of  the  oblation,  and  to  consider  only  that 
these  gifts  are  transformed  into  His  flesh  and  blood 
by  the  Eucharistic  prayer."  20  St.  John  Chrysostom 
goes  even  so  far  in  the  same  direction  as  almost  to 
fall  into  ultra-realism.21 

The  truth,  as  always,  is  in  the  golden  mean.  Sym 
bolism  has  its  place  in  the  Eucharist,  otherwise  there 
would  be  no  sacrament.  The  doctrine  of  transubstan- 
tiation  which  by  the  fourth  century  was  sufficiently 
developed,  enabled  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  to  reconcile 
that  symbolism  with  the  traditional  realism.  The 
bread  and  the  wine  are  changed  —  /xera/^A^Tcu  22 


19EusEBius,  Demonstr.  Evangel,  i,  10,  P.G.,  xxii,  89. 

20  In  Matt.,  xxvi,  26;  P.O.,  Ixvi,  713. 

21  In  Joan.,  horn,  xlvi,  3.     In  the  Eucharist  Christ  is  not  only 
"seen,"  He  is  handled  (a\l/aa0ai)  ;  the  Christian  fastens  his  teeth 
into  His  flesh   (efjiirij^ai  robs  dSovras  rrj  erap/et)r  expressions  which 
are  true  only  of  the  Eucharistic  species.     Conscious  of  the  need 
of   speaking  with   more  accuracy,  the   Holy  Doctor  says,  else 
where,  that   Christ's  Body  cannot  be  perceived  by  our  senses, 
only  by  our  faith.     In  Matt.,  Ixxxii,  4. 

22  Cat.  Mystag.,  iv,  7. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  9 

into  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ;  "  The  bread  which 
is  present  to  the  senses  is  not  bread;  .  .  .  the 
wine  which  is  seemingly  present  is  not  wine,"  for  "  in 
the  figure  of  bread  —  iv  TV™  aprov  —  there  is  given  His 
Body,  and  in  the  figure  of  wine,  His  Blood."  23  The 
appearances  of  bread  (o  <j>aiv6p€.vo<s  apros)  and  of  wine 
(6  ^aii/o/xe^o?  oii/os  )  are  figures  (TUTTOI),  symbols,  con 
taining  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ. 

Thus  after  a  few  vicissitudes  the  application  of  sym 
bolism  to  the  Eucharist  attained,  in  Greek  literature, 
to  an  accurate  and  almost  set  expression.  St.  John 
Damascene,  though  two  centuries  later,  is  content 
merely  to  reproduce  the  teaching  of  St.  Cyril  and  of 
the  Greek  writers  of  the  fourth  century.24 

Baptismal  symbolism  experienced  no  such  vicissi 
tudes;  it  was  accepted  just  as  Origen  had  stated  it, 
after  St.  Paul,  and  interpreted  during  the  fourth  cen 
tury  according  to  the  then  current  notion  of  the  ef 
ficacy  of  Baptism.  Origen,  as  we  have  seen,  ascribed 
this  efficacy  to  the  invocation  of  the  adorable  Trin 
ity.  Subsequent  writers,  influenced  by  the  text  of  St. 
John,  "  Nisi  quis  renatus  fuerit  ex  aqua  et  spiritu," 
were  led,  in  the  controversies  about  the  divinity  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  to  account  for  the  efficacy  of  the  baptismal 
rite  by  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  water. 
"If  the  baptismal  water  has  in  it  any  virtue,"  says 
St.  Basil,25  "  it  has  it  not  of  itself,  but  by  reason  of 

™Mystag.,  iv,  3,  9. 

2*De  Fide  orthodoxa,  iv,  13;  P.G.,  xciv,  1141-1144. 

25  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  35 ;  P.G.,  xxxii,  128  sq.  The  formula  for 
the  blessing  of  baptismal  water  in  Serapion's  Euchologium  asks 
of  God  "to  fill  the  waters  with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  to  bring  down 
upon  them  the  Word  "that  they  may  receive  from  Him  their 
virtues."  G.  WOBBERMIN,  Altchristliche  liturgische  Stilcke  (Leip- 


io  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

the  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  IK  rrj<s  TOV 


Supernatural  regeneration  implies  that  the  previous 
life  of  sin  is  annihilated,  and  that  a  new  life  begins. 
Hence  Baptism  has  a  twofold  aim:  to  make  us  die 
to  sin,  and  live  for  God.  Death  to  sin  takes  place  in 
the  waters  of  Baptism,  wherein  the  catechumen  is 
buried  as  in  a  grave;  the  new  life  is  imparted  by  the 
Holy  Ghost.26  Baptismal  immersion,  then,  is  truly 
for  St.  Basil  the  symbol  of  death  to  sin,  a  symbol 
which  receives  from  the  Holy  Spirit  all  its  efficacy. 

In  order  to  throw  light  on  this  action  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  baptismal  regeneration,  St.  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen  insists  on  the  conformity  of  Baptism  with  man's 
nature.  Man  is  made  up  of  two  elements,  an  invisi 
ble  soul  and  a  visible  body.  This  is  why  there  are 
in  Baptism  two  purifications,  the  one  made  by  water, 
and  the  other  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  former  is  visi 
ble  and  has  the  body  for  its  object;  the  latter  is  spirit 
ual  and  takes  place  unseen.  The  bodily  immersion  is 
symbolical;  the  action  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  real,  and 
reaches  the  depths  of  the  soul  to  purify  it.27 

The  very  same  explanation  of  the  efficacy  of  Bap 
tism  is  given  by  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem.  The  baptis 
mal  bath  cleanses  the  twofold  nature  of  man,  his  soul 
and  his  body,  because  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
therein  united  with  the  water.  When  going  down  into 
the  sacred  pond,  the  catechumen  ought  not  to  regard  it 

zig,  1899),  p.  8,  or  FUNK,  Didascalia  et  Constitutiones  Aposto- 
lorum,  t.  ii,  pp.  180-182  (Paderborn,  1905). 

26  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  Ibid.  Cf.  Constit.  Apostol.  vii,  22,  2  (Ed. 
Funk). 

27  ST.  GREG.  NAZ.,  Oratio  xl,  8;  P.O.,  xxxvi,  368. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  n 

merely  as  common  water,  but  should  reflect  on  the  ac 
tion  of  the  Holy  Spirit  through  which  he  receives  sal 
vation.28 

The  Pauline  symbolism  of  the  baptismal  immersion 
is  also  admirably  set  forth  by  St.  Cyril  to  the  neo 
phytes.  Baptism  is  the  image,  o/Wo^a,  the  symbol 

of  Christ's  passion  I     TU>V  TOV  Xptorou  TraO-^^ar^v  avriruTrov. 

The  threefold  immersion  signifies  "  the  three  days  and 
three  nights  Our  Lord  passed  in  the  darkness  of  the 
earth."  The  emersion  recalls  the  resurrection  to  the 
true  light.  The  saving  water  is  thus  the  sepulchre 
wherein  we  die  to  be  born  again  into  life,  so  that,  as 
St.  Paul  says,  we  are  truly  baptized  in  Christ's  death, 
and  engrafted  upon  Him  by  a  similitude  to  His 
death.29 

The  anointing  which  follows  Baptism  typifies  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  makes  of  the  neophyte  a  true 

Christ :      Xpiorofi  Be  yeyorare  TOV  ayiov  ITyev/aaros  TO  avrtruTrov 

8e£a/xei/oi.30  For  the  chrism  represents  the  spiritual  unc 
tion  which  the  Savior  received  in  His  Baptism  and 
which  is  no  other  than  the  Holy  Ghost  Himself.  It  is 
only  after  we  have  been  anointed  with  that  chrism  that 

We  belong  truly  to  Christ   (JCOWDWH  KOL  piroxoi  rov  Xpio-rov 

ywofjiivoi ) .  Like  the  water  of  Baptism,  the  chrism 
owes  its  efficacy  to  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
invoked  by  the  priest.  When  the  oil  flows  visibly 
over  the  body,  the  soul  is  interiorly  sanctified  by  that 
vivifying  Spirit.31 

28Catech.  iii,  3-4. 

29  Co?.  Mystag.,  ii,  4,  6,  7. 

30  Cat.  Mystag.,  iii,  i,  2. 

31  Cat.  Mystag.,  3. 


12  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

Hence  it  is  seen  that  among  the  Greeks,  in  the 
fourth  century,  the  concept  of  a  sacrament  as  an 
efficacious  symbol  had  been  fully  worked  out  as  re 
gards  Baptism,  the  Eucharist  and  also  Confirmation. 
The  distinction  between  what  is  sensible,  visible,  and 
what  is  intelligible  —  a  distinction  which  is  the  basis 
of  sacramental  symbolism  —  is  seen  to  be  at  the  bot 
tom  of  all  the  speculations  of  the  Fathers  concerning 
these  Christian  rites.  This  distinction,  in  a  sacra 
ment,  of  a  visible  and  sensible  part,  which  is  the  sym 
bol,  and  of  an  intelligible  part,  which  is  the  spiritual 
effect,  is  based  on  man's  nature,  both  bodily  and  spirit 
ual:  God  wished  to  adapt  the  Sacraments  to  human 
nature. 

In  a  comparison  between  Baptism  and  the  Eucha 
rist,  St.  John  Chrysostom  has  summed  up  quite  well 
the  Greek  conception  of  a  sacrament.  Christ's  body, 
he  says,  cannot  be  seen  in  the  Eucharist,  we  must  dis 
cern  it  with  the  eyes  of  the  mind.  "  For  Christ  hath 
given  nothing  sensible,  but  in  things  sensible  all  is  in 
telligible."  Thus,  baptismal  water  can  be  seen  that 
we  may  know  what  takes  place  in  the  soul,  a  spiritual 
birth  and  renewal :  "  For  if  thou  hadst  been  incor 
poreal,  He  would  have  granted  thee  incorporeal  gifts ; 
but  because  the  soul  is  united  to  a  body,  He  delivers 
thee  the  things  that  the  mind  perceives,  in  things  sen 
sible."  32 


A  similar  conception  of  a  sacrament  was  also  grow 
ing  about  the  same  time,  among  the  Latin  Fathers. 

32  In  Matt.,  horn.  82,  2,  4. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  13 

True  it  is  that,  at  the  outset,  the  Latin  mind,  more 
positive  than  the  more  speculative  Greek  mind,  felt 
less  at  home  in  symbolism  than  the  latter.  It  is  only 
during  the  fourth  century,  when  Greek  works  were 
read  in  the  West,  especially  by  St.  Ambrose,  that  specu 
lative  studies  concerning  the  Sacraments  received  any 
considerable  attention.  At  the  end  of  the  fourth  cen 
tury,  St.  Augustine,  whose  culture  is  decidedly  Greek, 
carried  them  to  a  remarkable  degree  of  perfection. 

Tertullian  is  the  first  Latin  ecclesiastical  writer 
who  uses  the  word  sacr amentum  to  designate  Bap 
tism  and  the  Eucharist.  This  word,  as  we  know,  had 
a  great  destiny,  for,  as  we  shall  see  later  on,  it  is  in 
the  Latin  Church  that  sacramentary  theology  really 
developed. 

The  primary  classical  sense  of  the  word  sacramen- 
tum  is,  as  some  one  has  said,33  that  of  sacred  thing. 
Hence,  by  way  of  analogy,  Tertullian  has  given  to 
this  term,  in  addition  to  its  former  meaning  of  oath,34 
that  of  religious  doctrine,35  and  of  symbolical  and 
sacred  rite.30  It  is  in  this  last  signification  that  he 
applies  it  to  Baptism  and  to  the  Eucharist,  thereby 
preluding  the  formation  of  the  theological  language. 

Differently  from  Origen,  Tertullian  does  not  frame 
any  theory  as  regards  sacramental  symbolism.  His 
altogether  materialistic  conception  of  the  human  soul 

33  A.  REVILLE,  Du  sens  du  mot,  Sacramentum,  dans  Tertullien. 
Bibliotheque  de  I'Ecole  des  Hautes-Etudes,  Sciences  religieuses, 
vol.  i,  pp.   194-204.     Cf.  J.  TURMEL,  Tertullien,  Paris,  1905,  pp. 
247  ss. ;   D'ALES,  La  Theologie  de  Tertullien,   Paris,   1904,  pp. 
321  sq. 

34  De  Spectac.,  24;  De  Idol,  6. 
**Apol,  47- 

88  De  Baptismo,  i ;  Adv.  Marc,  iv,  34. 


14  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

— "  a  corporeal  substance  "  37 —  leads  him  to  look  upon 
the  Sacraments  almost  as  material  causes  that  sanctify 
the  soul  in  a  material  manner. 

The  waters  of  Baptism  really  cleanse  the  soul,  for 
they  have  been  "  impregnated  "  with  the  sanctifying 
power,  because  of  the  Spirit  which  has  penetrated 
them.88  The  imposition  of  hands,  which  follows  the 
ablution,  diffuses  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  it  were,  through 
our  whole  being,  just  as  the  playing  of  water-organs 
draws  from  them  harmonious  sounds.39  The  Eucha 
rist  fattens  the  soul  with  God.40  Such  expressions 
which  are  no  mere  exaggerations  of  language,  warn 
us  not  to  seek,  in  Tertullian's  writings,  for  a  fully 
developed  symbolism :  symbolism  rests  fundamentally 
on  the  distinction  between  what  is  material  and  what  is 
spiritual,  between  what  is  sensible  and  what  is  purely 
intelligible;  and  for  Tertullian  this  distinction 
amounted  to  very  little. 

However,  there  is,  in  the  Christian  rites,  an  intrin 
sic  symbolism  which  results  from  the  fitting  associa 
tion  of  the  rite  with  its  effect,  and  which  can  be  known. 
Tertullian  distinctly  realized  this  rudimentary  sym 
bolism.  In  Baptism,  the  bodily  cleansing  is  the  sign 

37"Animse  corpus  asserimus,"  De  Anim.,  9.  Cf.  TIXERONT, 
P.  339;  TURMEL,  p.  242;  D'ALES,  pp.  112  ss.  Tertullian  adopts 
the  Stoic  conception  of  the  soul. 

38  De  Bapt.,  iv. 

39  Ibid.,  8.    That  image  is  connected  with  the  notion  Tertullian 
had  of  the  origin  of  Adam's  soul.     God  breathed  into  the  body 
of  the  first  man  as  we  breathe  into  a  musical  instrument.    De 
Anima,  3,  4.    Adam's  soul  received  from  the  breathing  of  God 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  divine  likeness,  of  which  sin  deprived 
him.    The  laying  on  of  hands,  which  follows  Baptism,  restores 
to  man  the  Spirit  of  God. 

40  De  Resurrectione  carnis,  8. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  15 

of  the  purification  of  the  soul  which  takes  place;  the 
oil  of  the  unction  that  flows  over  the  flesh  and  recalls 
Christ's  spiritual  unction,  is  profitable  to  the  soul ; 41 
the  imposition  of  hands  brings  down  the  Holy  Ghost 
into  the  Christian,  cleansed  by  the  waters  of  Baptism, 
•just  as  the  use  of  the  fingers  contributes  to  send  the 
air  into  the  pipes  of  water-organs.42 

Did  Tertullian  realize  even  imperfectly  the  sacra 
mental  symbolism  of  the  Eucharist?  Most  probably 
he  did  not.  Several  times  in  his  treatise  against  Mar- 
cion 43  he  calls  the  bread  the  figure  of  Christ's  body : 
"  Acceptum  panem  et  distribution  discipulis,  corpus 
ilium  suum  fecit  (Christus),  Hoc  est  corpus  ineum  di- 
cendo,  id  est  figura  corporis  mei.  Figura  autem  non 
fuisset,  nisi  veritatis  esset  corpus."  Protestants  con 
clude  from  these  words  that  Tertullian  has  a  decidedly 
symbolistic  concept  of  the  Eucharist;  they  overlook 
altogether  both  the  strongly  realistic  temperament  of 
the  great  African  writer,  and  his  emphatic  affirmations 
of  the  real  presence.44  Some  might  be  tempted  to 
think  that,  in  this  passage,  Tertullian  considers  the 
bread  a  symbolic  sign  containing  Christ's  body :  in  that 
case  we  should  have  truly  a  theory  of  Eucharistic  sym 
bolism.  However,  such  an  interpretation  of  Tertul- 
lian's  thought  is  far  from  correct.  It  seems  rather 
that,  in  the  treatise  against  Marcion,  the  bread  is 
looked  upon  solely  as  an  Old  Testament  prophetical 
figure  of  Christ's  body.45  In  his  controversy  with 

41  De  Bapt.,  vii :     "  In  nobis  carnaliter  currit  unctio,  sed  spirita- 
liter  proficit:   quomodo   et  ipsius  baptism!   carnalis  actus,  quod 
in  aqua  mergimur;  spiritalis  effectus,  quod  delictis  liberamur." 

42  De  Bapt.,  viii,  5. 

43  Adv.  Marc.,  in,   19;  iv,  40. 

44  De  Resurr.  earn.,  8 ;  De  Corona,  3 ;  De  Idololatria,  7. 
45TiXERONT,  p.  349. 


16  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

Marcion,  Tertullian  was  necessarily  led  to  prove  to  him 
that  there  was  no  antagonism  between  the  two  Testa 
ments,  since  the  Old  Testament  contains  many  prophe 
cies  and  figures  of  Christ's"  life  and  passion.  In  the 
bread  broken  through  by  the  wood,  of  which  Jere 
miah  speaks,46  Tertullian  sees  the  figure  of  the  Savior's 
crucified  body,  a  figure  fulfilled  at  the  Last  Supper, 
when  Jesus  "  made  bread  the  figure  of  His  body."  47 
By  means  of  that  figure  he  proves  to  Marcion  what 
the  latter  denied,  the  reality  of  the  body  of  Christ. 
Since  that  body  was  typified,  it  is  real ;  for  a  nonentity 
cannot  be  typified. 

Bread  is  then  the  figure  of  Christ's  body,  not  in  the 
Eucharist,  but  in  the  Old  Testament.  Tertullian 
speaks  of  the  Last  Supper,  not  with  the  purpose  of 
theorizing  about  the  Eucharist,  but  to  show  that  in  it 
the  figure  was  actually  fulfilled.  Here  we  have  no 
sacramental  symbolism,  but  Biblical  allegorism. 

On  the  whole,  the  conception  of  a  sacrament  as  a 
symbol  is  rather  undeveloped  in  Tertullian's  writings : 
we  have  tried  to  show  why  this  should  be. 

This  concept  is  found  to  be  more  developed  in  St. 
Cyprian,  although  as  regards  the  Eucharist  only.  The 
Bishop  of  Carthage  outlines  a  theory  of  the  efficacy 
of  the  Sacraments,  with  an  eye  to  his  doctrine  concern 
ing  rebaptistru  The  water  of  Baptism  can  neither 
purify  nor  sanctify,  nor  can  the  oil  of  Confirmation 
impart  the  Holy  Ghost,  nor  the  Eucharist  be  valid, 
unless  they  have  been  "  sanctified  "  by  the  Bishop.48 

40  xi,  19. 

47  Adv.  Marc.,  iv,  40. 

**Epist.  Ixx,  i,  2,  (Edit   Hartel). 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  17 

It  is  this  sanctification  which  imparts  to  the  sacrament 
all  its  efficacy,  which  communicates  to  the  water  the 
Holy  Spirit  without  whose  presence  the  water  can 
neither  cleanse  nor  sanctify;49  and,  as  this  sanctifica 
tion  can  take  place  only  in  the  Catholic  Church,  which 
alone  possesses  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Sacraments  of 
heretics  cannot  be  valid.50 

St.  Cyprian  does  not  intend  to  speculate  about  the 
symbolism  of  Baptism  and  of  Confirmation:  he  con 
tents  himself  with  Tertullian's  rudimentary  notion. 
Water  signifies  the  interior  ablution  of  the  soul;  its 
significance  is  preserved  whichever  way  Baptism  is 
given,  whether  by  immersion,  or  by  mere  aspersion.51 
Oil  is  the  image  of  the  spiritual  anointing  of  the  soul.52 

On  the  contrary,  Eucharistic  symbolism  is  remarka 
bly  developed  and  turned  to  account.  The  great  de 
fender  of  the  unity  of  the  Church  against  the  Nova- 
tians,  St.  Cyprian  sees  in  the  Eucharist,  according  to 
St.  Paul's  teaching,  the  symbol  of  that  unity.53  The 
bread  composed,  as  it  is,  of  many  grains  of  corn  that 
have  been  ground,  represents  the  faithful  united  with 
Christ,  forming  with  Him  one  mystical  body.  Like 
wise,  the  water  mixed  with  the  wine  in  the  chalice, 
typifies  the  Christian  people  united  as  closely  with 
Christ  as  the  water  with  the  wine,  after  the  mixture. 
This  is  why  those  who  celebrate  the  Eucharist  either 
with  water  alone  —  according  to  the  aquarian  practice 

49 "  Peccata  enim  purgare  et  hominem   sanctificare  aqua   sola 
non  potest,  nisi  habeat  Spiritum  Sanctum." — Epist.  Ixxiv,  5. 
50  Epist.  Ixx,  i,  2. 

61  Epist.  Ixix,  12. 

62  Epist.  Ixx,  2. 

53  That  symbolism  is  in  no  way  prejudicial  to  the  distinct 
affirmations  of  the  real  presence  found  in  St.  Cyprian's  writ 
ings.  Cf.  TIXERONT,  p.  389;  BATIFFOL,  pp.  224,  ff. 


i8  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

which  St.  Cyprian  vigorously  opposes  in  his  letter  to 
Caecilius, —  or  with  wine  alone,  not  only  go  counter  to 
the  will  of  Christ,  but  also  do  away  with  the  sym 
bolism.84 

In  that  same  letter  to  Csecilius,  which  is  really  a 
treatise  on  the  Eucharist  as  a  sacrifice,  St.  Cyprian 
states  with  wonderful  accuracy  the  relations  that  exist 
between  the  Eucharistic  sacrifice  and  the  sacrifice  of 
fered  by  Christ  at  the  Last  Supper  and  in  His  pas 
sion.  The  Eucharistic  sacrifice  is  an  exact  reproduc 
tion  of  what  our  Savior  did  at  the  Last  Supper.  It 
is  this  exactness  which  imparts  to  it  all  its  value,  for 
the  Bishop  holds  the  place  of  Christ  and  does  over 
again  what  He  did  in  the  cenacle :  "  Sacerdos  vice 
Christi  vere  fungitur,  qui  id  quod  Christus  fecit  imi- 
tatur,  et  sacrificium  verum  et  plenum  tune  offert  in 
ecclesia  Deo  Patri,  si  sic  incipiat  offerre  secundum 
quod  ipsum  Christum  videat  obtulisse."  55  The  Eu 
charist  is  then  a  symbol  of  Christ's  sacrifice.  Yet  it  is 
not  a  mere  symbol :  it  is  also  a  "  true  and  complete  " 
sacrifice.  It  is  the  sacrifice  offered  by  the  Savior  at 
the  Last  Supper  and  in  His  Passion : 56  the  Eucha 
ristic  sacrifice  is  a  representation  of  Christ's  sacrifice, 
but  a  representation  which  truly  contains  the  reality 
(of  that  sacrifice).  Subsequent  authors  will  hardly 
find  a  better  expression. 

s*  Epist.  Ixiii.  The  mixture  of  water  and  wine  in  the  chalice 
is  looked  upon  by  St.  Cyprian  as  an  institution  of  Christ: 
"  Dominus  panem  et  calicem  mixtum  vino  obtulit."  Ibid.  4. 

55  Epist.  Ixiii,  14,  9. 

56 "  Passio  est  enim  Domini  sacrificium  quod  offerimus." — 
Epist.  Ixiii,  17. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  19 

St.  Ambrose  has  a  concept  of  the  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments,  quite  similar  to  that  of  St.  Cyprian;  but 
he  drew  from  the  Alexandrians,  whom  he  studied  with 
special  care,  a  very  rich  symbolism,  in  which  his 
mind  moves  along  with  perfect  ease. 

The  baptismal  waters  are  efficacious  because  the 
Holy  Ghost  comes  down  upon  them,  as  formerly  the 
Angel  of  old  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,57  and  imparts  to 
them  by  His  presence  the  power  of  healing  the  diseases 
of  our  souls.58  It  is  the  "  consecration  "  of  the  wa 
ters,  by  the  prayers  of  the  priest  and  "  the  mystery 
of  the  cross,"  which  brings  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  them 
and  grants  them  a  saving  power.59  For  what  is  the 
water  without  the  Spirit  and  the  Cross  of  Christ? 

Hence  the  waters  of  Baptism  are  not  void :  they 
contain  a  virtue  that  cannot  be  seen  by  our  bodily 
eyes,  but  is  to  be  discerned  by  the  faith  of  the  Chris 
tian.60 

Baptism  is  thus  in  harmony  with  man's  twofold 
nature :  water  washes  the  body,  and  the  Spirit  cleanses 
the  soul  from  the  stains  of  its  sins.  In  that  mystery, 
what  is  visible  is  consecrated  by  the  visible  element, 
what  is  invisible  by  the  invisible  element.61 

57  John,  v,  4. 

58  De  Spiritu  S.,  i,  88,  77.     Cf.  De  Mysteriis,  19 :     "  Aqua  non 
mundat  sine  Spiritu."    That  explanation  of  the  efficacy  of  Bap 
tism  is  borrowed   from   St.   Basil,  whom    St.   Ambrose   follows 
step  by  step  in  his  treatise  De  Spiritu  Sancto. 

69  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  i,  88 ;  De  Mysteriis,  14 :  "  Elementum  com 
mune  sine  ullo  sacramenti  effectu." 

60 "  Non  ergo  solis  corporis  tui  credas  oculis :  magis  videtur 
quod  non  videtur;  quia  istud  temporale,  illud  aeternum  aspicitur, 
quod  oculis  non  comprehenditur,  animo  autem  ac  mente  cernitur." 
De  Mysteriis,  15,  20,  21. 

61  In  Lucam,  ii,  79 :    "  Nam  cum  ex  duabus  naturis  homo,  id 


20  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

The  external  order  falling  under  our  senses,  is 
clearly  distinguished  from  the  intelligible  order,  of 
which  it  is  the  symbol.  Our  readers  will  recognize 
here  the  influence  of  Greek  thought  upon  St.  Am 
brose. 

The  symbolism  of  each  one  of  the  ceremonies 
which  accompany  Baptism,  is  explained  by  the  Bishop 
of  Milan  in  his  treatise  "  De  Mysteriis."  The  im 
mersion  is  the  image  of  death  to  sin  buried  in  the 
waters.62  The  unction  of  Confirmation  recalls  the 
unction  formerly  traced  upon  Aaron's  head  and  beard ; 
it  typifies  the  spiritual  unction  by  which  we  are 
anointed  members  of  the  kingdom  of  God  and  priests. 
The  washing  of  the  feet,  a  ceremony  peculiar  to  the 
Church  of  Milan,  is  the  sign  of  the  cleansing  from  the 
hereditary  guilt.  The  white  garments  put  on  by  the 
neophytes  after  their  Baptism  are  symbolical  of  re 
stored  innocence.63 

The  sacramental  symbolism  of  the  Eucharist  is 
stated  by  St.  Ambrose  with  a  remarkable  precision, 
owing  to  his  already  most  explicit  doctrine  of  the  Eu- 
charistic  transubstantiation.  The  "  divine  consecra 
tion  "  of  the  Eucharist,  produced  "  by  the  very  words 
of  Christ,"  "  changes  the  nature  "  of  bread  and  wine 
and  "  makes  it  the  sacrament  of  our  Savior's  Body 
and  Blood."  When  we  contemplate  that  mystery,  even 
less  than  for  Baptism  ought  we  to  stop  at  what  is  seen. 
What  is  seen  is  the  sacrament  of  Christ's  Body  and 
Blood,  that  is  to  say,  the  sign,  the  symbol  under  which 

est,  ex  anima  subsistat  et  corpore,  visibile  per  visibilia,  invisibile 
per  invisibile  mysterium  consecratur.  Aqua  enim  corpus  abluitur, 
spiritu  animae  delicta  mundantur." 

62  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  I,  76. 

63  De  Mysteriis,  30,  32,  34. 


CONCEPT  OF  SYMBOLISM  21 

Christ's  Body  and  Blood  are  really  present :  "  Forte 
dicas:  aliud  video,  quomodo  tu  mihi  asseris  quod 
Christi  corpus  accipiam  ?  .  .  .  Probemus  non  hoc 
esse  quod  natura  formavit,  sed  quod  benedictio  con- 
secravit.  .  .  .  Quod  si  tantum  valuit  humana  bene 
dictio,  ut  naturam  converteret  (j  Reg.,  xviii,  38), 
quid  dicimus  de  ipsa  consecratione  divina,  ubi  verba 
ipsa  Domini  Salvatoris  operantur?  Nam  sacramen- 
tum  istud  quod  accipis,  Christi  sermone  conficitur. 
.  .  .  Ante  benedictionem  verborum  coelestium  alia 
species  nominatur,  post  consecrationem  corpus  signifi- 
catur."  C4  Thus  we  find  a  conception  of  Encharistic 
symbolism,  as  perfect  as  that  which  we  met  in  the 
Cateckeses  of  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem.65 


Thus  it  is  seen  that  the  elaboration  of  the  concept 
of  a  sacrament  as  an  efficacious  symbol  was  almost 
completed  at  the  end  of  the  period  previous  to  St. 
Augustine.  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist  are  looked 
upon  as  symbols,  which  manifest  the  unseen  realities 
they  produce  or  contain.  They  are  made  up  of  two 
parts:  the  one,  external  and  visible,  called  <™/A/3oAov, 
TVTTOS,  by  the  Greeks,  and  Sacramentum,  by  the  Lat 
ins;  the  other,  unseen,  which  is  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  producing  baptismal  regeneration,  or 
Christ's  Body  and  Blood.  The  same  conception  is  ap 
plied,  to  some  extent,  to  the  rite  of  Confirmation.  As 
to  the  symbolism  of  Marriage,  in  their  commentaries 
on  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  the  Fathers  added 
nothing  to  what  St.  Paul  had  already  said  on  the  sub- 

64  De  Mysteriis,  50,  52,  54. 

65  The  sacramental  symbolism  of  the  author  of  De  Sacramentis 
is  identical  with  that  of  St.  Ambrose. 


22  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

ject.66  When  they  speak  of  the  other  Sacraments, 
the  Fathers  mention  their  effects,  without  making  use 
of  the  notion  of  efficacious  symbol.  Sacramental  sym 
bolism  was  applied  later  on  to  Ordination  by  St.  Au 
gustine,67  to  the  anointing  of  the  sick  by  Pope  Inno 
cent  I,68  and  to  Penance  chiefly  by  St.  Peter  Damian.69 
But  before  St.  Augustine,  nobody  ever  thought  of 
abstracting,  as  it  were,  the  concept  of  efficacious  sym 
bol,  in  order  to  consider  it  by  itself  and  frame  its  the 
ory.  Hence,  to  show  its  historical  development,  we 
have  been  obliged  to  expose  the  doctrine  of  the  Fathers 
concerning  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  that  doctrine 
being  conceived  in  direct  dependence  on  the  idea  of 
efficacious  symbol.  St.  Augustine  was  the  first  for 
mally  to  distinguish,  by  opposing  one  to  the  other,  the 
visible  part  of  the  sacrament  —  the  sacramentum — 
and  its  unseen  part  —  the  virtus  sacramenti.70  This 
clear  distinction  enabled  him  to  sketch  a  definition 
properly  so  called  of  a  sacrament. 

§  II.     The  Augustinian  Definition  of  a  Sacrament. 

Two  conceptions  of  a  sacrament  are  met  with  in 
St.  Augustine:  the  one  quite  general  and  applied  in 
discriminately  to  any  kind  of  rite,  is  that  of  sacra 
ment  as  "  a  mere  sign;  "  the  other,  more  precise,  and 
applied  exclusively  to  certain  rites,  particularly  to  the 

66  Cf.  ST.  JOHN  CHRYSOS.,  In  Eph.  horn,  xx,  4;  S.  AMBROS.,  In 
Epist.,  ad  Eph.,  v. 

67  De  Bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2,  etc. 

68  Epist.    ad   Decentium,  8 ;    DENZINGER,   Enchiridion   Symbo- 
lorum  et  Definitionum,  n.  61   (new  ed.,  n.  99). 

69  Sermo  Ixix ;  P.L.,  cxliv,  901. 

70  In  Joan.,  tract,   xxvi,   n:    "  Aliud  est   sacramentum,  aliud 
virtus  sacramenti/' 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DEFINITION        23 

Eucharist  and  to  Baptism,  is  that  of  sacrament  as  a 
"  sign  with  which  a  gift,  an  objective  effect  is  con 
nected."  We  begin  with  the  latter. 


In  its  most  restricted  meaning,  the  Augustinian  sac 
rament  is  a  sacred  sign  which  calls  forth  the  idea  of  a 
religious  thing,  of  which  it  is  the  image;  that  sign  is 
a  material  element;  with  that  sign  is  connected  the 
spiritual  gift  which  is  signified  and  is  destined  to 
sanctify  man;  the  efficient  cause  of  a  sacrament,  viz., 
that  which  makes  the  material  element  the  sign  of  a 
spiritual  reality,  and  joins  to  that  element  the  gift 
of  the  spiritual  reality  thus  signified,  is  the  formula  - 
of  blessing  used  by  the  minister;  finally  the  institutor  ... 
of  the  Sacraments  is  Jesus  Christ.  Thus  we  have 
the  four  essential  ideas  of  St.  Augustine's  definition; 
not  all  of  them  are  peculiar  to  the  holy  Doctor;  some 
are  borrowed  from  previous  authors,  especially  from 
St.  Ambrose. 

It  is  when  he  explains  the  first  idea,  that  St.  Augus 
tine  shows  most  originality.  There  is  in  a  sacrament, 
a  very  close  relation  of  meaning  between  the  sacra 
mental  rite  and  its  effects,  between  the  baptismal  ablu 
tion,  for  instance,  and  the  cleansing  of  the  soul.  St. 
Augustine  stated  with  wonderful  accuracy  this  rela 
tion  of  signification  by  means  of  the  concept  of  sign.  • 
This  concept  the  Bishop  of  Hippo  owes  to  the  Alex 
andrians;  from  them  he  borrowed  also  a  complete 
theory  of  the  sign,  which  he  set  forth  in  two  of  his 
works,  De  Doctrina  Christiana™*  and  De  Magistro. 
Here  we  see  what  services  philosophy  may  render  to 

70a-Lib.  II. 


24  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

dogma,  by  supplying  ecclesiastical  writers  with  con 
cepts  that  may  help  them  to  express  with  more  pre 
cision  the  traditional  doctrine. 

The  sign,  says  St.  Augustine,  is  an  object,  the  ex 
ternal  appearances  of  which  suggest  the  idea  of  an 
other  object;71  the  footsteps  of  an  animal  are  a  sign 
of  its  passage,  smoke  is  a  sign  of  fire,  the  cry  of  a 
living  being  tells  what  the  latter  wishes,  the  sound  of 
a  trumpet  makes  known  the  movement  of  an  army. 
The  most  expressive  signs  are  words  by  which  we 
manifest  the  sentiments  of  our  souls.  The  Sacra 
ments  are  signs  because  they  are  material  and  sensible 
objects, —  bread,  wine,  water,  for  instance,  which  bring 
before  our  minds  spiritual  and  religious  objects: 
"  Ista  [panis  et  calix] ,  f ratres,  ideo  dicuntur  sacra- 
menta,  quia  in  eis  aliud  videtur,  aliud  intelligitur. 
Quod  videtur,  speciem  habet  corporalem,  quod  intelli 
gitur,  fructum  habet  spiritualem."  72  The  bodily  ablu 
tion  in  Baptism  is  a  visible  sign  of  what  takes  place  in 
the  soul :  "  Aqua  sacramenti  visibilis  est 
abluit  corpus,  et  significat  quod  fit  in  anima."  73 

But  that  the  relation  existing  in  the  Sacraments, 
between  the  sensible  sign  and  the  signified  thing,  may 
be  still  closer,  it  must  be  a  relation  of  similitude;  the 
sign  must  be  the  image  of  the  signified  thing.  "  Si 
enim  sacramenta  quamdam  similitudinem  earum  re- 
rum  quarum  sacramenta  sunt,  non  haberent,  sacra 
menta  non  essent." 74  Hence  the  sacramental  signs 

71  De  Doct.  Christ.,  i,  i,  4:     "  Signum  est  res  praeter  speciem 
quam  ingerit  sensibus,  aliud  aliquid  ex  se  faciens  in  cogitationem 
venire."    This  is  the  definition  of  a  sign  that  has  already  been 
explained. 

72  Sermo  cclxxii.     Cf.  In  Joan.,  xxvi,  II. 

73  In  Epist.  Joan.,  ad  Parth.,  vi,  n. 

74  Epist.  xcviii,  7. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DEFINITION       25 

belong  to  the  category  of  natural  signs  (signa  natu- 
ralia),  as  well  as  that  of  conventional  signs  (signa 
data),  since  the  relation  which  unites  the  sign  with 
the  signified  thing,  rests  as  much  on  the  nature  of 
things  as  on  a  divine  conception.75  Thus  it  is  that 
chrism  is  the  visible  sign  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (Sacra- 
mentum  Spiritus  Sancti),  for  oil  keeps  up  fire.  Now 
the  Holy  Ghost  came  down  upon  the  Apostles  in  the 
shape  of  tongues  of  fire ;  it  is  He  too  who  after  the 
baptism  of  neophytes,  bakes  them  in  the  flames  of 
charity,  and  makes  of  them  that  bread  which  is 
Christ's  mystical  body.76 

Any  sign  that  signifies  a  spiritual  and  religious  ob 
ject  is  then  a  "  sacramentum,"  for  according  to  St. 
Augustine,  the  religious  significance  of  the  sign  is  es 
sential  to  the  sacrament.  A  profane  sign  which  calls 
up  the  idea  of  a  profane  thing,  is  not,  and  must  not  be 
called  a  sacrament.  "  Signa  cum  ad  res  divinas  per 
tinent  sacramenta  appellantur." 77  Consequently  a 
sacrament  is  defined  a  sacred  sign,78  that  is  to  say, 
a  sign  which  brings  before  the  mind  the  idea  of  a  re 
ligious  thing,  and  which  is  also  its  image. 

This  first  part  of  the  definition  of  the  "  sacramen 
tum  "  will  become  classical.  All  the  authors  who 
come  after  St.  Augustine  will  define  a  sacrament: 
"  Signum  sacrum,"  or  again  "  Signum  rei  sacrae ; " 
and,  following  in  the  footsteps  of  St.  Thomas,  modern 
theologians  remark  that  a  sacrament  belongs  to  the 
category  of  signs,  "  Sacramentum  est  in  genere  sig- 

75  Cf.  De  Doctrina  Christiana,  ii,  2,  3. 
>J9Sermo  ccxxvii. 

77  Epist.  cxxxviii,  7. 

78  De  Civitate  Dei,  x,   5.    Sacramentum,   id   est   sacrum   sig- 
num. 


26  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

ni."  79  Yet  it  is  not  a  mere  sign,  it  is  an  efficacious 
sign,  which  produces  what  it  signifies.  The  Augus- 
tinian  definition  which  is  quite  precise,  when  it  says 
that  a  sacrament  is  a  sign,  is  rather  less  so  as  regards 
the  efficacy  of  that  sign. 

If  St.  Augustine  did  not  state  with  full  precision 
the  efficacy  of  the  sacramental  sign,  he  did  not  teach 
either  that  a  sacrament  is  a  mere  sign,  void  of  all 
reality.  Had  he  done  so,  he  would  have  set  himself  in 
opposition  to  the  traditional  doctrine  of  his  predeces 
sors.  No,  between  the  sign  and  the  signified  object 
there  is  more  than  a  mere  relation  of  meaning.  An 
objective  gift  is  joined  to  the  sign;  that  gift  is  received 
by  the  subject  of  the  sacrament  when  he  is  properly 
disposed,  and  that  gift  is  precisely  what  is  signified  by 
the  sign;  it  is  the  "  virtus/'  the  "  res  sacramenti."  The 
Eucharistic  bread  and  wine  are  "  visible  food; "  those 
who  feed  on  it,  whether  adults  or  infants,  receive  in 
themselves  "  a  spiritual  fruit,"  which  is  life.80  The 
gift  of  Baptism  is  the  spiritual  and  unseen  cleansing 
of  the  soul,  figured  by  the  bodily  ablution.81  It  is, 
in  other  words,  the  regeneration  of  the  soul :  "  Sa- 
cramentum  autem  baptismi  profecto  sacramentum  re- 
generationis  est."  82  The  virtue  of  the  sacrament  of 
chrism  is  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  is  imparted  to  the 
soul,  and  produces  in  it  love.83  That  gift  which  is 
bound  up  with  the  sacrament,  and  varies  according 
to  the  nature  of  the  rite,  is,  after  all,  nothing  else  than 

79  ST.  THOM.,  Summ.  Theol,  3a  p.,  quaest.  60,  art.  i. 

80  In  Joan.,  tract,  xxvi,  n;  xxvii,  5;  Sermo  clxxiv,  7. 

81  Quaest.  in  Heptat.,  iv,  xxiii. 

82  De  peccat.  mentis  et  rem.,  ii,  43. 

83  In  Epist.  Joan,  ad  Parthos,  tract,  vi,  10. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DEFINITION        27 

grace,  "  gratia,  quae  sacramentorum  virtus  est." 84 
The  distinction  between  the  "  sacramentum  "  and 
the  gift  connected  with  it,  is  such  that  sometimes  the 
two  may  be  completely  separated.  We  may  have  the 
"  sacramentum  "  without  the  "  virtus  sacramenti  " ; 
this  occurs,  when  the  subject  is  improperly  disposed. 
Heretics  and  schismatics  administer  the  Sacraments, 
but  as  they  are  outside  the  unity,  and  therefore  out 
side  the  sphere  of  action  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  can 
not  have  the  spiritual  fruit  of  those  Sacraments.85 
They  may  have  indeed  the  visible  sacrament  of  the 
chrism,  which  may  exist  in  the  just  for  their  salva 
tion,  and  in  the  wicked  for  their  condemnation;  they 
have  not  the  unseen  unction  of  charity,  which  exists 
only  in  the  just.86  Simon  the  magician  received  Bap 
tism,  the  "  sacrament  of  piety;  "  but  he  had  only  the 
"  form  of  piety,"  he  had  not  its  "  virtue."  87 

According  to  St.  Augustine,  a  spiritual  gift  is  joined 
with  the  sacramental  sign;  this  gift  is  objective;  it  is 
not  created  by  the  faith  of  the  subject,  since  children 
receive  it,88  and  yet  are  unable  to  make  acts  of  faith. 
Some  dispositions  however  are  required  in  an  adult, 
that  he  may  share  in  the  "  virtus  sacramenti." 

But  what  is  the  nature  of  the  bond  which  unites 
the  spiritual  gift  with  the  sacramental  rite?  Is  it  a 
bond  of  causality  or  of  mere  concomitance  ?  To  this 
St.  Augustine  does  not  give  a  precise  answer.  This 
question  is  beyond  his  horizon  altogether.  What  he 
had  directly  in  view,  is  the  fact  of  the  union  of  the 

84  Enarr.  in  Psalm,  Ixxvii,  2. 
85Sermo  Ixxi,  32. 

86  Contr.  Hit.  Petil,  ii,  239. 

87  Contra  Faust.,  xix,  cap.  xii. 
86Epist.  xcviii,  10;  Sermo  clxxivt  7. 


28  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

sacramental  sign  with  the  spiritual  gift  which  it  sig 
nifies.  When  the  minister  performs  the  external  rite, 
Christ  or  the  Holy  Ghost  produces  infallibly  in  the 
soul  of  the  subject,  grace  and  other  effects  of  the  Sac 
raments  :  "  Ecce  quia  Christus  etiam  ipso  lavacro 
aquae  in  verbo  ubi  ministri  corporaliter  videntur  ope- 
rari,  ipse  abluit,  ipse  mundat.  Nemo  ergo  sibi  arro- 
get  quod  Dei  est."  89  The  divine  sanctifying  action 
always  accompanies  the  conferring  of  the  sacrament, 
unless  the  subject  is  not  properly  disposed : 

"  Dominus  [sanctificat]  invisibili  gratia  per  Spiritum 
Sanctum,  ubi  est  totus  fructus  etiam  visibilium  sacramen- 
torum.  Nam  sine  ista  sanctificatione  invisibilis  gratiae,  visi- 
bilia  sacramenta  quid  prosunt?  .  .  .  Nihil  quippe  pro- 
fuit  Simoni  mago  visibilis  baptismus,  cui  sanctificatio  in 
visibilis  defuit."  90 

The  sanctification  that  takes  place  in  the  soul  when  the 
minister  performs  the  rite  is  so  truly  the  result  of  the 
divine  action,  that  St.  Augustine  looks  upon  the  sacra 
ment  as  the  work  of  Christ  himself,  acting  through  His 
Church,  and  sanctifying  the  faithful.91  The  nature 
of  the  bond  which  unites  the  spiritual  gift  to  the  sacra 
mental  rite  is  not,  then,  very  clearly  stated  in  the 
Augustinian  definition.  Mediaeval  theologians  will 
attempt  to  do  so,  by  affirming  that  this  bond  is  one 
of  causality. 

89  Contr.  litt.  Petil.,  iii,  59.  An  analogous  idea  is  expressed  in 
Epist.  xcviii,  2.  "Aqua  igitur  exhibens  forinsecus  sacramentum 
gratiae,  et  Spiritus  operans  intrinsecus  beneficium  gratiae,  solvens 
vinculum  culpae,  reconcilians  bonum  naturae,  regenerant  hominem 
in  uno  Christo,  ex  uno  Adamo  generatum." 

^Quaest,  in  Heptat.,  lib.  iii,  cap.  84. 

91  The  Augustinian  notion  of  a  sacrament  will  be  fully  treated 
in  the  3d.  chapter. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DEFINITION       29 

St.  Augustine's  teaching  about  the  efficient  cause  of 
the  sacrament  is  the  same  as  that  of  St.  Ambrose  and 
of  St.  Cyprian.  The  priest's  blessing  makes  the  sac 
rament,  viz.  imparts  to  the  material  element  its  sac 
ramental  signification,  and  connects  with  that  material 
element  an  objective  spiritual  gift. 

This  action  of  the  word  in  the  making  of  the  sacra 
mental  sign  is  considered  by  St.  Augustine  as  essen 
tial: 

"  Detrahe  verbum,  et  quid  est  aqua  nisi  aqua  ?  Accedit 
verbum  ad  elementum  et  fit  sacramentum,  etiam  ipsum  tan- 
quam  visibile  verbum."92 

The  doctrine  is  accounted  for  by  the  Augustinian 
theory  of  signs,  exposed  in  the  De  Doctrina  Chris 
tiana.^  Men  manifest  their  thoughts  and  feelings 
by  two  kinds  of  signs:  gestures  and  words.  But  the 
more  expressive  signs  are  words,  for,  after  all,  ges 
tures  are  simply  words  made  visible,  "  visibilia  ver- 
ba."  Hence  a  material  element,  that  has  received  the 
word  of  blessing,  becomes  the  sensible  sign  of  the 
spiritual  object  expressed  by  the  word ;  it  becomes  the 
visible  word,  "  visibile  verbum,"  which  expresses  the 
spiritual  object.  It  is  the  word  of  blessing  that  makes 
water  a  "  sacramentum,"  that  is  to  say,  a  sign  of  the 
spiritual  cleansing  of  the  soul;  it  is  also  the  word  of 
sanctification  that  makes  bread  and  wine  the  "sacra 
mentum  "  of  Christ's  Body  and  Blood.94 

As  we  have  seen,  an  objective  spiritual  gift  is 
united  with  the  sacramental  sign;  it  is  also  the  word 

92  In  Joan.,  tract.  Ixxx,  3. 
&3ii,  4.    Cf.  Contr.  Faust.,  xix,  c.  16. 

84  Contra  Faust.,  xx,  13 ;  Sermo  ccxxxiv,  12.  Cf.  P.  BATIFFOL, 
L'Eucharistie,  pp.  237  and  ss. 


30  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

of  blessing  that  brings  about  this  union  and  thus  consti 
tutes  the  sacrament  in  all  its  reality.  Baptismal 
water  could  not  purify,  unless  it  had  been  "  conse 
crated  "  by  the  sign  of  the  cross,  in  the  name  of 
Christ,95  and  unless  it  was  accompanied  by  the  words 
of  the  Gospel: 

"  Unde  ista  tanta  virtus  aquae,  ut  corpus  tangat  et  cor 
abluat,  nisi  faciente  verbo:  non  quia  dicitur  sed  quia  credi- 
tur?  Nam  et  in  ipso  verbo,  aliud  est  sonus  transiens,  aliud 
virtus  manens."  96 

That  action  of  the  word  in  the  making  of  the  sacra 
ment  is  objective,  since  it  unites  the  spiritual  gift  to 
the  water  of  Baptism,  to  the  oil  of  Confirmation,  and 
to  the  Eucharistic  bread  and  wine. 

Hence  St.  Augustine's  teaching  regarding  the  ef 
ficient  cause  of  the  sacrament  is  the  same  teaching  we 
have  met  already  in  St.  Ambrose  and  in  St.  Cyprian. 
However,  the  adversary  of  Donatism  carefully  ab 
stains  from  subordinating,  as  the  adversary  of  Pope 
St.  Stephen  had  done,  the  value  of  the  minister's 
blessing  to  his  faith  or  sanctity.  The  sacrament  holds 
its  value  from  God.  Therefore,  whatever  may  be  the 
state  of  the  minister's  soul,  the  blessing  he  utters  is 
valid : 

"  Si  ergo  ad  hoc  valet  quod  dictum  est  in  Evangelic,  Deus 
peccatorem  non  audit  (Joan.,  IX,  31),  ut  per  peccatorem 
sacramenta  non  celebrentur;  quomodo  exaudit  homicidam 
deprecantem,  vel  super  aquam  baptismi,  vel  super  oleum,  vel 

95  Sermo   ccclii,   3 :     Sed  quia  baptismus,   id  est,   salutis   aqua 
non   est   salutis,  nisi   Christi  nomine  consecrata,  qui   pro  nobis 
sanguinem   fudit,  cruce  ipsius  aqua  signatur. 

96  In  Joan.,  tract.  Ixxx,  3.     Cf.  De  Bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  vii,  102. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DEFINITION        31 

super  eucharistiam,  vel  super  capita  eorum  quibus  manus 
imponitur?  Quae  omnia  tamen  et  fiunt  et  valent  etiam  per 
homicidas,  id  est  per  eos  qui  oderunt  fratres,  etiam  in  ipsa 
intus  Ecclesia."  97 

Finally,  it  is  in  virtue  of  the  will  of  Christ,  who 
instituted  the  Sacraments,  that  the  minister's  word 
can  make  a  material  object  an  efficacious  sacramental 
sign.  The  divine  institution  is  an  essential  element 
of  the  Augustinian  definition  of  the  sacrament  in  the 
restricted  meaning.  But,  as  this  most  comprehensive 
definition  applies  chiefly  to  Baptism  and  to  the  Eu 
charist,  it  is  also  on  the  divine  institution  of  these 
two  Sacraments  that  St.  Augustine  insists  most 
strongly : 

"  Quaedam  pauca  [signa]  .  .  .  ipse  Dominus  et  apos- 
tolica  tradidit  disciplina,  sicuti  est  baptismi  sacramentum  et 
celebratio  corporis  et  sanguinis  Domini."  98 

When  He  established  the  Sacraments,  Christ  in 
tended  to  sanctify  men  and  to  create  means  of  union, 
social  bonds,  between  the  members  of  the  Church : 

"  [Christus]  sacramentis  numero  paucissimis,  observatione 
facillimis,  significatione  praestantissimis,  societatem  novi 
populi  colligavit,  sicuti  est  baptismus  Trinitatis  nomine  con- 
secratus,  communicatio  corporis  et  sanguinis  ipsius  et  si  quid 
aliud  in  Scripturis  canonicis  commendatur."  " 

For  no  religion,  true  or  false,  can  stand  without  rally 
ing  signs.1  That  teaching  of  St.  Augustine  concern- 

97  De  Bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  v,  28;  Cf.  iii,  15. 

98  De  Doctrina  Christ.,  iii,  13.     Cf.  Enarr.  in  psalm.  Ixxxiii,  2. 

99  Epist.  liv,  i ;  cf .  In  Joan.,  tr.  cxx,  2. 
1  Contr.  Faust.,  xix,  n. 


32  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

ing  the  social  function  of  the  Sacraments  has  become 
classical. 

In  the  restricted  sense,  a  sacrament  then  is  a  ma 
terial  sign  of  a  spiritual  object  of  which  it  is  the 
image,  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  with  which  is 
connected,  by  the  formula  of  the  minister's  blessing, 
the  spiritual  object  signified,  which  is  destined  to 
sanctify  men.2 

This  definition  is  nowhere  formulated  in  St.  Au 
gustine's  writings;  3  the  ideas  of  which  it  is  made  up 
are  developed  here  and  there,  and  the  historian  who 
brings  them  together  in  a  synthesis  is  exposed  to  the 
risk  of  outrunning  the  thought  of  the  Bishop  of  Hip 
po.  St.  Augustine  actually  formulated  only  the  first 
part,  the  generic  term  of  the  definition :  a  Sacrament 
is  a  sacred  sign  of  a  spiritual  object.4  Especially 
when  speaking  of  Baptism  and  of  the  Eucharist,  he 
did  not  pass  by  its  specific  element,  viz.  the  efficacy 
of  that  sign.  But  he  did  not  insert  it  in  his  formula ; 
and  this  will  not  be  done  before  the  I2th.  century. 
This  accounts  for  the  fact  that  St.  Augustine  and 
all  the  ecclesiastical  writers,  until  Peter  Lombard,  give 
the  name  "  sacramentum  "  indiscriminately  to  all  kinds 

of  rites. 

* 
*  * 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  that  most  general  conception  of 
a  sacrament  as  a  mere  sign  is  often  met  with  in  St. 

2  Cf.  HARNACK,  History  of  Dogma,  vol.  5,  pp.  156-162. 

3  The   formula  which  comes  the  nearest  to  it  is  that  of  the 
letter   to   Januarius,    Epist.    lv,    2:     Sacramentum    est   autem   in 
aliqua  celebratione,  cum  rei  gestae  commemoratio  ita  fit,  ut  aliquid 
etiam  significari  intelligatur,  quod  sancte  accipiendum  est. 

4  De  Civitate  Dei,  x,  5. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DEFINITION       33 

Augustine's  writings.  It  is  applied  to  all  religious 
rites,  which  are,  in  some  way  or  other,  the  signs  of  a 
spiritual  reality.5  The  special  character  of  a  sacra 
ment  as  a  mere  sign,  lies  precisely  in  signifying  a 
spiritual  reality  which  it  does  not  produce:  in  other 
words,  in  being  an  ineffective  symbol.  Hence  the  dif 
ference  which  distinguishes  it  from  a  sacrament  in 
the  restricted  sense,  is  important.  Except  circum 
cision,6  the  Mosaic  rites  did  not  impart  salvation,  they 
merely  promised  it ; 7  they  were  intended  to  announce 
Christ  and  to  remind  the  Jews  of  the  divine  promises ;  8 
they  were  then,  figurative  signs,  "  sacramenta  "  of  the 
Christian  realities,  and  nothing  more. 

It  is  also  in  this  rather  impoverished  sense  that  St. 
Augustine  calls  Sacraments  the  rites  pertaining  to 
Catechumens,  ajid  the  ceremonies  preparatory  to  Bap 
tism.  The  blessed  salt  which  Catechumens  used  to 
receive  in  Africa  all  through  the  year,  is  a  "  sacra- 
mentum."  That  salt  has  become,  through  the  priest's 
blessing,  the  sign  of  a  religious  thing,  namely  of  Chris 
tian  doctrine,  a  true  moral  seasoning  of  which  salt  is 
the  image.9  For  this  reason,  that  salt  is  something 
more  holy  than  ordinary  food:  it  is  a  sacred  symbol.10 
In  a  similar  sense,  St.  Augustine  applies  the  term  Sac 
raments  to  the  rites  of  the  "  traditio  "  of  the  Creed 

5  In  the  East,  about  the  end  of  the  sth.   century,  the  word 
fivarripLov  had  likewise  a  most  extensive  and  rather  undetermined 
meaning.    It   was   used   to   designate   any   sacred   and   symbolic 
ceremony.     Cf.    for    instance,    the    Ecclesiastical    Hierarchy    by 
Pseudo-Dionysius. 

6  Epist.  clxxxvii,  34. 

7  Enarr.  in  Psal.  Ixxiii,  2. 
sContr.  Faust.,  xix,  n,  12,  13. 

9  Catech.  rud.,  50. 

10  De  peccat.  merit.,  ii,  42. 


34  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

and  the  Lord's  Prayer,11  as  well  as  to  the  exorcisms 
made  over  the  candidates  for  Baptism.12  Likewise 
Christian  marriage  is  looked  upon  by  St.  Augustine, 
although  with  some  important  shades  of  difference,  as 
a  "  sacramentum,"  because,  inasmuch  as  it  signifies  and 
figures  the  union  of  Christ  with  His  Church,13  it  is 
the  symbol  of  a  spiritual  and  religious  reality. 

§  III.     The  Definition  of  a  Sacrament  according  to  Mediaeval 

writers. 

The  attention  of  ecclesiastical  writers,  chiefly  after 
the  Qth.  century,  was  specially  drawn  to  the  study  of 
the  Sacraments.  The  need  made  itself  felt  of  setting 
forth,  in  synthetic  treatises,  both  the  Christian  doc 
trine  which  must  be  taught,  and  the  liturgical  rules 
which  are  to  be  followed  in  administering  the  Sacra 
ments.14  Moreover,  St.  Augustine  had  settled  the 
doctrine  of  sin  and  of  salvation;  and  the  subsequent 
writers  quite  naturally  took  up  specially  the  means 
appointed  for  the  remission  of  sins  and  for  salvation. 
In  the  beginning  of  the  I2th.  century,  Abelard  di 
vides  the  Introductio  ad  Theologiam  and  the  Sic  et 
Non  into  three  parts,  corresponding  to  the  three  means 
necessary  for  salvation :  "  Tria  sunt,  ut  arbitror,  in 
quibus  humanae  salutis  summa  consistit,  fides  vide 
licet,  charitas  et  sacramentum."  15  The  "  Sententiae  " 
of  Roland  begins  in  the  same  way.16  According  to 

11  Sermo  ccxxviii,  3. 

12  Sermo  ccxxvii. 

13  De  bono  conjug.,  21. 

14  The  realization  of  this  need  led  Rabanus  Maurus  to  com 
pose  his  treatise  De  Clericorum  Institution*. 

is  Introd.  ad  Theol  lib.  i,  i ;  P.L.,  clxxviii,  981. 

16  GIETL,  Die  Sentensen  Rolands,  Freiburg  im  B.  1891,  p,  i. 


MEDLEY AL  WRITERS  35 

Hugh  of  St.  Victor,17  faith,  the  sacraments  of  faith, 
and  good  works  are  also  the  three  means  necessary 
for  salvation.  Is  it  any  wonder,  then,  that  during 
the  first  part  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Sacraments  progressed,  and  that  particularly  the  defi 
nition  of  a  sacrament  was  improved? 


The  notion  of  a  sacrament,  proposed  by  St.  Isidore 
of  Seville,18  deserves  a  special  mention;  it  had  a  con 
siderable  success,  since,  until  the  nth.  century,  it  was 
reproduced  by  the  greater  number  of  ecclesiastical 
writers. 

St.  Isidore  quotes  the  definition  given  by  St.  Augus 
tine  in  his  letter  to  Januarius  (Epist.  Iv,  2)  : 

"  Sacramentum  est  in  aliqua  celebratione,  cum  res  gesta 
ita  fit  ut  aliquid  significare  intelligatur,  quod  sancte  accipien- 
dum  est." 

But,  instead  of  explaining  that  formula  by  means  of 
the  Augustinian  theory  of  a  sacrament,  St.  Isidore, 
faithful  to  the  method  followed  in  his  "  Etymologies," 
appeals  to  the  etymology  of  the  word  "  sacramentum." 
"  Sacramentum,"  he  says,  is  derived  from  "  secre- 
tum  "  :  it  is  the  exact  synonym  of  "  mysterium  "  among 
the  Greeks.  Hence  St.  Isidore  does  not  define  a  sac 
rament  dependently  on  the  idea  of  sign,  but  dependent- 
ly  on  that  of  secret.  Baptism,  the  chrism,  the  Sacra 
ment  of  Christ's  Body  and  Blood  are  called  Sacra 
ments,  because,  under  the  cover  of  material  bodies, 
there  is  hidden  the  divine  action,  which  produces  in 
visibly  the  effects  proper  to  those  Sacraments: 

17  De  Sacramentis,  lib.  i,  pars  ix,  cap.  viii;  P.L.,  clxxvi,  317. 

18  Etymol.,  lib.  vi,  cap.  xix,  39  sq. ;  P.L.,  Ixxxii,  255. 

4 


36  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

"  Sunt  autem  sacramenta  baptismus  et  chrisma,  corpus  et 
sanguis.  Quae  ob  id  sacramenta  dicimtur,  quia  sub  tegu- 
mento  corporalium  rerum  virtus  divina  secretius  salutem 
eorumdem  sacramentorum  operatur,  unde  et  a  secretis  virtu- 
tibus,  vel  a  sacris  sacramenta  dicuntur.  Quae  ideo  fructuose 
penes  Ecclesiam  fiunt,  quia  sanctus  in  ea  manens  Spiritus 
eorumdem  sacramentorum  latenter  operatur  effectum." 19 

Thus  a  sacrament  is  like  a  mystery : 20  its  special 
i  character  consists  in  concealing,  under  the  appearances 
of  a  material  object,  the  action  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
^.. which  accomplishes  in  secret  the  salvation  of  the  soul. 
That  eagerness  with  which  St.  Isidore  had  recourse 
to  etymology  in  order  to  define  a  sacrament,  resulted, 
then,  in  throwing  the  idea  of  sign  into  the  back 
ground.  This  result  was  not  fortunate.  As  we  will 
see  later  on,  whenever  the  definition  departed  from 
the  idea  of  sign,  it  lost  something  of  its  precision ;  this 
is  proved  by  the  Isidorian  definition.  All  the  authors 
of  the  Qth,  century  adopted  it.21  Paschasius  Rad- 
bert 22  and  Ratramnus  23  used  it  to  set  forth  their 
Eucharistic  doctrine.  Moreover,  Paschasius  Radbert 
applied  it  to  the  Incarnation,  which  is  a  "  magnum 
quoddam  sacramentum,"  because,  in  Christ's  visible 
humanity,  the  divinity  acted  interiorly,  in  secret.24 
Somewhat  later,  not  only  the  Incarnation,  but  all  the 
mysteries  of  the  Catholic  faith  will  be  called  Sacra 
ments:  a  confusion  which  impeded  the  development 

19  EtymoL,  Ibid.    Cf .  ST.  GREG.  THE  GR.,  In  I  Regum,  lib.  vi,  3. 

20  "  Unde  et  graece  mysterium  dicitur  quod  secretum  et  recon- 
ditam  habeat  dispositionem." 

21RABANus  MAURUS,  De  Instit.  Cleric,,  lib.  I,  cap.  xxiv;  P.L., 
cvii,  309. 

22 De  Corpore  et  Sang.    Domini,  cap.  in;  P.L.,  cxx,  1275. 

23  De  Corpore  et  Sang.    Domini,  xlv,  and  ff. ;  P.L.,  cxxi,  116. 

24  PASCHASIUS  RADBERT,  De  Corp.  et  Sang.    Domini,  cap.  iii. 


MEDIEVAL  WRITERS  37 

of  the  Catholic  doctrine  concerning  the  number  of 
the  Sacraments,  and  which  originated  with  the  Isi- 
dorian  definition. 


At  the  beginning  of  the  I2th.  century,  scholars  came 
back  to  the  Augustinian  formula  :  "  Sacramentum 
est  signum  sacrum  —  signum  rei  sacrae."  Abelard  25 
contributed  to  give  currency  to  another  formula,  as 
cribed  by  Roland  2G  to  St.  Augustine  :  "  Sacramen 
tum  est  visibile  signum  invisibilis  gratiae  Dei." 
Henceforth,  that  idea  of  sign  will  be  very  seldom,  if 
ever,  lost  sight  of;  it  will  render  possible,  at  last,  the 
complete  formation  of  the  definition  of  a  sacrament. 


The  school  of  St.  Victor,  represented  by  Hugh,  be 
gan  this  final  work.  Hugh  summed  up  in  a  formula 
all  the  ideas  St.  Augustine  had  exposed  here  and  there 
in  his  works.  That  synthesis  resulted  in  the  rejection 
of  the  Isidorian  definition,  and  in  the  adoption  of  an 
other  formula  more  comprehensive  and  true. 

The  ancient  doctors,  Hugh  remarks  in  his  De  Sa- 
cramentis  27  defined  a  sacrament  :  sacrae  rei  signum; 
for  in  a  sacrament  there  is  the  visible,  exterior  sign, 
which  is  the  material  element,  and  the  spiritual,  un 
seen  grace,  signified  by  the  sign,  which  is  called  res 
sive  virtus  sacramenti.  But  that  definition  is  imper 
fect,  for  not  every  sign  is  a  sacrament:  a  word,  a 
painting  are  signs,  and  yet  nobody  says  they  are  sac- 

25  Introd.  ad  Theolog.,  lib.  I,  2.     In  Epitome,  xxviii,  a  sacra 
ment  is  thus  defined  :  sacrae  rei  signum. 

26  Sent.  RoL,  p.  155.     This  formula  is  not  found  in  the  writ 
ings  of  St.  Augustine;  it  has  been  formed  by  the  juxtaposition 
of  two  Augustinian  expressions,  see  above  p.  28. 

27  Lib.  I,  pars  ix,  cap.  2;  P.L.,  clxxvi,  317. 


38  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

raments.  Then  the  author  proposes  this  definition 
which  shows  a  considerable  improvement  on  the  pre 
vious  works : 

"  Sacramentum  est  corporate  vel  materiale  elementum 
foris  sensibiliter  propositum  ex  similitudine  repraesentans, 
et  ex  institutione  significans,  et  ex  sanctificatione  continens 
aliquam  invisibilem  et  spiritualem  gratiam." 

According  to  the  explanation  given  by  Hugh  him 
self,  this  definition  comprises  three  essential  ideas :  the 
fitness  of  the  material  or  bodily  element  to  represent, 
because  of  a  natural  similarity,  what  it  signifies;  the 
divine  institution  by  which  the  relation  of  significa 
tion  between  the  corporeal  element  and  grace  is  actual 
ly  established;  finally,  the  sanctification  by  the  priest, 
which  fills  with  grace  the  bodily  element  and  renders 
it  capable  of  imparting  that  grace  to  the  subject. 
These  are,  as  is  easily  seen,  St.  Augustine's  ideas ;  but 
they  are  expressed  with  more  precision  and  enriched 
with  new  data.  Hugh  exposes  them  as  follows : 

"  Ut  ergo  in  uno  sacramento  ea  quae  de  omnibus  dicta 
sunt  tria  haec  qualiter  sint  agnoscamus,  aquam  baptismatis 
pro  exemplo  assumimus.  Ibi  enim  est  aquae  visibile  elemen 
tum  quod  est  sacramentum,  et  inveniuntur  haec  tria  in  uno: 
repraesentatio  ex  similitudine,  significatio  ex  institutione, 
virtus  ex  sanctificatione.  Ipsa  similitude  ex  creatione  est; 
ipsa  institutio  ex  dispensatione;  ipsa  sanctificatio  ex  bene- 
dictione.  Prima  indita  per  Creatorem;  secunda  adjuncta 
per  Salvatorem;  tertia  ministrata  per  dispensatorem.  Est 
ergo  aqua  visibilis  sacramentum,  et  gratia  invisibilis,  res 
sive  virtus  sacramenti.  Habet  autem  omnis  aqua  ex  natural! 
qualitate  similitudinem  quamdam  cum  gratia  Spiritus  Sancti ; 
quia,  sicut  haec  abluit  sordes  corporum,  ita  ilia  mundat  in- 
quinamenta  animarum.  .  .  .  Venit  autem  Salvator  et  in- 
stituit  visibilem  aquam  per  ablutionem  corporum  ad  signifi- 


MEDIAEVAL  WRITERS  39 

candam  invisibilem,  per  spiritalem  gratiam,  emundationem 
animarum.  .  .  .  Sed  quia  haec  duo,  sicut  diximus,  non- 
dum  adhuc  sufficiunt  ad  perfectionem,  accedit  verbum  sanc- 
tificationis  ad  elementum  et  fit  sacramentum,  ut  sit  sacra- 
mentum  aqua  visibilis  ex  similitudine  repraesentans,  ex  in- 
stitutione  significans,  ex  sanctificatione  continens  spiritualem 
gratiam.  Ad  hunc  modum  in  caeteris  quoque  sacramentis 
haec  tria  considerare  oportet."  28 

In  order  to  become  a  sacrament,  the  material  ele 
ment  must,  then,  present  some  features  of  natural  like 
ness  with  what  it  is  called  to  signify:  water,  for  in 
stance,  is  most  apt  to  signify  the  cleansing  of  the  soul: 
a  thought  which  we  have  met  with  already  in  St. 
Augustine.  The  relation  of  signification,  between  the 
material  element  and  grace,  was  established  by  Christ, 
the  institutor  of  the  sacrament.  On  this  point  Hugh 
parts  company  with  St.  Augustine,  according  to  whom 
that  relation  of  signification  was  brought  about  by  the 
minister's  blessing.  In  the  new  theory,  that  blessing 
has  for  its  only  purpose  to  sanctify  the  material  ele 
ment,  and  to  "  fill  it  with  grace."  For,  according  to 
Hugh,  the  sacrament,  that  is  to  say,  the  material 
element  sanctified  by  the  priest,  contains  grace,  some 
what  as  a  "  vessel  "  29  contains  the  medicine  which 
will  cure  a  sick  man : 

"  Quod  enim  elementa  sacramenta  sunt,  non  natura  prima 
fecit;  sed  apposita  institutio  per  dispensationem,  et  gratia  in- 
fusa  per  benedictionem.  .  .  .  Primum  Creator  per  ma- 
jestatem  vasa  formavit,  postea  Salvator  per  institutionem 
eadem  proposuit;  postremo  dispensator  per  benedictionem 
haec  ipsa  mundavit  et  gratia  implevit."  29a 

28  De  Sacramentis,  Ibid. 

29  Ibid.,  cap.  iv:     Si  ergo  vasa  sunt  spiritualis  gratiae  sacra 
menta,  non  ex  suo  sanant,  quia  vasa  segrotum  non  curant,  sed 
medicina. 

Z9*Ibid.,  c.  iv. 


40  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

That  conception  of  sacramental  efficacy  outruns  by 
far  St.  Augustine's  conception.  The  blessing  of  the 
material  element  by  the  priest  does  not  merely  connect 
with  that  element  a  spiritual  gift:  it  "fills"  that  ele 
ment  with  grace:  and  then,  the  sacrament  confers 
to  the  subject  the  grace  it  "  contains."  Hence  the 
doctrine  of  sacramental  efficacy,  set  forth  in  Hugh's 
De  Sacramentis  is  a  great  and  almost  excessive  im 
provement  on  St.  Augustine's  doctrine,  and  on  that  of 
the  early  mediaeval  writers;  it  prepares  and  forebodes 
the  Lombardian  conception  of  the  sacrament,  as  cause 
of  grace. 

And  yet,  Hugh's  definition  is  not  sufficiently  exact : 
in  spite  of  what  its  author  says,  it  does  not  apply 
"  omni  sacramento  solique."  Its  chief  imperfection 
comes  from  its  not  being  conceived  dependently  on  the 
idea  of  sign;  according  to  Hugh,  a  sacrament  is  not, 
in  a  general  way,  a  sign  of  grace;  it  is  essentially  a 
material  element.  The  author  of  De  Sacramentis 
calls  sacrament  what  we  now  call  the  "  matter  "  of  the 
sacrament.  A  serious  drawback  of  his  definition  con 
sists  in  taking  only  a  part  of  the  sacrament  for  its 
whole,  and  in  discarding  from  the  number  of  the  Sac 
raments,  rites  which,  like  ordination  and  matrimony, 
are  not  made  up  of  corporeal  elements.30  It  was  then 
necessary  to  come  back  to  the  idea  of  sign,  and  to  seek, 
in  the  efficacy  of  the  sacramental  sign,  for  the  distinc 
tive  and  specific  feature  of  the  definition  of  a  sacra 
ment. 

This  is  the  method  employed  with  success  by  the  un- 

30  This    defective    definition    actually    prevented    Hugh    from 
drawing  up  an  exact  list  oftjie  Sacraments;  he  confounds  them. 


MEDIAEVAL  WRITERS  41 

known  author  of  the  Summa  Sententiarum?1  No 
doubt,  this  author  draws  his  inspiration  from  Hugh's 
works;  from  them  he  borrows  his  theory  on  the  effi 
cacy  of  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law,  which  could 
truly  sanctify  man,32  his  views  concerning  the  motives 
that  prompted  God  to  institute  the  Sacraments,33  and 
several  other  ideas.  But,  he  goes  farther  than  Hugh 
in  most  points  of  the  doctrine ;  and  as  regards  particu 
larly  the  definition  of  a  sacrament,  he  contributed 
much  towards  making  it  more  exact. 

Hugh  defined  Baptism:  the  water  sanctified  by  the 
word  of  God.  According  to  the  author  of  the  Sum- 
ma,  that  language  is  quite  inappropriate.  For  him, 
Baptism  is  a  compound  of  the  immersion  and  of  the 
invocation  of  the  Trinity:  the  water  and  the  immer 
sion  are  the  Sacramentutn  of  Baptism,  the  invocation 
of  the  Trinity  is  its  forma?*  In  all  the  Sacraments, 
he  discerns  the  sacramentum  which  is  the  external  sign 
by  which  the  res  sacramenti  is  signified.  He  is  thus 
led  to  make,  like  St.  Augustine,  the  general  notion  of 
sign  the  foundation  of  the  definition  of  a  sacrament; 
it  is  in  efficacy  that  he  rightly  seeks  for  the  specific 
mark  which  distinguishes  the  sacramental  sign  from 
any  other  sign: 

with  the  sacramentals.  Cf.  the  criticism  of  that  definition  by 
St.  Thomas :  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  I,  quaest  I,  art.  i,  and  Sum.  Theol, 
3  p.  quaest.  66,  art.  I. 

31  Summa  Sent.,  P.L.,  clxxvi,  42-174.    We  think  that  the  Sum. 
Sent,  is  not  the  work  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  but  that  it  is  pos 
terior    to    him.     Cf.     PORTALIE,    Diet,    de     Theol.     Cath.,    art. 
"  Abelard."    A  comparison  of  the  notion  of   Sacrament  in  De 
Sacramentis  and  in  Summa  Sent,  strengthens  this  belief. 

32  Summa  Sent.,  tract,  iv,  cap.  i ;  cf .  De  Sacramentis,  lib.  I,  pars 
xi,  cap.  i. 

33  Summa  Sent.,  Ibid.    Cf.  De  Sacramentis,  lib.  i,  p.  ix,  cap. 
iii. 

3*Sum.  Sent.,  tract,  v,  cap.  i,  iii,  iv. 


42  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

"  Quid  sit  sacramentum,  quare  institutum  et  in  quibus  con- 
stat.  Augustinus:  Sacramentum  est  sacrae  rei  signum. 
Idem :  Sacramentum  est  invisibilis  gratiae  visibilis  forma, 
ut  in  sacramcnto  baptismatis  figuratur  ablutio  interior  per 
illam  exteriorem  et  visibilem.  Unumquodque  enim  sacra 
mentum  ejus  rei  similitudinem  debet  habere  cujus  est  sacra 
mentum.  Unde  Augustinus:  Si  enim  sacramenta  quam- 
dam  similitudinem  earum  rerum  quarum  sacramenta  sunt 
non  haberent,  omnino  sacramenta  non  essent.  Opponitur 
quod  praedicta  definitio  non  solis  competat  sacramentis,  cum 
et  ante  sanctificationem  hoc  congruat  aquae  ut  sit  visibilis 
forma  invisibilis  gratiae;  quia,  sicut  aqua  auferuntur  sordes 
corporis,  ita  per  gratiam  sordes  animae.  Sed  ut  solis  sa 
cramentis  competat,  sic  intelligendum  est:  Sacramentum  est 
visibilis  forma  invisibilis  gratiae  in  eo  collatae,  quam  scilicet 
confert  ipsum  sacramentum.  Non  enim  est  solummodo  sa 
crae  rei  signum,  sed  etiam  efficacia.  Et  hoc  est  quod  distat 
inter  signum  et  sacramentum ;  quia  ad  hoc  ut  sit  signum 
non  aliud  exigit  nisi  ut  illud  significet  cujus  perhibetur  sig 
num,  non  ut  conferat.  Sacramentum  vero  non  solum  sig- 
nificat,  sed  etiam  confert  illud  cujus  est  signum  vel  significa- 
tio.  Iterum  hoc  interest;  quia  signum  potest  esse  pro  sola 
signification  quamvis  careat  similitudine,  ut  circulus  vini ; 
sed  sacramentum  non  solum  ex  institutione  significat,  sed 
etiam  ex  similitudine  repraesentat."  35 

That  notion  of  a  sacrament  is  almost  definitive;  it 
enabled  the  author  of  the  Summa  to  apply  the  name 
of  sacrament  exclusively  to  the  Mosaic  rites  and  to 
six  of  our  Sacraments.  Very  little  indeed  remains 
for  Peter  Lombard  to  do,  that  he  may  formulate  his 
celebrated  definition,  which  enabled  him  to  draw  up 
the  first  accurate  list  of  the  seven  Sacraments. 

The  Fourth  Book  of  the  Sentences  of  Peter  Lom 
bard  opens  with  a  definition  of  a  sacrament  which  is 

85  Sum.  Sent.,  tract,  iv,  cap.  i. 


MEDLEVAL  WRITERS  43 

similar  to  that  given  in  the  Summa  and  which  was 
reached  by  means  of  an  identical  method.36  The  spe 
cific  character  which  distinguishes  a  sacrament  from 
anything  else  is  the  efficacy: 

"  Sacramentum  est  sacrae  rei  signum.  .  .  .  Omne 
enim  sacramentum  est  signum,  sed  non  e  converse.  Sa 
cramentum  ejus  rei  similitudinem  gerit,  cujus  signum  est. 
Si  enim  sacramenta  non  haberent  similitudinem  rerum 
quarum  sacramenta  sunt,  proprie  sacramenta  non  dicerentur. 
Sacramentum  enim  proprie  dicitur  quod  ita  signum  est 
gratiae  Dei,  et  invisibilis  gratiae  forma,  ut  ipsius  imaginem 
gerat  et  causa  existat.  Non  ergo  significant  tantum  gratia 
sacramenta  instituta  sunt,  sed  etiam  sanctificandi.  Quae 
enim  significandi  gratia  tantum  instituta  sunt,  solum  signa 
sunt,  et  non  sacramenta;  sicut  fuerunt  sacrificia  carnalia,  et 
observantiae  caeremoniales  veteris  legis."37 

Henceforth  the  name  of  sacrament  will  be  applied 
only  to  those  rites  of  the  Church  which  sanctify  by 
themselves,  which  are  "  causes  "  of  grace,  that  is  to 
our  seven  Sacraments  of  which  Peter  Lombard  gives 
the  definitive  list.38 

The  Lombardian  conception  of  a  sacrament  con 
tains  several  new  data,  which  are  destined  to  become 
classical.  The  first,  and  the  chief  one,  is  the  applica 
tion  of  the  philosophical  idea  of  cause  to  the  notion 
of  sacrament.  What  distinguishes  a  sacrament  from 
all  other  signs  is  that  it  is  a  cause  of  grace.  The  use 
made  by  Peter  of  the  concept  of  cause,  to  express 

36  The  earliest  treatise  strictly  so  called  of  the  Sacraments 
in  general  is  to  be  found  in  the  fourth  book  of  Peter  Lombard's 
Sentences.  However,  we  must  remark  that  the  rough  draught 
of  that  treatise  was  supplied  by  the  Summa  (tract,  iv-vii),  which 
strongly  influenced  Peter  Lombard. 

37 IV  Sent.,  i,  2;  P.L.,  cxcii,  839. 


44  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  will  give  rise  later  on 
to  many  controversies  of  which  we  find  still  an  echo 
in  the  problem  of  the  physical  or  moral  causality; 
however,  it  prevailed.  Peter  Lombard's  teaching 
about  the  conception  of  the  sacramental  sign  is  also 
more  precise  than  that  of  his  predecessors.  Accord 
ing  to  the  Master  of  Sentences,  the  sacr  amentum  is 
not  the  corporeal  element  alone :  it  is  made  up  of  the 
corporeal  element  and  of  the  formula  which  accom 
panies  the  administration  of  the  sacrament. 

A  sacrament,  then,  is  at  once  a  sign  and  a  cause 
of  grace;  sign  is  the  generic  term  of  the  definition, 
causality  is  its  specific  element.  Thus  the  Augustinian 
formula  received,  in  the  i2th.  century,  its  necessary 
complement. 


The  Lombardian  definition  met  with  various  vicissi 
tudes  during  the  I3th.  and  I4th.  centuries.  St. 
Thomas  and  his  school  adopted  it: 

"  Sacramenta  novae  legis  simul  sunt  causae  et  signa ;  et 
inde  est  quod,  sicut  communiter  dicitur,  '  efficiunt  quod  figu 
rant.'  Ex  quo  etiam  patet  quod  habent  perfecte  rationem 
sacramenti,  in  quantum  ordinantur  ad  aliquid  sacrum,  non 
solum  per  modum  signi,  sed  etiam  per  modum  causae."  39 

It  is  because  they  are  at  the  same  time  signs  and 
causes  of  grace  that  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law 
differ  from  those  of  the  Old:  the  latter  were  mere 
signs.40  But  St.  Thomas  carefully  remarks  that,  if 

39  S.    Theolog.,  p.   3,   quaest.   62,   art.    i,  ad   ium.     Elsewhere, 
Opusc.  v,   14,   St.   Thomas  repeats  word   for  word  Peter  Lom 
bard's   definition. 

40  Art.  6. 


MEDIEVAL  WRITERS  45 

the  Christian  Sacraments  are  causes  of  grace,  they  can 
be  only  instrumental  causes  thereof;41  by  this  ex 
planation,  he  made  Peter  Lombard's  definition  more 
acceptable. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Franciscan  school  departed 
considerably  from  the  conception  of  sacrament,  as 
proposed  by  the  Master  of  the  Sentences  and  stated 
with  precision  by  St.  Thomas.  According  to  its  fol 
lowers,  a  sacrament  is  chiefly  a  sign  of  grace;  it  is 
a  cause  of  grace  only  in  a  broad  sense.  A  mere  con 
dition  "  sine  qua  non  "  of  grace,  it  has  no  other  power 
than  that  of  recalling  to  God  His  promise  to  bestow 
His  grace  on  well  disposed  subjects.  St.  Bonaven- 
ture  is  quite  ready  to  ascribe  to  the  sacramental  rites 
only  this  very  attenuated  causality : 

"  Sacramenta  novae  legis  sunt  causae  gratiae,  efficiunt  et 
disponunt  extenso  nomine:  an  vero  plus  habeant,  nee  affirmo, 
nee  nego."42 

As  for  Duns  Scotus,  he  does  not  hesitate  to  discard 
from  the  notion  of  a  sacrament  any  idea  of  causality. 
In  his  view,  a  sacrament  is  an  efficacious  sign  of 
grace,  not  because  it  has  in  itself  a  virtue  that  causes 
grace,  but  because,  in  virtue  of  a  "  covenant  drawn 
up  with  the  Church,"  God  pledged  Himself  never  to 
refuse  His  grace  to  those  who  receive  the  sacrament 
with  the  proper  dispositions.  A  sacrament  is  effica 
cious,  in  consequence  of  that  economy  established  by 
God,  not  in  virtue  of  a  causality  intrinsic  to  the  rite 

41  Art.  i.    The  divers  systems  proposed  during  the  i3th.  cen 
tury  to  explain  the  causality  of  the  Sacraments,  will  be  treated 
in  the  3rd.  chapter. 

42  In  IV  Sent.  Dist.  I,  q.  4. 


46  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

itself.  Such  is  the  doctrine  set  forth  in  this  defini 
tion  of  Duns  Scotus : 

"  Signum  sensibile  gratiam  Dei,  vel  effectum  Dei  gratuitum 
[for  instance  the  sacramental  character],  ex  institutione  di- 
vina  efficaciter  significans,  effectum  ordinatum  ad  salutem 
hominis  viatoris."  43 

The  whole  function  of  a  sacrament,  then,  consists  in 
signifying  its  effects  efficaciously,  in  this  sense  that  it 
is  a  sign  of  their  production,  which  production  is 
wrought  infallibly  by  God  in  the  soul,  in  virtue  of 
His  agreement,  at  the  very  moment  when  the  rite 
is  administered. 

Hence,  the  Scotist  conception  of  a  sacrament  dif 
fers  somewhat  from  the  Thomist  conception:  it  at 
tenuates  considerably  the  efficacy  of  the  sacramental 
rite. 

Harnack,44  who  is  manifestly  anxious  to  find  pre 
cursors  for  Protestants,  affirms,  not  without  exag 
geration,  that  this  "  nominalist  "  conception  paved  the 
way  for  the  doctrine  of  the  Reformers  and  of  Zwingli. 
However,  the  case  is  this:  Duns  Scotus  and  his 
school  carefully  maintained  the  objective  efficacy  of 
the  Sacraments,  independent  of  the  subject's  disposi 
tions.  No  doubt,  their  teaching  is  less  in  harmony 
than  that  of  the  Thomists  with  the  Decretum  ad  Ar- 
menos  and  the  decisions  of  the  Council  of  Trent; 
but  it  is  very  far  from  being  opposed  to  them.  At 

43  In  IV  Sent.  Dist.  i,  q.  2,  no.  5.    We  leave  aside,  as  being 
too  subtle  and  without  any  interest,  the  disputes  of  the  authors 
of  the  I4th.  century  as  to  whether  or  not  a  sacrament  can  be 
denned. 

44  History  of  Dogma,  vol.  6,  p. 


MODERN  THEOLOGIANS  47 

all  events,  it  differs  essentially  from  that  of  the  Re 
formers. 

It  would  be  as  great  an  exaggeration  to  claim  that 
the  two  philosophical  currents  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
Realism  and  Nominalism,  explain  by  themselves  the 
rise  of  these  two  conceptions.  For,  to  leave  aside  the 
consideration  that  the  followers  of  the  Scotist  view, 
barring  a  few  exceptions,45  were  not  nominalists,  the 
study  of  the  texts  proves  that  we  must  look  for  that 
rise  chiefly  in  the  effort  made  by  the  Christian  mind 
to  account  for  its  sacramental  faith.  To  explain  the 
origin  of  doctrines  by  philosophical  surroundings  is 
indeed  an  easy  process,  but  a  process  which,  applied 
to  the  Catholic  doctrine,  exposes  one  to  the  risk  of 
grasping  but  imperfectly  the  complex  reality  of  his 
tory. 

§  IV.     The  definition  of  a  Sacrament  according  to  the  Theo 
logians  subsequent  to  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  Council  of  Trent  formulated  no  definition  of  a 
sacrament.  Our  actual  definition  was  drawn  up  ac 
cording  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Council,  by  the  theolo 
gians  of  the  end  of  the  i6th.  century.46  The  fol 
lowing  is  the  definition  set  forth  by  Suarez  (1548- 
1617),  a  theologian  who  has  been  followed  on  this 
point  by  all  modern  authors. 

45lz>.#v  William  of  Occam  and  Gabriel  Biel  in  the  I4th.  cen 
tury. 

46  The  authors  of  the  Catechism  of  the  Council  of  Trent  thus 
define  a  sacrament  (pars  ii,  DC  Sacramentis,  9)  :  Ut  accuratius 
quid  sacramentum  sit  declaretur,  docendum  erit  rem  esse  sensi- 
bus  objectam,  quae  ex  Dei  institutione  sanctitatis  et  justitise  turn 
significandae,  turn  efficiendae,  vim  habet. 


48  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

Suarez  first  states  a  general,  "  univocal "  definition 
of  a  sacrament,  which  may  apply  both  to  the  Sacra 
ments  of  the  Old  Law  and  to  those  of  the  New ;  then 
he  exposes  the  differences  which  exist  between  the 
Sacraments  of  the  two  Laws;  finally  he  shows  how 
the  two  definitions,  that  of  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old 
Law,  and  that  of  the  Sacraments  of  the  New,  may 
be  formulated. 

The  general  definition  of  a  sacrament  is  thus  given: 

"  Sacramentum  est  signum  sensibile,  ad  sanctitatem  ali- 
quam  conferendam  et  veram  animae  sanctitatem  significan- 
dam  institutum."  47 

Two  ideas  constitute  essentially  this  definition:  the 
idea  of  sign,  and  the  idea  of  a  sign  efficacious  of  a 
certain  sanctity.  Suarez  leaves  in  the  background  the 
divine  institution,  which  later  on  will  be  considered 
as  the  third  idea  essential  to  the  definition.48 

The  theory  of  the  sign  exposed  by  Suarez  is  that 
of  St.  Augustine,  plus  the  terminology  and  the  subtle 
ties  of  the  School.  Towards  the  end  of  the  i6th. 
century,  the  theory  of  the  Eucharist  as  a  sacrifice  had 
considerably  developed  under  the  pressure  of  the  Prot 
estant  controversies ;  hence  our  author  deems  it  useful 
to  distinguish  a  sacrifice  from  a  sacrament.  They 
differ  by  their  respective  ends.  A  sacrament  has  for 
its  purpose  to  sanctify  men;  a  sacrifice  aims  at  ren 
dering  to  God  the  worship  due  to  Him. 

It  is  essential  to  a  sacrament  that  it  should  impart 
a  certain  sanctity.  Suarez  employs  this  somewhat 

47  SUAREZ,  In  sam  P.,  qu.  Ix,  art.  3,  disp.  I,  sect.  4. 

48  Ibidv  sect,  i,  n. 


MODERN  THEOLOGIANS  49 

vague  expression,  so  as  to  include  in  his  definition  the 
Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law  and  those  of  the  New. 
For  there  are  two  kinds  of  sanctity:  the  internal  and 
spiritual  sanctity,  which  the  grace  bestowed  by  the 
Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  brings  about,  and  the 
external  and  legal  sanctity  which  consists  in  the  legal 
purity  imparted  by  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old : 

"  Alia  est  enim  sanctificatio  interior  spiritualis,  et  coram 
Deo,  quae  fit  per  gratiam  sanctificantem,  et  potest  dici  sanc 
tificatio  simpliciter ;  alia  vero  est  sanctificatio  externa  legalis 
et  secundum  quid :  qui  modus  sanctificationis  erat  frequens  in 
veteri  lege."  49 

Peter  Lombard  had  already  caught  a  glimpse  of 
this  doctrine. 

Suarez  states  most  clearly  the  differences  which 
exist  between  the  Sacraments  of  the  two  Laws.  These 
are  the  chief  differences. 

From  the  viewpoint  of  the  signified  grace,  there  is 
this  difference,  that  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law 
signified,  while  they  figured,  the  true  sanctity,  that 
which  Christ  was  to  impart  to  His  followers,  whilst 
the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  signify  and  immedi 
ately  confer  sanctity.  The  Sacraments  of  old  were 
then,  truly  signs  of  grace,  "  signs  of  Christ's  passion, 
which  is  the  source  of  all  grace,"  "  signs  of  the  heaven 
ly  glory,  which  is  the  aim  of  our  sanctification."  This 
is  why  they  are,  and  must  be  called  Sacraments. 
Here  we  find  St.  Augustine's  teaching  enriched  with 
the  developments  of  St.  Thomas. 

But  it  is  chiefly  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  pro 
duction  of  sanctity  that  the  fundamental  difference  is 

**Ibid.,  sect.  ii. 


50  A  SACRAMENT  DEFINED 

manifest.  The  Sacraments  of  old  imparted  only  a 
legal  sanctity,  except  circumcision  by  which,  accord 
ing  to  the  teaching  of  St.  Augustine  and  of  theolo 
gians,  original  sin  was  taken  away.  The  Sacraments 
of  the  New  Law  alone  confer  the  sanctifying  grace 
which  they  signify. 

Then  Suarez  points  out  the  modifications  that  have 
to  be  introduced  into  the  general  definition  so  as  to 
obtain  the  definitions  peculiar  to  the  Sacraments  of  the 
two  Laws : 

"  Praedicta  definitio  facile  potest  ad  sacramenta  novae 
legis  coarctari,  addendo  hujusmodi  sacramentum  significare 
veram  animae  sanctitatem,  quam  confert,  seu  quatenus  ab 
ipso  confertur.  .  .  .  Denique  servata  proportione,  facile 
potest  contrahi  ilia  definitio  ad  sacramenta  veteris  legis,  ad 
dendo  fuisse  instituta  ad  conferendum  legalem  sanctitatem, 
per  quam  vera  sanctitas  per  Christum  conferenda  significaba- 
tur."  50 

The  method  and  doctrine  of  Suarez  were  adopted 
later  on  by  most  authors ;  51  no  precision  worthy  of  re 
mark  has  been  added  thereto.  The  divine  institution 
has  been  simply  more  insisted  on  in  the  definition. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  complete  elaboration  of  the 
definition  of  a  Sacrament  was  slowly  worked  out.  The 
authors  previous  to  St.  Augustine  drew  from  the 
study  of  Christian  rites  the  idea  of  efficacious  symbol. 
St.  Augustine  was  the  first  that  attempted  to  formu 
late  a  definition  properly  so  called,  and  the  authors  of 
the  1 2th.  century  perfected  the  work. 

™Ibid.,  sect.  iv. 

51  FRANZELIN,  De  Sacramentis  in  genere,  II,  i ;  CHR.  PESCH, 
Praelectiones  dogmaticae,  Freiburg  in  Brisgau,  1900,  t.  vi,  pp. 
5  and  ff. ;  BILLOT,  De  Ecclesiae  Sacramentis,  Rome,  1896,  t.  i, 
pp.  19  ff.j  TANQUEREY,  Synopsis  theolog.  dogmaticae,  Paris,  1903, 
t.  ii,  pp.  151-153- 


CHAPTER  II 

THE    COMPOSITION    OF    THE    SACRAMENTAL    RITES 

A  sacrament  is  an  efficacious  symbol  of  grace. 
Hence  there  are  two  distinct  parts  in  a  sacrament: 
one,  the  symbol,  the  sacramental  rite,  is  external  and 
visible ;  the  other,  -the  effect  produced  by  the  rite,  is 
internal  and  unseen.  The  effects  of  the  Sacraments, 
as  well  as  their  efficacy,  will  be  studied  in  the  third 
chapter.  Here  we  will  study  the  external  and  visible 
part  of  a  sacrament,  the  sacramental  rite.  Is  the  sac 
ramental  rite  something  simple  or  composite?  and  if 
it  is  composite,  what  are  its  constitutive  elements? 

According  to  the  Decretum  ad  Armenos,1  the  sacra 
mental  rite  is  made  up  of  two  essential  elements :  "  res 
et  verba."  The  element  called  "  res  "  is  that  part  of 
the  sacramental  rite,  which  is  undetermined,  as  the 
ablution  in  Baptism,  and  the  anointing  in  Confirmation 
and  Extreme  Unction.  That  the  "  res  "  may  have  a 
precise  sacramental  signification,  it  must  be  determined 

1The  Decretum  ad  Armenos  is  the  official  document  of  the 
Church,  that  treats  of  the  binary  composition  of  the  sacra 
mental  rite.  It  was,  as  we  know,  added  to  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Florence;  yet,  it  has  not  the  value  of  a  concili- 
ary  definition.  It  is  "  merely  a  practical  instruction "  intended 
for  the  United  Armenians,  and  not  for  the  whole  Church. 
Hence,  although  that  decree  is  worthy  of  great  regard,  still  it 
does  not  impose  itself  on  our  faith.  Cf.  HURTER,  Theol.  Dogm. 
comp.,  I,  n.  441 — The  Decree  to  the  Armenians  is  a  summary 
of  a  chapter  of  the  Opusculum  of  St.  Thomas,  De  articulis  fidei 
et  sacramentis  Ecclesia,  Opusc.  v.  c.  14,  edit.  Vives,  Paris,  1856. 

51 


52         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

by  the  other  element,  called  "  verba."  The  words 
which  the  minister  utters  when  he  performs  the  sac 
ramental  action,  are  then  the  determining  element  of 
the  rite,  the  one  that  gives  to  the  first  all  its  meaning. 
Because  of  the  analogy  which  exists  between  that 
conception  of  the  sacramental  rite  and  the  Aristotelian 
theory  of  matter  and  form,  the  Decree  to  the  Ar 
menians,  ratifying  the  terminology  of  the  School,  calls 
matter  and  form  the  two  constitutive  elements  of  a 
sacrament : 

"  Omnia  sacramenta  tribus  perficiuntur,  videlicet  rebus  tan- 
quam  materia,  verbis  tanquam  forma,  et  persona  ministri 
conferentis  sacramentum  cum  intentione  faciendi  quod  facit 
Ecclesia:  quorum  si  aliquod  desit,  non  perficitur  sacramen 
tum."  2 

The  Council  of  Trent  has  several  times  used  this  ter 
minology,3  but  without  giving  an  authoritative  deci 
sion  concerning  the  value  of  the  philosophical  theory 
from  which  it  is  derived. 

The  doctrine  of  the  composition  of  the  sacramental 
rite  was  settled  by  the  theologians  of  the  I2th.  and  of 
the  1 3th.  century.  St.  Augustine  began  the  work,  es 
pecially  as  regards  Baptism;  Peter  Lombard  com 
pleted  it;  and  the  theologians  of  the  I3th.  century 
gave  it  its  definitive  form,  by  applying  to  the  Sacra 
ments  the  Aristotelian  distinction  of  matter  and  form. 

2  DENZINGER,  Enchiridion,  n.  500  (new  ed.,  n.  695). — The  De 
cree  to  the  Armenians  does  not  speak  of  the  determination  of 
the  matter  and  form  of  the  Sacraments  by  Jesus  Christ     Fur 
ther  on  we  expose  the  different  opinions  afterwards  set   forth 
by  theologians  on  this  subject. 

3  Sess.  xiv,  cap.  2,  3 ;  can.  4. 


BEFORE  ST.  AUGUSTINE  53 


§  I.     The  Theory  of  a  Sacramental  Sign  before  St.  Augus 
tine. 

Here  as  elsewhere,  the  practice  of  the  Church  pre 
ceded  by  far  theoretic  speculation.  Long  before  au 
thors  ever  thought  of  analysing  the  sacramental  rite, 
and  of  investigating  the  number  of  elements  of  which 
it  is  made  up,  the  Church  laid,  by  her  sacramental  life, 
the  foundation  of  the  speculations  which  were  to  come. 

In  the  Apostolic  period,  the  performance  of  the 
Christian  rites  comprised  an  action  accompanied  by  a 
prayer.  It  is  after  praying  that  the  Apostles  laid 
their  hands  upon  the  seven  Christians  chosen  to  fulfil 
the  office  of  deacons,4  and  that  St.  Peter  and  St.  John 
laid  their  hands  upon  the  Samaritans  previously  bap 
tized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  to  impart  to  them 
the  Holy  Ghost.5  Before  sending  St.  Paul  and  St. 
Barnabas  as  missionaries,  the  Prophets  and  the  Doc 
tors  of  the  Church  of  Antioch  imposed  their  hands 
upon  them,  after  fasting  and  praying.6 

The  presbyters  spoken  of  in  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James7  prayed  over  the  sick  man,  whilst  anointing 
him  with  oil  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  The  invocation 
of  the  Trinity,  or  of  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
likewise  accompanied  the  baptismal  ablution.8  We 
learn  from  the  authors  of  the  2d.  and  3d.  centuries  9 

*Act.,  vi,  6. 

5  Act.,  viii,  15,  17. 

*  Act.,  xiii,  3.  The  texts  which  speak  of  the  anointing  con 
ferred  on  Timothy  by  the  imposition  of  hands,  make  no  men 
tion  of  prayer. —  /  Tim.,  iv,  14;  //  Tim.,  i,  6. 

7v,  14. 

8  Matth.,  xxviii,  19;  Didache,  vii ;  Act.,  ii,  38;  viii,  16;  xix,  5. 

9  ST.  JUSTIN,  I  Apol.,  61 ;  TERTULLIAN,  Adv.  Prax.,  26;  ORIGEN, 
In  Rom.,  v.  8. 


54         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

that  they  administered  Baptism,  calling  upon  the  three 
Divine  Persons,  in  keeping  with  Christ's  command; 
for  them  there  was  no  legitimate  Baptism,  unless  it 
was  conferred  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity.  The  con 
secration  of  bread  and  wine  in  the  Eucharist  is 
wrought,  they  tell  us,  by  the  words  of  Christ,  that  is 
to  say,  by  the  words  of  the  institution,  with  or  without 
the  epiclesis.10  The  liturgical  texts  of  the  4th.  and 
5th.  centuries  contain  the  formulas  which  the  minister 
had  to  pronounce,  when  administering  the  various 
Sacraments.11 

Such  is  the  practice  of  the  Church,  on  which  au 
thors  will  base  their  arguments,  when  the  moment 
comes  to  frame  the  theory  of  the  sacramental  rite. 

That  moment  could  come  only  after  the  develop 
ment  of  sacramental  symbolism  had  brought  out  the 
distinction  between  the  two  parts  of  a  sacrament:  the 
visible  part,  the  symbol,  and  the  unseen  part,  the  ef- 

10  ST.  JUSTIN,  /  Apol.,  66 ;  ORIGEN,  Comment,  in  Matth.,  xi, 
144;  ST.  IREN^EUS,  Adv.  Haer.,  iv,  18,  5;  v.  2,  3. 

11 A  Latin  formula  accompanying  the  anointing  in  Confirma 
tion  is  found,  about  the  4th.  century,  in  the  De  Sacramentis,  ii, 
24.  Another  formula  is  given  by  the  Canons  of  Hippolytus,  133 
(DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  1904,  p.  533).  The  actual  Greek 
formula  of  Confirmation  is  found  in  a  document  of  the  5th. 
century,  known  as  the  7th.  canon  of  the  first  Council  of  Cons 
tantinople  (HEFELE,  History  of  the  Councils,  Edinburgh,  vol. 
2,  p.  366).  Formulas  for  the  reconciliation  of  penitents  are  met 
with  in  the  Gelasian  Sacramentary,  I,  38.  (P.L.,  Ixxiv,  1095, 
seq.)  In  the  Canons  of  Hippolytus  we  read  the  formulas  that 
were  pronounced  at  the  ordinations  of  bishops,  9-19,  of  priests, 
30-31,  and  of  deacons,  39-42  (DUCHESNE,  Ibid.,  525-527).  The 
Apostolical  Constitutions,  viii,  4  and  ff.,  give  the  ancient  formulas 
of  Greek  ordinations.  The  oldest  liturgical  texts  that  we  possess 
mention  then  the  formulas  which  always  accompanied  the  sacra 
mental  action :  unction,  imposition  of  hands,  etc.  These  formulas 
were  not  the  same  everywhere.  Their  diversity  raised  during 
the  I7th.  century  problems  of  which  we  shall  speak  later  on. 


BEFORE  ST.  AUGUSTINE  55 

feet  symbolized  and  produced.  Not  until  that  dis 
tinction  was  made,  could  anybody  ever  think  of  ana 
lysing  theoretically  the  symbol,  the  rite,  with  the  view 
to  enumerate  its  constitutive  elements.  Now,  as  we 
saw  in  the  preceding  chapter,  the  conception  of  a  sac 
rament  as  a  symbol  was  worked  out  by  the  ecclesias 
tical  writers  of  the  middle  of  the  3rd.  century,  and  by 
those  of  the  4th.  Hence  we  may  expect  to  find  in  that 
period  the  first  outlines  of  a  theory  of  the  sacramental 
rite. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  are  found,  although  in  a 
very  imperfect  state.  Their  imperfections  arise  al 
ways  from  the  fact  that  the  Fathers  are  tempted  to 
apply  the  same  theory  to  Baptism  and  to  the  Eucharist, 
notwithstanding  the  essential  differences  to  be  found 
in  these  two  Sacraments.  It  is  the  words  of  the  Con 
secration  that  make  bread  and  wine  the  sacrament  of 
the  Body  and  Blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  elements 
necessary  for  the  making  of  the  Eucharist  are,  then, 
bread,  wine,  and  the  formula  of  consecration.  This 
teaching  concerning  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  is 
assuredly  quite  correct;  it  is  less  so,  when  applied  to 
Baptism. 

Instead  of  saying,  as  we  do  now,  that  the  sac? 'amen 
tum  of  Baptism  consists  in  the  ablution  accompanied 
with  the  Trinitarian  formula,  the  writers  of  whom  we 
are  speaking,  reason  from  analogy  with  the  Eucharist, 
and  teach  that  it  is  constituted  by  the  water  and  by  the 
prayer  of  "  sanctification  "  of  the  water.12 

12  Here  it  is  question  of  the  blessing  of  baptismal  water, 
which  was  performed,  during  the  Patristic  period,  immediately 
before  the  solemn  administration  of  Baptism.  Cf.  DUCHESNE, 
Christian  Worship,  chap,  ix,  and  Dictionnaire  de  Theologie 
catholique,  art.,  "  Bapteme,"  II,  col.  181.  That  blessing  was  a 


56         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

The  water  "  sanctified  "  for  Baptism,  is  a  sign  of 
grace;  it  contains  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Its 
regenerating  and  sanctifying  efficacy  acts  in  the  neo 
phyte,  when  the  latter  is  plunged  into  the  water  at 
the  same  time  that  the  minister  pronounces  the  Trini 
tarian  formula.  Thus,  the  "  sanctification "  of  the 
water  is  considered  an  element  of  Baptism,  almost  as 
the  prayer  consecratory  of  bread  and  wine  is  consid 
ered  an  element  of  the  Eucharist  —  due  allowance  be 
ing  made.  Let  us  bear  well  in  mind  however  that  the 
Fathers  see  analogies,  but  not  a  genuine  identity,  be 
tween  the  sanctification  of  baptismal  water  or  of  the 
oil  for  Confirmation  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Eucha- 
ristic  consecration  on  the  other.  The  latter  makes 
Christ's  Body  and  Blood  present;  the  former  imparts 
the  divine  power  to  the  water  and  to  the  oil. 

The  theory  which  has  just  been  exposed  begins  to 
show  itself  in  the  writings  of  Tertullian13  and  es 
pecially  in  those  of  St.  Cyprian  14  as  regards  not  only 
Baptism,  but  Confirmation  also.  That  theory  makes 
its  influence  felt  also  in  the  sacramental  doctrine  of  St. 
Ambrose  and  of  the  author  of  De  Sacramentis.  Bread 

most  imposing  ceremony.  This  explains  why  authors  ascribed 
to  it  so  great  an  importance,  and  looked  upon  it  as  a  part  of 
Baptism. 

13  De  bapt.,  4:  Omnes  aquae  de  pristina  originis  praerogativa 
sacramentum  sanctificationis  consequuntur,  invocato  Deo.  Super- 
venit  enim  statim  spiritus  de  cselis,  et  aquis  superest,  sanctificans 
eas  de  semetipso,  et  ita  sanctificatae  vim  sanctificandi  combibunt. 

^Epist.  Ixx,  i,  .2:  Quomodo  autem  mundare  et  sanctificare 
aquam  potest  qui  ipse  immundus  est  et  apud  quern  Sanctus 
Spiritus  non  est?  .  .  Sanctificare  autem  non  potuit  olei 
creaturam  qui  nee  altare  habuit  nee  ecclesiam.  Unde  nee  unctio 
spiritalis  apud  haereticos  potest  esse,  quando  constet  oleum  sanc- 
tificari  et  eucharistiam  fieri  apud  illos  omnino  non  posse.  Cf. 
supra,  p.  17. 


BEFORE  ST.  AUGUSTINE  57 

and  wine  become  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  and 
are  changed  into  Christ's  Body  and  Blood  by  the  con 
secration,  viz. :  by  the  words  of  the  institution.15  The 
"  consecration  "  of  the  water  is  likewise  necessary,  in 
order  that  the  Holy  Ghost  may  dwell  in  it,  and  that  it 
may  have  the  power  of  purifying: 


"  Non  omnis  aqua  sanat ;  sed  aqua  sanat,  quae  habet  gra- 
tiam  Christi.  Aliud  est  elementum,  aliud  consecratio:  aliud 
opus,  aliud  operatic.  Aqua  opus  est,  operatio  Spiritus  Sancti 
est.  Non  sanat  aqua,  nisi  Spiritus  descenderit,  et  aquam 
illam  consecraverit."  1<J 

Thus,  according  to  St.  Ambrose,  Baptism  is  made 
up  of  these  elements :  the  water,  the  "  consecration  " 
of  the  water,  and  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity. 

"  Ideoque  legisti  quod  tres  testes  in  baptismate  unum  sunt, 
aqua,  sanguis,  et  Spiritus  (i  Joan.,  V,  7)  ;  quia  si  unum 
horum  detrahas,  non  stat  baptismatis  sacramentum.  Quid  est 
enim  aqua  sine  cruce  Christi  ?  17  Elementum  commune,  sine 
ullo  sacramenti  effectu.  Nee  iterum  sine  aqua,  regenera- 
tionis  mysterium  est.  .  .  .  Sed  nisi  baptizatus  fuerit 
[catechumenus]  in  nomine  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti, 
remissionem  non  potest  accipere  peccatorum,  nee  -spiritualis 
gratiae  munus  haurire." — De  Mysteriis,  20. 

Evidently,  that  lack  of  precision  regarding  the  con 
stituent  elements  of  Baptism,  comes  from  the  fact  that 
St.  Ambrose  and  others  are  bent  on  applying  to  this 
sacrament  the  same  theory  as  to  the  Eucharist. 

15  De  mysteriis,  52;  De  sacramentis,  iv,  14. 

16  De  sacramentis,  i,  15.     Cf.  De  mysteriis,  14. 

17  Allusion  to  the  sign  of  the  cross  made  over  the  baptismal 
water    for   the   purpose    of  blessing   it.     Cf.    De   mysteriis,    14; 
ST.  AUGUSTINE,  Sermo  ccclii,  3. 


58         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

The  same  doctrine  is  also  found  among  the  Greeks. 
As  our  reader  knows,  they  explain  the  efficacy  of 
Baptism  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  which 
the  baptismal  water  is  endowed.  For  the  blessing 
pronounced  by  the  Bishop  over  the  water  draws  down 
into  it  the  divine  power.18  Hence  the  Greek  Fathers 
insist  on  the  necessity  of  that  blessing,  which  they 
consider  almost  indispensable.19 

The  oil  of  Confirmation  would  have  no  efficacy,  un 
less  it  was  previously  sanctified  by  the  invocation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  "  For,"  says  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
"  just  as  the  Eucharistic  bread,  after  the  invocation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  no  longer  ordinary  bread,  but  the 
Body  of  Christ,  so  the  chrism,  after  the  invocation,  is 
no  longer  an  empty  element,  or  if  the  expression  be 
preferred,  an  ordinary  element,  but  it  is  rather  a  gift 
of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  the  Deity 
present  in  it  has  rendered  efficacious."  20 

We  see  that  it  is  by  reasoning  from  analogy  with 
the  Eucharist,  that  the  Greek  as  well  as  the  Latin 
divines,  came  to  look  upon  the  blessing  of  the  water 
and  of  the  oil,  as  a  part  of  Baptism  and  of  Confirma 
tion. 

18  This    idea    is    most    distinctly    expressed    in    the    liturgical 
formulas  of  the  blessing  of  the  baptismal  water,  of  the  oil  for 
Confirmation,  and  of  the  oil  of  the  sick,  in  the  Euchologium  of 
Serapio,  vii,  xvi,  xvii   (G.  VOBBERMIN,  Altchristliche  liturgische 
Stucke,  pp.  8-9,  12-13),  xix,  xxv,  xxix   (ed.  Funk)  ;  and  in  the 
formula  of  the  blessing  of  the  baptismal  water  in  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions,   vii,   43,   5    (ed.    Funk).     The   Latin    formulas   of 
the  Gelasian  Sacramentary  (P.L.,  Ixxiv,  mo,  mi)  are  of  a  simi 
lar  inspiration;  they  are  still  used  to-day. 

19  ST.  BASIL,  De  Spiritu  S.,  66 ;  ST.  GREGORY  OF  NYSSA,  In  bap- 
tismum  Christi;  P,,G.,  xlvi,  581 ;  ST.  CYRIL  OF  JERUSALEM,  Cat., 
i",  3- 

ao  My  stag.,  iii,  3.     ££.  ST.  BASIL,  De  Spiritu  S.,  66. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  THEORY  59 

However,  we  should  not  think  that  the  Fathers  of 
that  period  considered  the  blessing  of  the  baptismal 
water  absolutely  indispensable,  for  in  the  clinical  Bap 
tism,21  administered  in  case  of  necessity,  the  water 
which  Was  employed  had  not  been  blessed.  As  to  the 
blessing  of  the  oil  for  Confirmation  and  of  the  oil  for 
Extreme  Unction,  it  has  always  been  regarded  as 
necessary  for  these  two  Sacraments. 

§  II.     The  Augustinian  Theory  of  the  Sacramental  Sign. 

In  St.  Augustine's  writings,  the  theory  of  the  com 
position  of  the  sacramental  sign  becomes,  as  it  were, 
conscious  of  itself  and  affirms  itself  in  a  precise  analy 
sis,  particularly  as  regards  Baptism. 

The  distinction  so  clearly  drawn  by  the  holy  Doc 
tor  between  the  external  and  visible  sign,  the  sacra- 
mentuni,  and  the  spiritual  and  unseen  effect,  which  is 
produced,  the  virtus  sacramenti,  enabled  him  to  con 
sider  the  sacr  amentum  in  itself  and  to  discern  its 
constitutive  elements.  For  Baptism,  these  elements 
are  two  in  number:  the  first,  called  elementum,  is  the 
material  object,  water;  the  second  is  the  word,  ver 
bum.  The  union  of  the  verbum  with  the  elementum 
makes  up  the  sacrament; 

"  Quare  non  ait  [Christus],  mundi  estis  propter  baptismum 
quo  loti  estis,  sed  ait,  propter  verbum  quod  locutus  sum 
vobis;  nisi  quia  et  in  aqua  verbum  mundat?  Detrahe  ver 
bum,  et  quid  est  aqua  nisi  aqua?  Accedit  verbum  ad  ele 
mentum  et  fit  sacramentum,  etiam  ipsum  tanquam  visibile 
verbum."  22 

21  The  clinical  Baptism  is  that  which  was  administered  to 
the  sick  who  were  confined  to  bed  (KXtVrj)  and  in  danger  of 
death. 

•2  In  Joan.,  tract.  Ixxx,  3. 
$  +-    .    J-  A^^^t^',  ft  .1     *2^-  ^>,   ^  £  •  f*J<L 

01+     /C     4^ 


60         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

Baptism,  then,  is  composed  of  the  ablution  in  water 
and  of  the  word.22a  The  water  derives  from  the 
word  the  power  of  cleansing  the  soul.  It  is  because 
there  is  in  the  word  a  power  which  remains  after  that 
word  has  been  uttered,  that  the  water,  "  that  moving- 
element  "  has  the  power  of  cleansing  man  from  his 
sin: 

"  Unde  ista  tanta  virtus  aquae,  ut  corpus  tangat  et  cor 
abluat,  nisi  faciente  verbo:  non  quia  dicitur  sed  quia  credi- 
tur?  Nam  et  in  ipso  verbo  aliud  est  sonus  transiens,  aliud 
virtus  manens.  .  .  .  Mundatio  igitur  nequaquam  fluxo 
et  labili  tribueretur  elemento,  nisi  adderetur  in  verbo."  23 

It  is  rather  difficult  to  know  what  is  that  word  con 
stitutive  of  a  sacrament,  of  which  St.  Augustine 
speaks.  Is  it  the  formula  of  the  blessing  of  the  bap 
tismal  water?  Or  is  it  what  we  call  now  the  form  of 
Baptism  —  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity?  Or  does 
it  embrace  the  formulas  of  exorcism,  of  renounce 
ment  of  Satan,  of  profession  of  faith,  etc.,  which  made 
up  the  baptismal  liturgy,  and  which  St.  Augustine  calls 
"  baptismatis  forma  "  ?  24 

Theologians,  especially  since  Peter  Lombard,  see  in 

-2*In  Joan.,  tract,  xv,  4:  Quid  est  baptismus  Christi?  La- 
vacrum  aquae  in  verbo.  Tolle  aquam,  non  est  baptismus:  tolle 
verbum,  non  est  baptismus. 

23  In  Joan.,  tract.  Ixxx,  3.     In  the  last  sentence,  St.  Augustine 
has  in  mind  the  text  of  the   Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  v,  26: 
Mundans  earn   [Ecclesiam]   lavacro  aquae  in  verbo.     Cf.  Contr. 
Faustum,  xix,  16. 

24  De  Peccatorum  mentis  et  remiss.,  lib.   I,  cap.   xxxiv.     Cf. 
Council  of   Milevis;   can.  2.     (DENZINGER,  n.  65;   new  edit.,  n. 
101.)     Before  St.  Augustine,  the  author  of  De  Sacramentis,  i,  18, 
also  calls  "  forma  baptismatis  "  the  ceremonies  of  a  part  of  the 
baptismal    ritual.     TERTULLIAN,    De    Bapt.,    13,    designates    the 
Trinitarian  formula  of  Baptism  by  the  expression  "  forma  prae- 
scripta  tingendi."     In  the  I2th.  century  these  expressions  will  be 
adopted  again,  but  their  signification  will  be  modified. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  THEORY  61 

that  word  the  sacramental  formula  of  Baptism,  viz. : 
the  invocation  of  the  Trinity  which  accompanies  the 
ablution.  They  ground  their  assertion  on  this  pas 
sage  of  the  text: 

"Hoc  est  verbum  fidei  quod  praedicamus:  quo  sine  dubio 
ut  mundare  possit,  consecratur  et  baptismus." 

Now  the  words  by  which  Baptism  is  "  consecrated," 
according  to  the  teaching  of  St.  Augustine  himself,25 
are  the  words  of  the  Gospel :  "  In  nomine  Patris,  et 
Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti." 26  Before  the  I3th.  cen 
tury,  some  authors  thought  that  the  verbum  desig 
nates  rather  the  formula  of  the  blessing  of  the 
baptismal  water,  by  which  the  water  was  "  conse 
crated  "  in  the  name  of  Christ.  This  interpreta 
tion  is  quite  ancient:  it  is  found  in  an  apocryphal 
sermon,  placed  among  the  works  of  St.  Augustine.27 
It  is  also  in  harmony  with  the  Augustinian  theory  of 
the  sacrament,  according  to  which  the  "  consecra 
tion  "  of  water  by  prayer  and  by  the  sign  of  the  Cross 
makes  the  baptismal  water  efficacious: 

"  Sed  quia  baptismus  id  est  salutis  aqua  non  est  salutis, 
nisi  Christi  nomine  consecrata,  qui  pro  nobis  sanguinem 
fudit,  cruce  ipsius  aqua  signatur."  '< 

25  De  baft,  contr.  Donat.,  iii,  20;  vi,  47,  etc.  Cf.  J.  MALDONAT, 
Disputationes  de  Sacramentis,  Disputatio  generalis,  pars  iii, 
Paris,  1677,  PP-  9-io. 

~*Matt.,  xxviii,  19. 

27  Sermo  ad  Catcchumcnos,  3:     Ecce  dilectissimi,  venturi  estis 
ad  fontem  aquae.     .     .     .     Debetis  autem  nosse  cur  virtus  illius 
aquae  et  animae  prosit  et  corpori.   Non  enim  omnis  aqua  mundat: 
sanctificatur   haec   per  consecrationem  verbi.     Tolle   verbum,   et 
quid  est  aqua  nisi  aqua?     Accedit  verbum  ad  elementum  et  fit 
sacramentum  (P.L.,  xl,  694).     This  interpretation  is  reproduced 
in  the  i2th.  century  by  the  Summa  Sententiarum,  tr.  v,  cap.  iv. 

28  ST.  AUG.,  Sermo  ccclii,  3.    Cf.  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  lib. 
v,  28;  vi,  47- 


62         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

We  think  that  in  St.  Augustine's  text,  the  verbum  does 
not  designate  exclusively  the  Trinitarian  formula 
which  accompanies  the  ablution,  but  also  the  formula 
of  the  "  consecration  "  of  water. 

Nay,  it  is  most  probable  that  the  word  ver 
bum  in  the  Tractatus  LXXX  in  Joannem,  has  a  bear 
ing  still  more  extensive,  and  that  it  designates  some 
times  the  Trinitarian  formula  and  the  formula  of  the 
blessing  of  water,  sometimes  the  "  forma  baptismatis," 
especially  the  profession  of  faith  which  the  catechu 
men  made  before  his  Baptism,  or  which  the  sponsor 
made  in  the  name  of  the  child,  sometimes  too,  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel,  which,  when  received  with 
faith,  contributes  to  the  Christian's  spiritual  cleans 
ing.29  Augustine's  thought,  so  versatile,  and  at  times 
so  bewildering,  passes  without  any  transition  from  the 
sacramental  words  that  are  in  the  Gospel  to  the 
preaching  of  the  words  of  the  Gospel  in  general. 

Thus  we  account  for  the  fact  that  Calvin,30  and 
after  him  most  Protestants,  based  on  that  text  their 
peculiar  theory  of  the  composition  of  the  Sacraments. 
According  to  them,  the  constitutive  words  of  the  Sac- 

29  HURTER,  Theol.  dogmat.  Compendium,  torn,  iii,  n.  283. 

30 Instit.  Chret.,  iv,  14 :  "A  Sacrament  consists  of  the  word 
and  of  the  external  sign.  ...  By  the  word  we  must  not 
understand  a  meaningless  murmur  uttered  after  the  manner  of 
enchanters,  as  if  the  consecration  could  be  wrought  by  that 
means;  but  we  must  understand  the  word  which  is  repeated 
to  us,  to  teach  us  and  enable  us  to  apprehend  the  meaning  of 
the  visible  sign.  .  .  .  Now,  we  see  that  he  (St.  Augustine) 
demands  for  the  sacraments  some  kind  of  preaching,  from 
which  faith  follows  as  a  consequence."  Cf.  BELLARMINE,  De 
Sacram.  in  genere.,  lib.  i,  cap.  xix.  Our  entire  chapter  on  the 
composition  of  the  sacramental  rite  shows  how  great  is  the 
opposition  of  these  Protestant  divines  to  the  constant  practice 
of  the  Church. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  THEORY  63 

raments  are  not  "  consecratory "  words,  objectively 
efficacious,  but  "  preached  "  words,  destined  to  arouse 
the  faith  of  the  subject,  from  which  alone  a  sacra 
ment  draws  some  value.  If,  on  account  of  its  ob 
scurity,  the  Tractatus  can  be  alleged  in  behalf  of  that 
teaching,  anyone  who  studies  it  in  an  unbiased  spirit 
cannot  fail  to  confess  that  such  is  not,  however,  the 
Augustinian  conception  of  a  sacrament.  The  for 
mulas  of  the  "  consecration  "  of  the  material  elements 
are  efficacious  by  themselves,  they  act  independently 
of  the  disposition  of  the  minister  and  of  the  subject.31 
According  to  St.  Augustine,  Baptism  is,  then,  made 
up  of  water,  of  the  formula  of  the  "  consecration  "  of 
the  water,  and  of  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity.  The 
union  of  the  water,  the  elementum,  with  the  formulas, 
the  verbum,  constitutes  the  sacrament.  This  is  St. 
Ambrose's  doctrine,  but  more  precise,  and,  as  it  were, 
more  conscious  of  itself.  Likewise  the  sacramentum 
chrismatis  consists  of  the  oil  over  which  the  blessing 
has  been  given.36  The  sacramentum  corporis  et  san- 
guinis  Christi  is  produced  by  the  consecration  of  the 
bread  and  of  the  wine,  which  is  wrought  by  the  "  mys 
tical  prayer,"  viz. :  by  the  prayers  of  the  Mass : 

Corpus   Christi  et  sanguinem  dicimus     .     .     .     illud  tan- 
turn  quod  ex  fructibus  terrae  acceptum  et  prece  mystica  con- 

31  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  v,  28 :     Si  ergo  ad  hoc  valet  quod 
dictum  est  in  Evangelic,  Deus  peccatorem  non  audit  (Joan.,  ix, 
31),  ut  per  peccatorem   Sacramenta  non  celebrentur;   quomodo 
exaudit  homicidam  deprecantem,  vel  super  aquam  Baptismi,  vel 
super   oleum,   vel    super    Eucharistiam,   vel    super    capita   eorum 
quibus  manus  imponitur?    Quae  omnia  tamen  et  fiunt  et  valent 
etiam  per  homicidas,  id  est  per  eos  qui  oderunt  fratres,  etiam  in 
ipsa  intus  Ecclesia. 

32  Contr.  litt.  Petiliani,  ii,  239;  De  bapt.,  v,  28.     Cf.   Sermo 
ccxxvii. 


64         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

secratum  rite  sumimus  ad  salutem  spiritualem  in  memoriam 
pro  nobis  dominicae  passionis.33 

The  bread,  the  wine,  and  the  formula  of  consecration 
are  then  the  constitutive  elements  of  the  sacrament  of 
the  Eucharist. 

St.  Augustine  sketches  no  system  concerning  the 
composition  of  the  rite  of  Penance.  This  is  to  be  ac 
counted  for,  first  of  all,  by  the  fact  that  the  holy 
Doctor  does  not  apply  to  Penance  his  theory  of  the 
sacramentum;  he  does  not  call  it  a  sacrament.  Then, 
as  Father  Vacandard  remarks,  the  Doctors  of  the 
primitive  Church,  never  thought  of  decomposing  Pen 
ance  into  all  its  elements :  "  They  were  wont  to  con 
sider  Penance  in  the  collection  of  the  acts  of  which 
it  was  made  up,  in  order  to  measure  its  full  value. 
.  .  .  That  there  might  be  full  remission  of  sins 
committed  after  Baptism  ...  all  the  exercises 
of  the  penitential  discipline  must  have  been  accom 
plished,  viz. :  the  confession  of  the  fault,  the  absolu 
tion  by  the  penitentiary  priest  or  by  the  Bishop,  the 
admission  to  penance,  the  satisfactory  works,  finally 
the  reconciliation  itself."  34  The  Fathers  ascribed  the 
efficacy  "  to  the  whole  collection  of  the  penitential  ex 
ercises  " ;  they  did  not  determine  the  value  proper  to 
each  one  of  them.  This  is  why  we  find  in  their  writ 
ings  all  the  elements  of  the  sacrament  of  Penance,  but 
no  theory  regarding  the  composition  of  this  sacra 
ment.  That  theory  will  be  formulated  by  the  medi 
aeval  divines. 

33  De  Trinitate,  iii,  10.     Cf.  P.  BATIFFOL,  L'Eucharistie,  pp.  236 
and  ss. 

34  Dictionnaire   de    theologie    catholique,    art.    "  Absolution   au 
temps  des  Peres,"  i,  p.  160. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  THEORY  65 

On  the  other  hand,  St.  Augustine  analyses  Matri 
mony  quite  minutely.  Christian  marriage  comprises 
three  elements,  which  are  also  the  three  good  things 
by  which  its  excellence  is  proved:  its  end,  which  is 
the  begetting  of  children;  conjugal  fidelity;  and  the  in 
dissoluble  bond  between  the  husband  and  the  wife, 
which  is  the  sac? •amentum  of  the  union  of  Jesus  Christ 
with  His  Church: 

"  Haec  omnia  bona  sunt,  propter  quae  nuptiae  bonae  sunt : 
proles,  fides,  sacramentum."  35 

St.  Augustine  calls  the  indissoluble  bond  sacramen 
tum,  because  it  is  the  figure,  the  symbol  of  the  union 
of  Jesus  Christ  with  His  Church.  It  is  in  order  to 
secure  that  most  holy  symbolism,  that  Christian  mar 
riage  has  for  its  essential  characters  unity  and  indis- 
solubility.36  For  St.  Augustine  the  bond  which  unites 
the  Christian  husband  and  wife  is  the  sacrament  of 
Matrimony,  just  as  the  sacerdotal  "  character  "  is  the 
sacrament  of  Holy  Orders.37  The  famous  distinction 
between  the  sacramentum  and  the  virtus  sacramenti 
is  not  clearly  applied  to  Matrimony  nor  to  Ordination. 
What  the  holy  Doctor  has  directly  in  view  is  the  ef 
fect  of  the  matrimonial  union  and  of  the  Ordination, 
the  bond  and  the  character;  he  does  not  think  of 
framing  the  theory  of  the  composition  of  the  sacra 
mental  sign  which  constitutes  these  two  Sacraments. 
One  of  St.  Augustine's  contemporaries,  Pope  Inno 
cent  I,  in  his  letter  to  Decentius,38  Bishop  of  Eugu- 

35  De  bono  conjug.,  32. 

36  De  bono  conjug.,  21. 

37  The   comparison   is   from   St.   Augustine,  De  bono   conjug., 
32.    The  holy  Doctor  sometimes  calls  the  sacrament  of  Order 
"  jus  dandi  baptismum."     DC  bapt.  cont.  Donat.,  i,  2. 

38DENziNGER,  Enchiridion,  n.  61   (new  ed.,  n.  99). 


66          ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

bium,  in  Umbria,  calls  the  oil  for  the  anointing  of  the 
sick,  a  "  genus  sacramenti  " ;  but  he  does  not  specu 
late  about  the  constitutive  elements  of  that  sacrament. 
To  sum  up,  the  Augustinian  theory  of  the  composi 
tion  of  the  Sacraments  is  really  formulated  only  as 
regards  the  Eucharist  and  Baptism.  It  is  most  clearly 
expressed  in  connection  with  the  latter  sacrament; 
and  it  is  this  doctrine  of  St.  Augustine  concerning  the 
constitutive  elements  of  the  baptismal  rite,  which  will 
be  retained.  Mediaeval  divines  will  merely  generalise 
it,  by  applying  it,  as  well  as  may  be,  to  the  seven  Sac 
raments. 

§  III.     The  Composition  of  the  Sacraments  during  the  I2th. 
century. —  Peter  Lombard. 

According  to  St.  Augustine,  a  sacrament,  then, 
consists  in  the  union  of  the  material  element  and  of 
the  word.  In  the  following  pages  we  shall  see  how 
the  writers  of  the  I2th.  century  state  with  precision 
that  theory  of  the  composition  of  the  sacramental 
sign. 

Before  Peter  Lombard,  the  famous  text  of  St 
Augustine:  Accedit  verbum  ad  elementum,  et  -fit  sa- 
cr amentum,  is  interpreted  in  various  ways.  Hugh  of 
St.  Victor  thinks  that  the  verbum  designates  the  Trini 
tarian  formula  which  accompanies  the  ablution: 

"  Per  verbum  enim  elementum  sanctificatur,  ut  virtutem 
sacramenti  accipiat.  Verbum  autem  quo  elementum  sancti 
ficatur  ut  sit  sacramentum,  ipsum  intelligimus  de  quo  dictum 
est:  Ite,  docete  omnes  gentes,  baptizantes  eos  in  nomine 
Patris,  et  Filii,  et  Spiritus  Sancti." 

Baptism  is  essentially  made  up  of  water  and  of  the 


HUGH  OF  ST.  VICTOR  67 

Trinitarian  formula  pronounced  by  the  minister ; 
water  is  the  material  element,  the  formula  is  called 
"  forma  verborum,"  an  expression  borrowed  from  St. 
Augustine.39  As  to  the  "  consecration  "  of  the  bap 
tismal  font,  it  takes  place,  not  because  it  is  a  constitu 
tive  part  of  Baptism,  but,  "  that  all  may  know  that  the 
sanctity  of  the  Sacrament  does  not  come  from  the 
minister,  but  from  God  the  Sanctifier."  40 

However,  after  reaching  a  most  exact  doctrine  of 
the  composition  of  the  baptismal  rite,  Hugh  falls  into 
confusion  and  inaccuracy  when  he  attempts  to  formu 
late  a  general  theory  of  all  the  Sacraments.  He  was 
led  into  error  by  his  defective  list  of  the  Sacraments, 
and  also  by  his  mystical  considerations. 

For  him,  the  matter  of  all  the  Sacraments  consists 
either  in  physical  substances,  like  the  water  of  Baptism, 
the  oil  for  the  anointing,  the  bread  and  wine  of  the 
Eucharist,  or  in  gestures,  like  the  sign  of  the  Cross, 
the  raising  of  the  hands  for  prayer,  etc.,  or  again  in 
words,  like  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity,  or  similar 
prayers.41  In  keeping  with  the  twofold  element  men 
tioned  by  St.  Augustine,  all  the  Sacraments  are  sancti 
fied  by  the  word  of  God;  but  that  sanctifying  word 

39  De  Sacram.,  lib.  ii,  pars  vi,  cap.  ii.     It  must  be  remarked 
that  Hugh   also,   as   well   as   St.   Augustine,   makes   use   of   the 
expression  "  forma  Baptismi "  to  designate  the  entire  baptismal 
rite.    Ibid.,  cap.  vi,  xiii,  etc. 

40  Ibid.,  cap.  xi. 

41  De   Sacram.,  lib.    I,   pars   ix,   cap.   vi :    In   triplici   materia 
omnia  divina  sacramenta  conficiuntur,  scilicet  aut  in  rebus,  aut 
in    factis,    aut    in    verbis.     ...     In    rebus    conficiuntur    sacra 
menta,  sicut  videlicet  sacramentum  baptismi  in  aqua.     ...     In 
factis    etiam    sacramenta    inveniuntur,    quemadmodum    videlicet 
cum    signtim    crucis    .     .    .     facimus.     ...     In    dictis    sacra 
mentum  invenitur  quemadmodum  est  invocatio  Trinitatis,  et  cse- 
tera  hujusmodi. 

6 


68         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

may  be  either  pronounced  orally,  when  the  sacrament 
consists  in  a  physical  substance  that  has  to  be  sancti 
fied,  or  simply  internally  believed,  when  the  sacrament 
consists  in  a  mere  gesture,  showing  faith  in  the  word 
of  God.42 

Far  more  simple  is  the  teaching  of  the  Summa  Sen- 
tentiarum.  Two  parts  constitute  Baptism  essentially: 
the  sacramentum  baptismi,  and  the  forma  baptismi. 
The  sacramentum  consists  in  the  water  "  sanctified  " 
by  the  formula  of  blessing:  for,  according  to  the 
Sermo  ad  C  ate  chum  enos,  the  element  united  with  the 
word  of  sanctification  makes  up  the  Sacrament.  As 
to  the  forma,  it  was  given  by  Christ,  it  is  the  invoca 
tion  of  the  Trinity,  which  accompanies  the  immer 
sion.43  Led  astray  by  the  apocryphal  Sermon  as 
cribed  to  St.  Augustine,  the  Summa  wrongly  inserts 
in  the  constitution  of  the  sacramentum  of  Baptism, 
the  formula  of  the  blessing  of  the  water  instead  of  the 
forma  baptismi.  On  this  point  Peter  Lombard  will 
depart  from  the  Summa,  and  side  with  Hugh.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  words  of  the  consecration  of 
bread  and  wine  are  most  rightly  considered  the 
forma  sacramenti  eucharistia.44 


Peter  Lombard  accepted  Hugh's  interpretation  of 
the  text  of  the  Tractatus  LXXX  in  Joanneni,  and  he 

42  Ibid.,   lib.   ii,   pars   ix,    cap.    i:     Quaedam    sacramenta    sine 
prolatione  verborum  per  solam  fidem  sanctificantur. —  ST.  BONA- 
VENTURE,  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  xxiii,  art.  i,  q.  iv,  speaks  of  the  queer 
opinion  of  certain  authors  according  to  whom  a  mental  prayer 
would   suffice    for   Extreme   Unction,   which   would   thus   be   a 
sacrament  without  form. 

43  Sum.  Sent.,  tract,  v,  cap.  iii,  iv. 

44  Tract  vi,  cap.  iv. 


PETER  LOMBARD  69 

formulated  a  general  theory  of  the  sacramental  rite, 
which  he  applied  to  all  the  Sacraments,  except  Pen 
ance  and  Matrimony: 

"Duo  autem  sunt  in  quibus  sacramentum  consistit,  scili 
cet  verba  et  res ;  verba,  ut  invocatio  Trinitatis ;  res,  ut  aqua, 
oleum  et  hujusmodi."  45 

The  special  character  indeed  of  the  work  of  the  Mas 
ter  of  Sentences  is  the  general  application  he  made  to 
all  the  Sacraments,  of  the  Augustinian  theory:  both 
of  the  distinction  between  the  sacramentum  and  the 
virtus  sacramenti,  and  of  the  composition  of  the  sa 
cramentum.4® 

The  sacrament  of  Baptism  consists  in  the  bodily 
ablution  accompanied  with  the  Trinitarian  formula : 

"  In  duobus  ergo  consistit  sacramentum  baptismi,  scilicet, 
in  verbo  et  elemento.  .  .  .  Sed  quod  est  illud  verbum,  quo 
accedente  ad  elementum,  fit  sacramentum  ?  Veritas  te  docet. 
.  .  .  Ite,  docete  omnes  gentes,  baptizantes  eos  in  nomine 
Patris.  .  .  ." 

The  effect  of  that  sacrament,  its  res,  is  the  justifica 
tion  of  the  soul.47 

The  words  said  by  the  Bishop  when  marking  with 
the  sign  of  the  Cross  the  foreheads  of  the  baptized, 
and  that  unction  itself  make  up  the  sacrament  of 
Confirmation,  the  virtus  of  which  is  the  conferring 

45  Sent.,  IV,  Dist.  I,  4. 

46  Peter   Lombard   draws   chiefly    from   Gratian   the   texts   of 
the   Fathers   by   which   he    justifies   his    sacramentary   teaching. 
Cf.  TURMEL,  Histoire  de  la  Thcologie  positive,  livre  II,  deuxieme 
partie,  chap,  vii  and  ff. ;  J.  ANNAT,  Pierre  Lombard  et  ses  sources 
patristiques,  in  the  Bulletin  de  Littcrature  ecclesiastique,  March, 
1906,  pp.  84  ff. 

47  Dist.  Ill,  i,  2,  12. 


70         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

of  the  Holy  Ghost  for  the  purpose  of  imparting 
strength  to  the  soul  (Dist.  VII,  i);  a  doctrine  that 
draws  its  inspiration  from  the  Sum.  Sent.,,  tract.  VI. 
In  the  Eucharist,  the  species  of  bread  and  wine  are 
the  sacr amentum,  and  the  words  of  the  consecration 
are  the  forma.  Peter  Lombard's  teaching  about  the 
res  of  the  Eucharist  is  that  of  the  Summa  Sententia- 
rum,  and  of  the  other  writings  of  the  first  half  of  the 
1 2th.  century: 

"  Hujus  autem  sacramenti  gemina  est  res:  una,  scilicet, 
contenta  et  non  significata ;  altera  significata  et  non  con- 
tenta.  Res  contenta  et  significata  est  caro  Christi,  quam 
de  Virgine  traxit,  et  sanguis  quern  pro  nobis  fudit.  Res 
autem  significata  et  non  contenta  est  unitas  Ecclesiae.  .  .  . 
Haec  est  duplex,  caro  Christi  et  sanguis." 

Hence  we  may  distinguish  in  the  Eucharist  the  sa 
cramentum  tantum,  viz. :  the  species  of  bread  and 
wine ;  the  sacramentum  et  res,  viz. :  the  natural  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ;  the  res  et  non  sacramentum,  viz. : 
'His  mystical  Body,48  a  well  known  distinction  which 
theologians  will  endeavor  later  on  to  apply  to  all  the 
Sacraments,  and  which  will  entangle  them  in  many 
subtleties. 

Peter  Lombard  did  not  apply  his  theory  to  Penance, 
and  really  he  could  not  have  done  so,  owing  to  the 
confusion  which  reigned  among  the  divines  of  the  i2th. 
century  concerning  this  sacrament.  They  did  not 
distinguish  clearly  enough  the  sacrament  of  Penance 
from  the  virtue  of  penance;  hence  they  taught  that 

48  Dist.  VIII.  The  just  alone  receive  the  two  res  of  the 
Eucharist ;  those  that  are  unworthy  receive  only  the  natural  body 
of  Jesus  Christ,  since  they  are  unable  to  possess  the  grace  of 
union  with  Christ  and  with  His  Church.  Dist.  IX. 


PETER  LOMBARD  71 

perfect  contrition  is  necessary  for  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  that  the  chief  effect  of  the  priest's  absolution 
is,  as  Peter  Lombard  teaches  after  St.  Anselm,  to  de 
clare  that  the  sins  have  been  forgiven  by  God.49 
Absolution,  then,  would  not  be  a  constitutive  element 
of  the  sacrament  of  Penance.  This  is  why  Peter 
Lombard  does  not  look,  in  the  sacr amentum  of  Pen 
ance,  for  the  two  elements  res  et  verba. 

As  regards  the  distinction  between  the  sacramentum 
and  the  res  vel  virtus  sacramenti,  Peter  Lombard  has 
no  definite  opinion  concerning  the  way  in  which  it  ap 
plies  to  Penance.  He  merely  exposes  the  views  of  his 
contemporaries,  without  adopting  any  of  them.  Ac 
cording  to  some,  the  sacramentum  consists  in  the  ex 
terior  penance,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  penitent's  confes 
sion  and  satisfaction;  the  res  sacramenti  is  the  interior 
penance,  that  is  to  say,  the  contrition  of  the  heart, 
which  brings  about  the  remission  of  sins.  Others  dis 
tinguished,  not  without  much  subtlety,  in  Penance  as 
in  the  Eucharist,  the  sacramentum  tantum,  viz. :  the  ex 
terior  penance,  the  sacramentum  et  res,  viz. :  the  inte 
rior  penance,  and  the  res  et  non  sacramentum,  the  re 
mission  of  sins.50  It  is  only  about  the  time  of  St. 
Thomas  that  a  more  accurate  conception  of  the  sacra 
ment  of  Penance  will  enable  theologians  to  find  out 
its  constitutive  elements. 

The  sacramentum  of  Extreme  Unction  is  the  unc 
tion  made  on  the  sick  with  the  oil  blessed  by  the 
Bishop ;  its  effect  is  the  remission  of  the  sins,  together 
with  the  increase  of  the  strength  of  the  sick  person.51 

49 A.  VACANT,  Dictionnaire  de  theologie  catholique,  art.  "Ab 
solution,"  I,  172  and  ff. 
80  Dist.  XXIT,  3. 
51  Dist.  XXIII,  2. 


72         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

The  ceremonies  of  Ordination  for  the  various  Or 
ders  are  sacramenta  which  confer  powers  and  impart 
grace.52 

The  union  of  the  minds  and  of  the  bodies  of  hus 
band  and  wife,  expressed  externally  by  the  mutual 
consent,  is  the  sacramentum  of  Marriage,  viz. :  the  sa 
cred  symbol  of  Christ's  union  with  His  Church.53  The 
Sacrament  of  Marriage  makes  the  matrimonial  bond 
indissoluble.  At  the  risk  of  opposing  his  own  defini 
tion  of  a  sacrament,  Peter  Lombard  teaches,  like  sever 
al  of  his  predecessors,54  that  this  sacrament  was  in 
stituted,  not  precisely  to  produce  grace,  but  to  be, 
after  the  fall,  a  remedy  to  concupiscence.55 

Peter  Lombard's  systematisation  is  to  become  clas 
sic,  except  as  regards  Penance  and  Matrimony. 
Henceforth  the  sacramental  rite,  that  which  consti 
tutes  the  sacramentum,  will  be  looked  upon  as  a  moral 
whole,  formed  by  the  union  of  two  essential  elements, 
res  ct  verba.  Sacramentary  Theology  is  formed. 

§  IV.     The  Conception  of  Matter  and  Form  of  a  Sacrament 
in  the  i$th.  Century. 

It  is  during  the  i3th.  century  that  Aristotelian  Phi 
losophy  definitely  penetrated  into  Theology.  Was  it 
not,  as  it  has  been  remarked,  very  clever  tactics,  in 
the  struggle  against  Averroism  which  attacked  Chris 
tianity  by  means  of  Aristotle,  to  take  hold  of  Peripa- 
teticism  and  to  use  it  as  an  arm  to  defend  Catholic 
dogma?  The  attempt  proved  successful  in  the  hands 

*2  Dist.  XXIV,  10. 

53  Dist.  XXVI,  6. 

54  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  especially,  De  Sacram.,  lib.  II,  pars  xi, 
cap.  iii,  and  the  Abelardian  Epitome,  31 ;  P.L.,  clxxviii,  1745. 

55  Dist.  XXVI,  2.     Cf.  Dist.  II,  i. 


MATTER  AND  FORM  73 

of  St.  Thomas,  and  it  attained  the  results  which  we 
know. 

Several  complete  theories  were  borrowed  from  Aris 
totelian  Philosophy,  that  they  might  be  used  for  the 
exposition  of  theological  doctrines.  Foremost  among 
these  theories,  we  must  place  that  of  matter  and  form, 
which  served  to  impart  more  precision  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  composition  of  the  sacramental  rite.  In  truth, 
the  analogies  between  Aristotle's  theory  of  matter  and 
form,  and  the  composition  of  the  Sacraments,  are  so 
striking  that  sooner  or  later  they  were  sure  to  be  put 
to  account.  Like  a  physical  body,  a  sacrament  is  a 
compound  resulting  from  the  union  of  two  constitu 
tive  elements,  one  of  which  is  undetermined  and  cor 
responds  to  matter,  the  other  is  determining  and  cor 
responds  to  form.  William  of  Auxerre 56  (fi223) 
was  the  first  who  pointed  out  these  analogies,  and  out 
lined  the  theory  of  matter  and  form  of  a  sacrament:  a 
theory  which  we  find  perfectly  completed  in  the  writ 
ings  of  St.  Thomas. 

At  the  outset,  the  Angelic  Doctor  justifies  the  theory 
of  the  sacramental  rite,  set  forth  by  Peter  Lombard : 
"  It  is  quite  fitting,"  he  says,  "  to  join,  in  the  Sacra 
ments,  words  to  external  things :  "  for,  in  this  way,  the 
Sacraments  are  in  harmony  with  the  Incarnate  Word, 
the  cause  of  sanctification;  they  are  made  up  of  a  word 

56  P.  SCHANZ,  Die  Lehre  von  den  heiligen  Sacramenten,  Frei 
burg  im  B.,  1893,  p.  103.  Yet  it  is  quite  probable  that  the  use  of 
the  words  materia  and  forma  to  designate  the  sacramental  action 
and  the  words  with  which  it  is  accompanied,  was  suggested  to 
William  by  the  terminology  of  the  authors  of  the  i2th.  century 
rather  than  by  the  Aristotelian  theory  of  matter  and  form.  But 
soon  after  Alexander  of  Hales,  Sum.  Theol.,  iv  p.,  qu  5,  memb. 
3,  art.  I,  and  all  his  contemporaries  applied  to  a  sacrament  the 
genuine  conception  of  matter  and  form. 


74         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

united  with  an  external  thing,  just  as  the  Word,  in 
the  mystery  of  the  Incarnation,  became  united  with  a 
visible  body.  They  are  also  in  keeping  with  human 
nature  which  they  are  intended  to  heal:  by  means  of 
the  external  thing,  they  touch  the  body,  and  by  the 
word,  they  inspire  the  soul  with  faith  in  the  sacra 
mental  remedy.57  A  sacrament,  then,  consists  in  the 
union  of  the  sensible  thing  and  of  the  word,  just  as 
the  physical  compound  results  from  the  union  of  mat 
ter  and  form: 

"  Ex  verbis  et  rebus  fit  quodam  modo  unum  in  sacramentis, 
sicut  forma  et  materia,  in  quantum  scilicet  per  verba  perfici- 
tur  significatio  rerum."  58 

Then  St.  Thomas  subordinates  his  sacramentary  the 
ology  to  that  philosophical  conception  of  a  sacrament. 
Determined  words,  united  with  determined  external 
things,  are  essential  to  a  sacrament ;  for,  "  in  all  the 
compounds  of  matter  and  form,  the  determining  prin 
ciple  is  the  form,  which  is  in  some  way  the  end  and 
term  of  matter.  Since  then,  in  the  Sacraments,  de 
termined  external  things  which  are,  as  it  were,  their 
matter,  are  required ;  with  still  more  reason  is  a  form 
of  determined  words  necessary/'  59  The  unchanging 
character  of  sacramental  words  is  also  deduced  from 
the  function  they  fulfil  in  the  Sacraments.  The  Phi 
losopher  has  said  that  every  addition  or  subtraction 
changes  the  species  in  forms,  as  in  numbers;  conse 
quently,  if  the  change  introduced  into  the  form  modi 
fies  the  requisite  meaning  of  the  words,  there  is  no 
sacrament.60 

57  S.  Theol,  3a  p.,  quaest.  60,  art.  6. 
ss  Ibid.,  ad  2um. 
59  Qusest.  60,  art.  7. 
eo  Art.  8. 


MATTER  AND  FORM  75 

Henceforth,  the  theology  of  the  composition  of  the 
sacramental  rite  shall  rest  on  that  conception  of  a  sac 
rament,  the  rise  of  which  we  have  just  witnessed. 
Authors  will  be  inclined  to  set  aside  the  study  of  his 
tory;  and  by  means  of  a  priori  reasonings,  will  attempt 
to  determine  the  conditions  on  which  Sacraments  are 
valid,  and  the  essential  elements  of  each  one  of  them. 

Duns  Scotus61  added  a  last  determination  to  the 
theory,  by  distinguishing  two  kinds  of  matter:  the 
remote  matter,  which  is  the  material  element  consid 
ered  in  itself  —  for  instance,  baptismal  water  —  and 
the  proximate  matter,  which  is  the  application  of  the 
remote  matter  to  the  subject,  when  the  sacrament  is 
administered,  like  the  baptismal  ablution.  St. 
Thomas  applied  the  name  of  matter  exclusively  to  the 
water  of  Baptism,  to  the  holy  chrism,  etc.,62  and  con 
tinued  to  call  "  res  "  the  external  acts,  such  as  ablu 
tions,  anointing,  etc. : 

"  Sub  rebus  autem  comprehenduntur  etiam  ipsi  actus  sen- 
sibiles,  puta  ablutio,  inunctio  et  alia  hujusmodi."  63 

61  DUNS  SCOTUS,  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  Ill,  quaest.  Ill ;  Dist.  VII,  quaest. 
I:  Hie  patet,  quae  sit  hujus  sacramenti  [confirmationis]  ma- 
teria:  quia  cum  posset  distingui  de  materia,  sicut  distinctum  est 
de  materia  in  Baptismo  (Dist.  Ill,  q.  3).  Materia  proxima 
...  est  unctio  facta  in  fronte  in  figura  crucis,  cum  chrismate 
sanctificato.  Materia  autem  remota,  est  chrisma  compositum  ex 
oleo  olivae  et  balsamo,  et  sanctificatum  specialiter  ab  episcopo 
vel  ab  alio,  cui  talis  sanctificatio  poterit  committi. 

62Opusc.  V,  14:  Verba  quibus  sanctificantur  sacramenta, 
dicuntur  sacramentorum  f  ormae :  res  autem  significatae  dicuntur 
sacramentorum  materiae,  sicut  aqua  est  materia  baptismi,  et 
chrisma  confirmationis. 

63  3  P-,  quaest.  60,  art.  6.  The  distinction  between  the  materia 
remota  and  the  materia  proxima  is  made,  in  the  Summa,  only  in 
the  case  of  Penance.  Qu.  84,  art.  2. 


76         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

But  what  it  is  important  to  observe,  are  the  remark 
ably  accurate  explanations  contributed  by  St.  Thomas 
to  the  composition  of  the  sacrament  of  Penance.  In 
his  time,  the  distinction  between  contrition  and  attri 
tion  had  brought  out  most  explicitly  the  great  differ 
ence  between  the  virtue  of  penance  and  the  sacra 
ment  of  Penance,  which  obtains  all  its  efficacy  from 
the  priest's  absolution.64  Hence  the  sacrament  of 
Penance  does  not  consist,  as  Peter  Lombard  said,  in 
the  external  acts  of  the  penitent:  these  are  only  a 
part  of  the  sacrament,  its  matter;  the  priest's  absolu 
tion  is  its  form. 

"  In  hoc  sacramento  [Paenitentiae]  sunt  aliquae  res,  scili 
cet,  ipsi  exteriores  actus,  et  aliqua  verba,  scilicet,  sacerdotis 
absolventis,  quae  sunt  forma  hujus  sacramenti,  quibus  ex- 
primitur  absolutions  actus."  65 

For  Penance  and  Matrimony  differ  from  the  other 
Sacraments :  in  the  latter,  the  matter  and  the  form 
exist  independently  of  the  acts  of  the  subject;  in  the 
former,  on  the  contrary,  the  very  acts  of  the  subject 
are  their  constitutive  elements : 

"  In  illis  autem  sacramentis,  quae  actum  nostrum  requi- 
runt  .  .  .  ipsi  actus  exterius  apparentes  hoc  idem  faciunt, 
quod  materia  in  aliis  sacramentis."  66 

64  A.  VACANT,  /.  c. 

«5  ST.  THOMAS,  In  Sent.  IV,  Dist.  XIV,  Qucest.  I,  ad  2um.  Sum. 
Theol,  84,  art.  2,  3. 

66  Ibid.,  ad  ium.  S.  Theol.,  84,  art.  2:  Proxima  sacramenti 
paenitentiae  materia  sunt  actus  paenitentis ;  remota  vero  sunt  pec- 
cata  non  acceptanda,  sed  detestanda  et  destruenda.  Art.  3 :  In 
qualibet  re  perfectio  attribuitur  formae.  Dictum  est  autem  supra 
(art  i),  quod  hoc  sacramentum  perficitur  per  ea  quae  sunt  ex 
parte  sacerdotis.  Unde  oportet  quod  ea  quae  sunt  ex  parte  paeni- 


MATTER  AND  FORM  77 

This  view  Duns  Scotus  did  not  accept.  For  him,  the 
priest's  absolution  constitutes  by  itself  the  whole  sac 
rament;  the  acts  of  the  penitent  are  not  its  constitu 
tive  parts,  they  are  mere  conditions.  Yet,  let  it  be 
observed,  what  Duns  Scotus  rejects  is  not  the  con 
ception  of  matter  and  form  applied  to  Penance,  but 
simply  the  particular  way  in  which  St.  Thomas  had 
applied  it  to  that  sacrament.  For,  in  his  time,  that 
conception  was  definitively  accepted,  and  no  scholar 
ever  thought  of  opposing  it. 

However,  as  our  readers  easily  imagine,  the  theory 
of  matter  and  form  of  a  sacrament  would  not  have 
been  held  as  true  by  mediaeval  authors,  if  it  could  not 
have  been  applied  to  all  the  Sacraments.67 

Since  the  principle  that  a  sacrament  consists  of  mat 
ter  and  form  was  laid  down,  these  two  elements  had 
to  be  found  in  all  the  Sacraments.  How  could  a  rite 
which  is  not  made  up  of  matter  and  form,  and  there 
fore  not  in  keeping  with  the  ideal  type,  how  could  such 
a  rite  be  a  genuine  sacrament?  Therefore  even  Mar 
riage,  although  it  is  a  contract,  was  likened  to  a  physi 
cal  compound.  Truly,  the  task  was  not  easy;  nay 
it  may  be  impossible,  if  we  judge  from  the  many 
attempts  made  by  Theologians  from  St.  Thomas  down 
to  our  own  day.  At  all  events,  the  attempt  ivas  actu 
ally  made.  In  his  Commentary  on  the  Sentences,  the 
Angelic  Doctor  asks  himself  how  Matrimony  can  be 

tentis,  sive  sint  verba,  sive  facta,  sint  quaedam  materia  hujus 
sacramenti ;  ea  vero  quae  sunt  ex  parte  sacerdotis,  se  habeant  per 
modum  formae. 

67  It  must  be  remarked,  however,  that  many  theologians  sub 
sequent  to  St.  Thomas,  refused  to  admit  that  all  the  Sacraments 
were  composed  of  matter  and  form.  Durand  of  Saint-Pourgain, 
in  the  I4th.  century,  is  of  this  number.  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  I, 
qu.  3.  But  their  opinion  was  never  popular  in  the  schools. 


78         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

a  sacrament,  since  apparently,  at  least,  neither  form, 
nor  matter  is  found  in  it;  the  priest's  blessing  is  not 
essential,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  no  material  element 
is  required.  The  form  of  this  sacrament,  he  answers, 
consists  in  the  words  which  express  the  consent  of 
the  husband  and  of  the  wife;  the  consent  itself  holds 
the  place  of  matter:68  a  puzzling  explanation  which 
will  bring  into  play  the  sagacity  of  the  commentators 
of  St.  Thomas! 


§  V.     The  Conception  of  Matter  and  Form,  after  the  i$th. 

Century. 

We  have  just  witnessed  the  formation  of  the  con 
cept  of  matter  and  form  of  a  sacrament,  and  en 
deavored  to  discern  the  moment  when  the  a  priori 
entered  the  field  of  sacramentary  theology.  We  have 
still  to  study  the  consequences  of  that  theological 
movement,  so  as  to  be  able  to  form  an  accurate  idea 
of  all  its  bearing. 

As  soon  as  a  sacrament  came  to  be  looked  upon  as 
a  compound  resulting  from  the  union  of  the  two  con 
stitutive  elements,  the  conditions  of  a  valid  adminis 
tration  of  the  Sacraments  were  set  forth  with  a  preci 
sion  and  a  rigor  unknown  up  to  that  time.  The  the 
ory  of  matter  and  form  enabled  moralists  to  expose, 
with  great  distinctness,  the  way  in  which  the  minister 

68  In  Sent.  IV,  Dist.  26,  qu.  2 :  Verba  quibus  consensus  matri- 
monialis  exprimitur,  sunt  forma  hujus  sacramenti :  non  autem 
benedictio  sacerdotis  quae  est  quoddam  sacramentale.  .  .  . 
Sacramentum  matrimonii  perficitur  per  actum  ejus  qui  sacra- 
mento  illo  utitur,  sicut  paenitentia;  et  ideo  sicut  paenitentia  non 
habet  aliam  materiam  nisi  ipsos  actus  sensui  subjectos,  qui  sunt 
loco  materialis  elementi,  ita  est  de  matrimonio.  Cf.  Summa  42, 
art.  I. 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  79 

must  perform  the  sacramental  action  and  pronounce 
the  sacred  formulas.  In  this  regard  and  in  many 
others  too,  the  conception  of  matter  and  form  was  of 
great  benefit,  and  denotes  considerable  progress. 

Another  consequence  of  the  sacramental  theory  of 
matter  and  form  seems  to  have  been  the  substitution 
or  the  addition  of  some  new  formulas  to  the  old  ones, 
which  were  not  found  expressive  enough  to  fulfil  the 
function  of  forms.  Some  deprecative  forms,  used  be 
fore  the  1 3th.  century,  were  set  aside  and  replaced  by 
indicative  forms,  except  for  Extreme  Unction,  be 
cause  of  the  text  of  St.  James:  Et  oratio  fidei  sal- 
vablt  infirmum.69 

The  formula:  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,  etc.,  which 
accompanies  the  imposition  of  the  Bishop's  hand  in  the 
ordination  to  Deaconship  was  introduced  into  the  ritu 
als,  about  the  I3th.  or  the  izj-th.  century,  probably  be 
cause  no  form  expressive  enough  was  found  in  the 
long  prayer  which  alone,  up  to  that  time,  had  been 
used.70  The  same  remark  must  be  made  about  the 

69  The  indicative  form  of  Penance :    Ego  te  absolve,  became 
general  after  St.  Thomas.     (A.  VACANT,  Dictionnaire  de  theolo- 
gie,  i,  244  and  ss.)     That  of  Confirmation  was  commonly  adopted 
about  the  same  time.     (CHARDON,  Histoire  de  la  Confirmation, 
chap.  I;  SCHANZ,  Die  Lehre  von  den  heil.  Sacr.,  p.  304.)     With 
J.  Morin  and  several  other  theologians  we  think  that  the  Church 
received   from   Christ  the  power  to  determine  the  matter  and 
form  of  some  Sacraments,  and,  therefore,  to  modify  them.     The 
modification,   in   the    I3th.   century,   was  brought  about   in  part 
through   the    influence    of   the   theory   of   matter   and    form   of 
the  sacrament,  as  we  learn  from  the  arguments  set  forth  by  St. 
Thomas.    5\  Thcol.,  quaest.  72,  4:  Praedicta  forma  [Consigno  te 
.    .    .]   est  conveniens  huic  sacramento   [confirmationis].     Sicut 
enim  forma  rei  naturalis  dat  ei  speciem,  ita  forma  sacramenti 
continere   debet    quidquid    pertinet    ad    speciem    sacramenti.     Cf. 
qusest.  84,  3. 

70  J.  MORIN,  De  sacris  Ecclesia  ordinationibus,  part  III,  exerc. 


80         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

similar  formula:  Accipe  Spiritum  Sanctum,,  now  em 
ployed,  in  the  Latin  Church,  for  the  consecration  of 
bishops.71 

However,  in  order  not  to  overestimate  the  influence 
of  the  theory  of  matter  and  form  in  the  modification 
of  the  sacramental  rites,  it  must  be  observed  that  the 
traditio  instrument  or  um  in  the  ordination  of  priests, 
and  that  of  the  Gospels  in  the  ordination  of  deacons, 
as  well  as  the  episcopal  and  priestly  unctions,  existed 
long  before  the  I3th.  century.  These  ceremonies  were 
introduced  under  the  influence  of  tendencies  similar  to 
those  which  prompted  the  scholastic  theologians.72 

The  conception  of  matter  and  form  applied  to  the 
Sacraments  had  other  consequences,  and  these  of  a 
rather  serious  character. 

To  it  we  must  ascribe,  in  a  large  measure,  the  origin 
of  Melchior  Cano's  73  opinion  concerning  Matrimony. 
The  difficulty  of  finding,  in  the  matrimonial  contract, 
the  matter  and  form  of  the  sacrament  had  caused 
theologians  to  lapse  into  subtleties  at  which  Cano 
laughs : 

"  Hie  tibi  dicit  contrahentes  ipsos  esse  materiam  sacra- 
menti;  hie,  non  ipsos,  sed  consensum;  alius,  gestus  et  nutus, 
qui  a  viro  feminaque  exceptis  verbis  adhibentur;  alius,  pri- 
oris  loquentis  verba  materiam  esse  affirmant,  posterioris  for- 
mam.  .  .  .  Quorsum  autem  attinet,  in  re  gravissima 
tenuiter,  ne  dicam  ridicule,  philosophari  ?  " 

9,  c.  ii ;  CHARDON,  Histoire  des  Sacrements.  L'Ordre,  II,  part  III, 
chap,  v ;  MANY,  Praelectiones  de  Sacra  Ordinatione,  Paris, 
1905,  P-  450. 

71  MORIN,  Ibid.,  part  III,  exerc.  2.—  CHARDON,  L'Ordre,  II  p., 
chap.  i. 

72  See  the  periods  in  which  these  different  ceremonies   were 
adopted,  in  CHARDON,  H.  de  TOrdre,  II,  p.,  chap,  i-v,  who  bor 
rows  from  Morin;  and  in  MANY,  I.e.,  pp.  433-462. 

73  De  locis  theol,  lib.  VIII,  cap.  v. 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  81 

The  best  thing  to  do  might  be,  it  seems,  simply  to 
seek  no  longer  for  a  matter  and  a  form  in  Matrimony. 
Melchior  Cano  does  not  think  so:74 

"  Incredibile  est  autem  nisi  a  forma  sacra  sacramentum 
perfici.  Quemadmodum  enim  humana  forma  hominem  efficit, 
et  albedo  facit  album,  ita  prorsus  necesse  est  a  forma  sacra 
quodcumque  sacramentum  existere." 

Hence,  he  is  obliged  to  look  for  that  "  indispensa 
ble  "  form  in  the  words  the  priest  pronounces,  whilst 
he  blesses  the  couple.  Thus  the  matrimonial  contract 
is  distinguished  from  the  sacrament,  of  which  it  is 
the  matter;  the  Christian  marriage  may  exist,  as  a 
contract,  yet  may  not  be  a  sacrament.  It  becomes 
a  sacrament,  when  it  is  united  with  the  form,  which 
is  supplied  by  the  priest.75 

This  erroneous  doctrine,  of  which  we  have  exposed 
the  origin,  was  followed  by  a  whole  school  until  the 
middle  of  the  last  century,  and  hindered  for  a  long 
while  the  development  of  the  theology  of  Marriage. 

However,  the  most  serious  consequences  of  the  the 
ory  of  matter  and  form,  applied  to  the  Sacraments, 
refer  to  their  institution.  Matter  and  form  being  the 

74  Melchior  Cano  was  held  back,  not  only  by  his  ideas  con 
cerning  the  Sacraments,  but  also  by  the  Decree  to  the  Armenians. 
But  the  Decree  does  not  apply  to  Marriage  the  theory  of  matter 
and    form;   which  proves   that  that  theory  must  not  be   neces 
sarily  extended  to  all  the   Sacraments.     We  need   not   say  that 
the  Church  never  approved  those  abuses  of  the  sacramental  the 
ory  of   matter   and   form,    for   which   individual   authors   alone 
remain  responsible. 

75  PALLAVICINI,  Histoire  du  Concile  de  Trent e,  livre  XXI IIe, 
chap,  ix,  n.  16,  informs  us  that  Protestants  did  not  fail  to  say  that 
the  words:  Ego  vos  in  matrimonium  conjungo,  etc.,  of  which  the 
Council  speaks  (Sess.  XXIV,  De  Reform.  Matrim.,  cap.  I)  were 
invented  to  be  made  the  form  of  the  sacrament  of  Matrimony. 


82         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

essential  elements  of  a  sacrament,  theologians  were 
led  to  believe  that  to  institute  a  sacrament  was  ex 
actly  the  same  as  to  determine  its  matter  and  form. 
And  yet,  we  may  easily  imagine  a  distinction  be 
tween  the  institution  of  the  Sacraments  and  the  deter 
mination  of  their  respective  matter  and  form.76  But 
when  one  reasons  as  if  he  identified  the  composition 
of  the  Sacraments  with  that  of  physical  bodies,  he 
is  also  tempted  to  admit  that,  like  a  physical  body,  a 
sacrament  cannot  exist  unless  God  Himself  deter 
mines  its  constitutive  elements,  which  must  remain  un 
changed.  Hence  it  is  God  and  God  alone,  who  chose 
the  matter  and  form  of  the  Sacraments,  as  they  were 
in  the  I3th.  century,  and  if  God  chose  them,  they  must 
have  been  the  same  in  all  places  and  at  all  times. 

This  doctrine  had  scarcely  arisen  when  it  found 
itself  in  conflict  with  history,  and  led  some  theolo 
gians,  like  Alexander  of  Hales,  to  the  most  unlikely 
hypotheses.  In  order  to  secure  the  divine  institution 
of  the  actual  matter  and  form  of  Confirmation,  Alex 
ander  went  so  far  as  to  ascribe  the  origin  of  this 
sacrament  to  a  council  held  at  Meaux,  in  the  Qth. 
century,  which  was  prompted  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
determine  the  elements  of  the  sacramental  rite: 

"  Postquam  apostoli  qui  erant  bases  Ecclesiae,  qui  a  Domi 
no  erant  praelati  et  Spiritu  Sancto  confirmati,  defecerunt, 
institutum  fuit  hoc  sacramentum  Spiritus  Sancti  instinctu 
in  concilio  Meldensi  quantum  ad  formam  verborum  et  mate- 
riam  elementorum,  cui  etiam  Spiritus  Sanctus  contulit  vir- 
tutem  sanctificandi."  77 

76  Since  the   I7th.  century,  that  distinction  has  actually  been 
made,  as  we  will  see  later  on.     When  instituting  the  Sacraments, 
Christ  may  have  left  to  His  Church  the  power  of  determining 
the  matter  and  form  of  some  of  them. 

77  Sum,  TheoL,  IV,  qu.  9,  membr.   I. 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  83 

Before  this  Council,  the  Holy  Ghost  was  imparted  to 
the  faithful  without  the  sacramental  rite,  since  the 
actual  form:  Signo  te  .  .  .  was  not  yet  in  ex 
istence.78  This  was  simply  to  give  up  the  institution 
of  Confirmation  by  Christ,  out  of  regard  for  the 
claims  of  history.  Albert  the  Great  and  St.  Thomas 
did  the  reverse.  Contrary  to  history,  they  maintained 
that  Christ  Himself  determined  the  present  matter 
and  form  of  the  sacrament  of  Confirmation,  and  that, 
since  the  Apostles,  these  have  always  been  in  use  in 
the  Church.  St.  Bonaventure  continued  to  teach,  like 
Alexander  of  Hales,  that  the  choice  of  chrism  and  of 
the  actual  formula  of  Confirmation  was  inspired  by 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  Church.  But,  instead  of  dating 
this  fact  from  the  Qth.  century,  the  Seraphic  Doctor 
placed  it  immediately  after  the  death  of  the  Apostles. 
Before  that  time,  the  Apostles  imparted  the  Holy 
Ghost,  without  the  sacrament  of  Confirmation,  which 
was  instituted  only  after  their  death,  since  it  is  only 
after  their  death  that  its  matter  and  form  were  "  in 
stituted."  79 

Decidedly,  the  attempts  of  Alexander  and  of  St. 
Bonaventure  could  not  meet  with  success.  However, 
as  the  solution  of  the  conflict  could  not  be  sought  at 
that  time  in  the  modification  of  theological  hypotheses, 
it  had  to  be  found  in  the  ignoring  of  history.  This 
was  done  by  the  authors  of  the  I4th.,  I5th.  and  i6th. 
centuries;  hence  the  conflict  no  longer  existed  during 

78  See  in  TURMEL,  Histoire  de  la  theologie  positive,  liv.  II,  ire 
partie,  chap,  ix,  the  discussions  concerning  Confirmation:  dis 
cussions  that  arose  from  the  identification,  made  by  the  authors 
of  the  I3th.  century,  of  the  institution  of  a  sacrament  with  the 
determination  of  its  matter  and  form. 

™  In  Sent.  IV,  dist.  VII,  art.  I,  q.  i,  2. 
7 


84          ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

that  age,  the  golden  age  of  the  conception  of  matter 
and  form  applied  to  the  Sacraments.80 

This  calm  was  disturbed  by  the  Catholic  works  which 
arose  on  occasion  of  the  Protestant  controversies  of 
the  1 7th.  century.  In  order  to  convince  Protestants  of 
the  apostolic  origin  of  the  sacramental  dogmas,  Cath 
olic  scholars  took  up  historical  researches  regarding 
our  sacred  rites,  both  in  the  Greek  and  in  the  Latin 
Church.  First  the  Greek  Arcudius  published  in  1619 
his  work  "  De  concordia  Ecclesiae  occidcntalis  et  ori- 
entalis  in  septem  sacrament  or  um  adniinistratione."  In 
1651  and  1655,  John  Morin,  of  the  Oratory,  published 
his  two  immortal  treatises  Commentarius  historicus 
de  disciplina  in  administratione  sacramenti  Paeniten- 
ti(z,  and  Commentarius  de  sacris  Ecclesiae  Ordinatio- 
nibus.  At  the  beginning  of  the  I7th.  century,  Dom 
Martene  81  and  Eusebius  Renaudot  82  composed  works 

80Suarez  (1548-1617)  at  the  end  of  the  i6th.  century  thus 
exposes  his  teaching  on  the  composition  of  the  Sacraments : 
i°  Dico  .  .  .  materias  et  formas  sacramentorum  determinatas 
esse  ex  Christi  Domini  institutione,  et  eo  modo  quo  definitse 
sunt,  esse  necessarias  ad  sacramenta  conficienda.  .  .  v  In 
quibusdam  [sacramentis]  certum  est  materiam  esse  determinatam 
in  quadam  specie  ultima  ut  est  aqua  in  Baptismo  et  oleum  in 
extrema  unctione,  in  aliis  vero  sufficit  unitas  generica,  ut  verbi 
gratia  confessio  dolorosa  est  materia  sacramenti  paenitentiae, 
sive  sit  dolorosa  per  attritionem,  sive  per  contritionem,  quae 
specie  differunt  (Qusest.  70,  art.  8,  disp.  2,  sect.  3.) — 2°  Dicendum 
.  .  .  est  sacramenta  omnia  eadem  materia  et  forma  constare 
in  universa  Ecclesia,  atque  ideo  id  quod  in  uno  loco  sufficit, 
sufficere  ubique  ut  sacramentum  factum  teneat,  quamvis  for- 
tasse  peccet  minister  accidentalem  ritum  omittendo  .  .  . 
alioquin  .  .  .  dici  posset  diversis  temporibus  posse  variari 
sacramentorum  essentias,  ita  ut  quod  nunc  sufficit,  antea  non 
fuerit  sufficiens:  vel  e  contrario,  quia  non  est  major  ratio  de 
diversis  locis,  quam  de  diversis  temporibus. 

81  Especially  in  his  De  antiquis  Ecclesice  ritibus  (Rouen,  1700). 

82 Liturgiarum    orientalium    collectio    (Paris,    1716);    La   per- 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  85 

which  equalled  in  every  respect  those  of  their  predeces 
sors.  A  few  years  later,  Dom  Chardon  brought  to 
the  knowledge  of  the  public  at  large,  the  information 
which  for  more  than  a  century  Catholic  historians  had 
gradually  accumulated.83 

The  results  of  those  truly  scholarly  works  fully  vin 
dicated,  as  we  might  expect,  the  definitions  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  They  showed  that  the  sacramental 
faith  of  the  Church  had  been  substantially  the  same  at 
all  times,  and  thus  they  dealt  a  decisive  blow  to  Protes 
tant  doctrines. 

However,  whilst  the  conclusions  reached  by  his 
torians  were  in  harmony  with  the  definitions  of  the 
Church,  they  were  far  less  favorable  to  the  theory  of 
matter  and  form  of  the  Sacraments.  History  showed, 
not  only,  as  Alexander  of  Hales  had  already  remarked, 
that  Christ  had  not  instituted  the  actual  matter  and 
form  of  all  the  Sacraments,  but  also  that  the  matter 
and  form  of  some  of  them  had  varied  in  the  course 
of  ages,  nay,  that  the  matter  and  form  of  some 
were  not  the  same  among  the  Greeks  and  among  the 
Latins.  Thus  historical  facts  were  found  to  clash 
with  the  theories  of  the  schools  concerning  the  con 
stitutive  elements-  of  the  sacramental  rites.84 

petuite  de  la  foi  de  VEglise  touchant  I'Eucharistie,  les  Sacrements 
(1711-1713). 

83  Histoire  des  Sacrements.     We  do  not  aim  at  enumerating 
all  the  historical  works  then  published  that  treat  of  the  Sacra 
ments.     Yet  we  must  mention  the  work  of  GOAR,  Euchologion 
she  Rituale  Graecorum  (Paris,  1647),  and  the  name  of  Joseph- 
Simon  Assemani   (+1768). 

84  The  following  are  the  historical  facts  which  were  at  vari 
ance  with  the  theories  of  the  Schools.     In  the  Apostolic  Age, 
the  matter  of  Confirmation  was  the  imposition  of  hands;  after 
the  2d.  century,  it  was,  besides,  the  anointing  with  the  holy  chrism. 
The  present  Latin  form  of  Confirmation  became  generally  ac- 


86         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

But  this  is  not  of  a  nature  to  disturb  any  one,  since 
the  Church  has  never  defined  that  Christ  Himself  de 
termined  the  matter  and  form  of  all  the  Sacraments. 

However,  theologians  were  considerably  perplexed: 
a  perplexity  to  which  the  historians  we  have  just  men 
tioned,  especially  Dom  Chardon,  frequently  allude,  not 
without  a  tinge  of  irony. 

In  the  preface  of  his  work  De  sacris  Eccleslae  Ordi- 
nationibus,  John  Morin  relates  that  having  gone  to 
Rome  in  1639,  at  the  invitation  of  Cardinal  Francis 
Barberini,  a  nephew  of  Pope  Urban  VIII,  he  was  in 
vited  to  examine  the  Euchologium  of  the  Greeks  in 
an  assembly  of  theologians.  The  latter  were  taking 
up  the  study  of  the  Greek  ordinations,  and  they  had 
agreed  to  follow  one  canon  of  criticism,  viz.,  they 
would  accept  those  Eastern  practices  that  agreed  with 
their  own  principles,  but  they  would  seriously  ques 
tion  and  even  reject  the  others.85  Morin  had  no  diffi- 

cepted  in  the  West  only  about  the  I2th.  century ;  before  that  time, 
the  most  diverse  formulas  were  used  in  the  Churches.  Since 
the  4th.  century,  the  Greek  form  is  Zfipayls  Swpeas  ITveu/iaros  'Ayiov. 
Before  the  i3th.  century,  the  formulas  of  the  absolution  of  sins 
were  generally  deprecative,  as  they  are  still  in  many  Greek 
Churches.  (Dictionnaire  de  theolog.  cath.,  i,  200  and  ff.)  The 
same  diversity  exists  as  regards  the  ancient  formulas  of  Extreme 
Unction.  (MARTENE,  De  antiquis  Bed.  ritibus,  lib.  I,  p.  II,  cap. 
vii.)  The  matter  of  Order  was,  and  is  still,  among  the  Greeks 
the  imposition  of  hands  alone.  In  the  Latin  Church,  since  the 
early  Middle  Ages,  it  consists  in  the  imposition  of  hands  and 
in  the  traditio  instrumentorum. —  DOM  PUNIET  has  demon 
strated  in  the  Dictionnaire  d'Archeologie  chretienne  et  de  Litur- 
gie,  art.  "  Bapteme"  fascic.  xiii,  col.  336  ff.,  that  the  Trinitarian 
profession  of  faith  in  the  form  of  questions  and  answers,  which 
accompanied  the  triple  immersion,  served  formerly  as  the  bap 
tismal  formula. 

85  J.  MORIN,  Commentarius  de  sacris  Ecclesia  ordinationibus 
(Paris,  1655),  Praefatio,  p.  i:  Mihi  non  satis  tutum  videbatur 
ex  solis  Doctorum  scholasticorum  dictatis  de  re  tanti  momenti 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  87 

culty  in  convincing  them  that  the  Eastern  practices  re 
garding  ordinations  had  been  those  of  the  Latin  Church 
before  the  Middle  Ages,  and  that  consequently,  if  the 
actual  practices  of  the  Greek  Church  were  in  harmony 
with  what  had  always  been  done  in  the  Church,  they 
should  not  be  declared  null  and  void.  That  episode 
is  quite  significant;  it  shows  that  a  school  of  theolo 
gians  were  disposed  to  sacrifice  to  their  own  principles 
the  Greek  ordinations,  and  also  several  other  practices 
of  the  Eastern  Churches,  had  it  not  been  for  the  far- 
seeing  wisdom  and  care  of  the  Holy  See. 

Yet,  it  was  not  necessary  for  theologians  to  come  to 
such  extreme  measures,  in  order  to  get  out  of  the  dif 
ficult  position  in  which  they  had  placed  themselves 
owing  to  systematic  hypotheses  hastily  framed  and 
resting  on  a  priori  ideas. 

Clear-sighted  as  he  was,  John  Morin  realized  at 
once  that  the  institution  of  the  Sacraments  had  to  be 
distinguished  from  the  determination  of  their  matter 
and  form.  Christ  may  have  instituted  some  Sacra 
ments,  in  particular  Confirmation,  Extreme  Unction 
and  Orders,  without  determining  Himself,  except  in 
a  most  general  way,  their  matter  and  form;  He 
may  have  left  to  His  Church  to  determine  them  with 
precision.  This  is  the  only  doctrine  that  can  be  rec 
onciled  with  facts: 

Quae    .     .     .     relata    sunt,    evidenter    mihi    demonstrare 

pronuntiare.  Experiebar  enim  eos  [theologos]  nulla  graecorum 
morum  scientia  tinctos,  nulla  linguae  graecss  cognitione  asperses, 
nunquam  illis  in  mentem  venisse  ut  inquirerent,  quse,  quot, 
qualesve  essent  grsecae  ordinationes.  ^quum  non  judicabam  ad 
eorum  sola  axiomata,  tanqtiam  ad  lapidem  lydium,  istas  ordi 
nationes  exigere;  quae  cum  eis  consentiunt,  probare;  quae  dis- 
sentiunt,  eo  ipso  statim  ut  spuria  improbare,  et  ab  ordinationum 
choro  eliminare. 


88         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

videntur  maxime  probabilem  esse  eorum  Doctorum  senten- 
tiam  qui  asserunt  Christum  Dominum  nostrum  plerorumque 
sacramentorum  formas  et  materias  generatim  tantum  institu- 
isse;  earum  vero  determinationem  apostolorum  et  Eccle- 
siae  auctoritati  et  prudentiae  commisisse.  Eas  enim  si 
Christus  instituisset,  et  apostolis  determinasset,  eaedem  es- 
sent,  et  omni  tempore,  et  apud  omnes  gentes.  Utroque  au- 
tem  modo  contrarium  deprehenditur.  Orientales  enim  ab 
Occidentalibus  hac  in  causa  plurimum  differunt.86 

True,  Morin  adds  (cap.  XVIII,  n.  2)  that,  never 
theless,  the  facts  can  be  made  to  agree  with  the 
scholastic  doctrines.  To  justify  his  assertion  he  main 
tains,  for  instance,  that  the  actual  Latin  formula  of 
absolution:  Ego  te  absolve,  is  deprecative,  for  it  con 
tains  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity!  Thus  it  would 
be  like  the  ancient  formulas  (cap.  XVIII,  n.  8).  Such 
explanations  prompt  us  to  seek  elsewhere  the  true 
mind  of  the  learned  Oratorian. 

If  Christ  left  to  His  Church  to  determine  the  mat 
ter  and  form  of  some  Sacraments,  He  gave  her  also 
by  that  very  fact  the  power  of  modifying  them ;  thus 
we  can  account  for  the  changes  and  diversities  of  prac 
tices,  which  history  records.  This  or  that  form,  for 
instance  a  deprecative  formula  of  absolution,  may 
have  been  validly  replaced  by  an  indicative  form ;  nay 
it  may  be  that  for  one  and  the  same  sacrament, 
the  Latin  Church  has  an  indicative  form,  whilst  the 
Greek  Church  has  a  deprecative  form,  and  vice 
versa.87 

86  De  disdplina   in  admin,   sacramenti  Panit entice,  lib.   VIII, 
cap.  xvii,  n.  i.     Nulla  enim  mihi  causa  necessaria  subesse  videtur 
ob  quam  ab  hoc  vulgato  axiomate  recedamus,  scilicet  immutabiles 
esse  sacramentorum  materias  et  formas,  et  ubique  terrarum  eas- 
dem  prorsus  esse  in  quibuslibet  ecclesiis. 

87  Cf.  A.  VACANT,  "  Absolution  sous  forme  deprecatoire,"  Diet, 
de  Theol,  i,  244,  ff. 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  89 

Many  theologians  of  the  end  of  the  I7th.  and  of  the 
beginning  of  the  i8th.  century,  were  impressed  by 
Morin's  historical  researches  and  adopted  the  view  of 
the  illustrious  Oratorian.88  Most  effective  in  putting 
an  end  to  their  hesitations  was  a  famous  text  of  In 
nocent  IV,  which  canonists  quoted  again  and  again, 
and  which  Morin  better  than  anybody  else,  had  known 
how  to  turn  to  account.89  Innocent  IV  affirms  that, 
during  the  Apostolic  Age,  the  rite  of  priestly  ordina 
tion  consisted  only  of  the  imposition  of  hands  ac 
companied  with  a  prayer,  and  that  it  is  the  Church 
which  instituted  the  other  rites  used  afterwards.90 

However  Morin's  opinion  was  far  from  being  uni 
versally  accepted.  The  ancient  conception  of  matter 
and  form  of  a  sacrament,  which,  a  few  years  after 
the  Council  of  Trent,  Suarez  had  somewhat  attenuated 

88  JOHN  DE  LUGO  (1583-1660),  De  Sacramentis  in  genere,  Dis- 
put.  II,  Sect,  v.;  WITASSE  (1660-1716),  De  Confirmatione,  Pars  I, 
quaest.    3;    TOURNELY    (1658-1729),    De   Sacramentis   in    genere, 
quaest.  I,  art.  iv. 

89  MORIN,    cap.    xvii.     It   is   this   text   which   led   de   Lugo   to 
declare  that  Jesus  Christ  did  not  determine  "  in  individuo  "  the 
matter  and  form  of  the  sacrament  of  Order :  "  sed  solum  voluisse 
quod  conferretur  Ordo  per  aliquod  signum  sensibile  significativum 
potestatis,  quae  traditur,  et  per  verba  hoc  ipsum  exprimentia " 
(/.<:.). 

90  De  ritu  apostolico  invenitur  in  epistola  ad  Timotheum  quod 
manus    imponebat    (Apostolus)    ordinandis,    et   quod   orationem 
fundebat  super  eos.     Aliam  autem  formam  non  invenimus  ab  eis 
servatam.     Unde   credimus  quod   nisi   essent    formae   postea   in- 
ventae,  sufficeret  ordinatori,  dicere :  Sis  sacerdos ;  vel  alia  aequipol- 
lentia  verba;  sed  subsequentibus  temporibus  formas  quae  servan- 
tur,  Ecclesia  ordinavit,  et  sunt  tantae  necessitatis  dictae  formae, 
quod  si,  iis  non  servatis,  aliquis  fuerit  ordinatus,  supplendum  est 
quod    omissum    est,    et    si    formae    servantur,    caracter    infigitur 
animae,  id  est,  figura  intellectualis  et  indeficibilis  ostendens  ordi- 
nem  collatum  ipsi  consecrato. —  In  capite  Praesbyter,  De  Sacra 
mentis  non  iterandis.    Innocentii  IV  in  quinque  libros  Deer  eta- 
tium  Commentaria.—  Vznetiis,  1610,  p.  129. 


90         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

and  made  more  precise,  was  again  taken  up  and  still 
more  attenuated,  that  it  might  be  reconciled  with  the 
historical  facts  which  now  could  not  be  ignored,  and 
thus  might  be  opposed  to  the  school  of  Morin. 

The  matter  and  form  of  all  the  Sacraments,  it  was 
said,  were  determined  by  Christ  Himself  in  a  rather 
precise  manner;  hence  they  cannot  change,  and  the 
Church  can  introduce  in  them  only  slight  modifications. 
For,  how  could  Christ  be  the  institutor  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  had  He  not  determined  Himself  their  essential 
elements?  As  to  the  differences  recorded  by  history 
between  the  actual  and  the  ancient  rites,  or  between 
the  Eastern  and  the  Western  rites,  these  differences 
are  only  accidental.  What  is  essential  in  the  matter  of 
the  Sacraments  is  what  has  been  determined  by  Christ, 
what  has  always  existed  everywhere :  thus  the  essen 
tial  matter  of  Order  has  always  been  the  imposition  of 
hands :  the  traditio  instrument  or  um  used  in  the 
West  since  the  early  Middle  Ages  is  an  accidental  rite. 
Likewise,  what  was  determined  by  Christ  in  the  form 
of  the  Sacraments, —  namely,  the  meaning  and  not  the 
words,  except  for  the  form  of  Baptism  and  of  the 
Eucharist,  which  was  literally  determined,  is  found 
everywhere  and  at  all  times.  Under  the  various  forms 
of  Penance,  Confirmation  and  Extreme  Unction,  there 
is  an  identical  fundamental  meaning:  the  meaning  de 
termined  by  the  Savior  Himself.91 

The  followers  of  Morin's  view  did  not  fail  to  ob 
ject  that  there  may  be  more  than  a  difference  of  words 
between  a  deprecative  formula  of  absolution  and  an 

91  We  have  exposed  this  opinion  according  to  TOURNELY 
(1.  c.),  who  is  not  in  favor  of  it,  and  DROUIN,  1682-1742,  De 
Sacramentis  in  genere,  quaest.  i,  cap.  i,  par.  5 ;  and  qusest.  6,  par. 
2,  who  adopts  it  (MIGNE,  Cursus  Theologies,  t.  XX,  1179,  1351). 


AFTER  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  91 

indicative  and  imperative  formula  of  absolution,  or 
between  the  Latin  formula  of  Confirmation:  Signo 
te  and  the  Greek  formula:  Signaculum 

doni  Spiritus  Sancti.  But  these  objections  were  not 
looked  upon  as  unanswerable;  hence,  during  the  i8th. 
century,  the  theological  schools  adopted  either  the 
opinion  of  Suarez  or  that  of  Morin.92 

During  the  first  two-thirds  of  the  iQth.  century, 
the  former  was  almost  exclusively  followed.  At  that 
time,  the  historical  works  of  the  I7th.  and  i8th.  cen 
turies  were  fallen  into  discredit,  and,  at  least  in 
France,  the  critical  sense  seems  to  have  disappeared. 
No  wonder,  then,  that  Morin' s  view  was  somewhat 
abandoned.  Even  Per  rone  (11876)  who  gave  to  the 
study  of  facts  the  share  to  which  it  is  entitled  in 
Theology,  does  not  adopt  this  latter  view.93  Most 
of  the  theological  text-books  of  the  time,  which,  in 
truth,  were  mere  compendiums  of  the  works  of  Suarez 
and  Billuart,  could  hardly  set  forth  a  teaching  dif 
ferent  from  that  of  the  authors  whom  they  were 
summing  up. 

But  in  the  last  third  of  the  iQth.  century,  historical 
studies  made  considerable  progress.  Works  like 
those  published  in  France  by  Mgr.  Duchesne  on  Chris 
tian  Worship,  and  by  Mgr.  Batiffol  94  and  Father  Va- 
candard  95  on  Penance,  and  by  others,  to  speak  only 

92  The    most    influential    defenders    of    Suarez'    opinion    were 
BILLUART  (1685-1757),  De  Sacramentis  in  communi,  Dissertatio  I, 
art.  v,  and  BENEDICT  xiv,  De  Syn.  1.  viii,  c.  x,  n.  10. 

93  In  his  treatise,  De  Sacramentis  in  genere   (Lovanii,  1840), 
he  said  nothing  of  the  matter  and  form  or  of  its  determination  by 
Christ. 

^Etudes  d'histoire  et  de  thcologie  positive,  ire  serie :  Les 
Origines  de  la  Penitence  (Paris,  1906),  pp.  43-223. 

95  Particularly  in  Revue  du  Clerge  franc,ais,  Nov.  15,  1899  — 
Sept.  15,  1901. 


92         ELEMENTS  OF  A  SACRAMENT 

of  what  has  been  done  in  France,  set  forth  a  concept 
of  a  sacrament  for  which  Morin's  opinion  alone  can 
account. 

Besides,  several  contemporary  theologians  have  ad 
vanced  views  which  either  do  not  differ  96  from  it,  or 
at  most  differ  but  very  little.97  For  they  realize  that 
"  Nisi  enim  quamdam  latitudinem  institutionis  admit- 
timus,  et  si  omnia,  quae  materiam  formamque  spectant, 
a  priori  ex  quibusdam  congruentiis  et  subtilibus  con- 
siderationibus  defmire  volumus,  in  graves  incidimus 
difficultates  ex  ipsa  historia  administrations  sacramen- 
torum  petitas."  98 

96HuRTER,  Theolog.  dogm.  compendium  (CEniponte,  1900), 
torn.  Ill,  n.  287;  TANQUEREY,  Synopsis  Theologiae  dogmaticae 
(1903)5  torn.  II,  pp.  197  sq.  The  statement  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  declaring  (sess.  xxi,  cap.  2)  that  the  Church  cannot 
change  the  "  substance  of  the  Sacraments  "  is  not  a  positive  ob 
jection.  "  Nam  in  materiis  et  formis  ilia  sola  substantialia  sunt 
quae  Christus  ipse  instituit;  jamvero  si,  ut  contendimus,  non- 
nisi  modo  generico  quasdam  materias  et  formas  determinaverit, 
substantia  earumdem  non  mutatur  per  specificam  determinationem 
ab  Ecclesia  factam,  dummodo  generica  significatio  a  Christo 
determinata  retineatur."  TANQUEREY,  1.  c. 

97  BILLOT,  De  Ecclesiae  sacramentis,  Romae,  1896,  torn.  I,  p.  34 : 
Sufficit    .     .     .    ut  divina  institutio  cadat  super  constitutiva  sa- 
cramenti  sub  ratione  generali  cujusdam  signi  symbolici,  aliunde 
apti   ad  certam   quamdam   significationem   sacramentalem    (puta 
significationem  traditionis  potestatis  sacrae)  relicta  interim  com- 
petenti  auctoritati  electione  materiae  et  formae  omnino  in  indi- 
viduo. 

98  HURTER,  /.  c.    If  it  is  true,  and  with  several  theologians 
we  believe   it   is,   that   the    Church   can   determine   and   modify 
the  matter  and  form  of  some  Sacraments,  the  priest,  who  wishes 
to   administer   the    Sacraments   in   a  manner  undoubtedly  valid, 
must  perform  most  exactly  the  ceremonies  that  are  now  con 
sidered  essential. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE   EFFICACY    OF   THE   SACRAMENTS 
§  I.     The  Definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  Council  of  Trent  defined  that  the  Sacraments 
of  the  New  Law  "  contain "  the  grace  they  signify 
and  "  confer  that  grace  on  those  who  do  not  place  an 
obstacle  thereunto,"  and  that  grace  is  "  conferred " 
by  the  Sacraments  ex  opere  operate.1  These  deci 
sions  are  formulated  against  the  Protestant  errors 
they  condemn,  and  by  means  of  expressions  which 
were  used  then  in  the  Schools  and  had  a  precise  sig 
nification.  Hence  it  is  in  contemporary  writings  that 
we  must  look  for  their  historical  interpretation. 

The  formula  ex  opere  operato  is  opposed  to  the  for 
mula  ex  opere  operantis: 

"  Omnes  catholici  opponunt  opus  operatum  operi  operan 
tis."  2 

It  signifies  that  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law,  in 
asmuch  as  they  are  external  actions,  resulting  from 
the  application  validly  made  of  the  sacramental  rite 

1  Ibid.    Sess.  VII,  De  sacramentis  in  gen.,  c.  6:  Si  quis  dixerit 
sacramenta  novae  Legis  non  continere  gratiam  quam  significant, 
aut  gratiam  ipsam  non  ponentibus  obicem  non  conferre.     .    .     . 
A.  S. —  c.  8:  Si  quis  dixerit  per  ipsa  novas  Legis  sacramenta  ex 
opere    operato    non    conferri    gratiam.     ...     A.    S. —  Cfr.    G. 
GOYAU,  Moehler  (Paris,  1905),  pp.  259,  ff. 

2  BELLARMINE,    De  Sacramentis  in  gen.,   lib.    II,   cap.   i. 

93 


94       EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

to  the  subject,  possess,  in  virtue  of  the  Divine  insti 
tution,  a  supernatural  power  which  confers  grace: 

"  Id  quod  active,  et  proxime,  atque  instrumentaliter  efficit 
gratiam  justificationis,  est  sola  actio  ilia  externa,  quae  sa- 
cramentum  dicitur,  et  haec  vocatur  opus  operatum,  accipiendo 
passive  (operatum)  ita  ut  idem  sit  sacramentum  conferre 
gratiam  ex  opere  operate,  quod  conferre  gratiam  ex  vi  ipsius 
actionis  sacramentalis,  a  Deo  ad  hoc  institutae,  non  ex  meri- 
to  agentis,  vel  suscipientis." 

Hence,  according  to  the  Catholic  teaching,  the  Chris 
tian  Sacraments  are  objectively  efficacious;  as  it  is 
evident  in  the  Baptism  of  children,  their  action  may 
be  effective  independently  of  the  subjective  disposi 
tions  of  the  minister  and  of  the  subject. 

However,  the  adult  is  not  exempt  from  lending  his 
cooperation  to  the  reception  of  grace.  Dispositions 
of  faith,  of  repentance,  and  others,  must  be  in  him; 
not  to  impart  to  the  sacrament  a  power  which  it  pos 
sesses  by  itself,  but  to  remove  the  obstacles  that  might 
oppose  the  sacramental  efficacy: 

"  Dispositiones  ex  parte  subject!  [requiruntur],  non  ut 
causae  activae :  non  enim  fides  et  paenitentia  efficiunt  gratiam 
sacramentalem,  neque  dant  efikaciam  sacramentis,  sed  solum 
tollunt  obstacula,  quae  impedirent  ne  sacramenta  suam  effi- 
caciam  exercere  possent"  3 

A  sacrament  has  then  in  itself  the  power  of  pro 
ducing  grace,  and  in  this  sense  it  "  contains  "  that 
grace. 

3  Ibid.  Bellarmine  compares  the  function  of  the  dispositions 
of  an  adult  to  that  of  dryness  in  the  combustion  of  wood:  the 
dryness  of  the  wood  is  the  condition,  not  the  cause  of  its  burn 
ing.  Likewise,  the  subject's  dispositions  are  the  conditio  sine 
qua  non  of  the  production  of  grace,  not  its  cause. 


DEFINITION  OF  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT     95 

Contrary  to  that  doctrine,  Protestants  taught  that 
the  whole  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  must  be  ascribed 
to  the  faith  of  him  who  receives  them: 

Non  sacramentum,  sed  fides  sacramenti  justificat.4 

Since  it  is  faith  alone  in  God's  mercy  that  justifies, 
the  Sacraments  can  be  nothing  but  means  of  strength 
ening  that  faith,  nothing  but  tokens  of  the  truthful 
ness  of  the  promise  God  made  of  forgiving  sins. 

"  Nos  .  .  .  scientes,  ubicumque  est  promissio  divina, 
ibi  requiri  fidem.  Esse  utrumque  tarn  necessarium,  ut  neu- 
trum  sine  altero  efficax  esse  possit.  Neque  enim  credi  potest, 
nisi  adsit  promissio,  nee  promissio  stabilitur,  nisi  credatur, 
ambae  vero  si  mutuae  sint,  facitmt  veram  et  certissimam 
efficaciam  sacramentis.  Quare  efficaciam  sacramenti,  citra 
promissionem  et  fidem  quaerere,  est  frustra  niti,  et  damna- 
tionem  invenire."  5 

Hence  the  Sacraments  are  made  efficacious  by  the  in 
terior  acts  of  him  who  receives  them,  by  his  faith  in 
the  Divine  promise;  thus  they  act  ex  opere  operantis, 
as  the  rites  of  the  Old  Law:  for  these,  according  to 
the  teaching  current  at  the  time  of  the  Council,  did 
not  confer  grace,  "  citra  operantium  meritum."  6 

4  LUTHER,  De  Captivitate  babylonica,  De  sacramento  baptismi. 
M.  Lutheri  opera,  Ihense,  1557,  t.  II,  p.  287.     Cf.  CALVIN,  Inst. 
chret.,  iv,  14-17. 

5  LUTHER,  Ibid.     The   Protestant  sacramental   system,  as  well 
as  the  Tridentine   definitions   which   condemned   it,   will   be   de 
scribed  in  the  course  of  the  present  chapter. 

GMELCHIOR  CANO  (1523-1560),  Relectio  de  Sacramentis  in 
genere,  Pars  quinta.  This  "  meritum  operantis "  was  called  by 
theologians,  "  opus  operantis." —  Per  opus  operantis  intelligunt 
[catholici]  opus  bonum,  seu  meritorium  ipsius  operantis. —  BEL- 

LARMINE,   /.    C. 


96        EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  Catholic  dogma  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra 
ments  developed  with  a  wonderful  logic  and  in  a  di 
rection  quite  contrary  to  the  Protestant  heresies.  At 
the  outset,  the  Sacraments  are  looked  upon  as  means 
for  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  for  sanctification. 
Then,  a  new  question  is  raised  during  the  baptismal 
controversy.  Are  the  Sacraments  so  efficacious  as  to 
produce  their  effects  independently  of  the  subjective 
dispositions  of  the  minister  and  of  the  subject?  Pope 
St.  Stephen  and  St.  Augustine  solved  the  question  in 
the  affirmative:  the  former  against  St.  Cyprian,  the 
latter  against  the  Donatists.  It  remained  to  state  with 
precision  the  relation  between  the  sacramental  rite 
and  the  grace  produced :  is  this  a  relation  of  causality 
or  of  mere  concomitance?  This  problem  of  the  cau 
sality  of  the  Sacraments  took  up  the  attention  of 
theologians  from  the  I2th.  century  to  the  Council  of 
Trent.  Although  the  Council  did  not  use  in  its  defi 
nitions  the  concept  of  cause,  yet  it  intimated  that  the 
Sacraments  must  be  considered  instrumental  causes  of 
grace.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  modern  times,  no 
theologian  has  been  bold  enough  to  deny  it.  Then, 
the  theological  discussion  took  another  direction.  As 
the  Sacraments  are  causes  of  grace,  are  they  physical 
or  merely  moral  causes  thereof?  This  is  the  actual 
controversy,  the  concluding  point  of  that  very  great 
dogmatic  progress,  in  which  we  perceive  most  con 
cretely  the  powerful  vitality  of  Catholic  thought. 


§  II.     The  Efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  at  the  Beginning  of 
the  Church. 

The  Bible  represents  the  Christian  rites  as  effica 
cious  means  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  for  the  im- 


ACCORDING  TO  HOLY  WRIT  97 

parting  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  conferring  of 
Divine  charisms. 

It  is  chiefly  the  efficacy  of  Baptism  that  is  set  off 
during  the  Apostolic  age:  this  is  easily  accounted  for 
by  the  prominent  place  which  Christians  assigned  to 
this,  the  initiatory  rite  of  their  religion. 

St.  Peter  declares  to  the  Jews  converted  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost  that  they  must  do  penance  and  be  bap 
tized  "  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission 
of  "  their  sins,  and  that  they  shall  receive  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.7  No  longer  does  penance  suffice 
to  obtain  the  remission  of  sins,  Baptism  must  be 
added.  "  Rise  up  and  be  baptized  and  wash  away  thy 
sins  invoking  the  name  of  Christ,"  says,  later  on,  Ana 
nias  to  Saul  newly  converted.8 

In  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  baptismal  efficacy  is  ex 
pressed  with  still  more  distinctness;  the  Apostle's  ex 
perience  had  already  brought  home  to  him  the  won 
derful  action  of  the  Baptism  of  Jesus.  The  bap 
tismal  immersion  is  the  sepulchre  where  the  old  man, 
that  is  to  say,  sin,  dies  and  is  buried,  and  whence  the 
new  man  comes  forth.9  The  purifying  power  of 
Baptism  is  so  great  that  it  washes  away  all  sins,  how 
ever  heinous  they  may  be :  "  Know  you  not  that  the 
unjust  shall  not  possess  the  kingdom  of  God?  Do 
not  err:  Neither  fornicators,  nor  idolaters,  nor  adul 
terers,  nor  the  effeminate,  nor  liars  with  mankind,  nor 
thieves,  nor  covetous,  nor  drunkards,  nor  railers,  nor 
extortioners  shall  possess  the  kingdom  of  God.  And 
such  some  of  you  were :  but  you  are  washed,  but  you 
are  sanctified,  but  you  are  justified  in  the  name  of  our 

7  Act.,  ii,  38. 

8  Act.,  xxii,  16. 

9  Rom.,  vi,  3-1.     Cf.,  p.  2. 


98       EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Spirit  of  our  God."  10 
That  sanctification  and  justification  are  wrought  by 
the  baptismal  ablution  and  by  the  Holy  Spirit  :  for  the 
rite  imparting  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  follows  the  ablu 
tion,  is  regarded  as  forming  with  Baptism  one  moral 
whole.11  The  baptismal  bath,  which  cleanses  from 
their  sins  those  who  enter  the  Christian  society,  is 
the  means  used  by  Christ,  together  "  with  the  word," 
to  purify  His  Church,  that  it  may  appear  before  Him 
"  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle."  12 

Having  obtained,  through  Baptism,  the  forgive 
ness  of  his  sins  and  sanctification,  the  Christian  may 
"walk  in  newness  of  life;"13  he  is  "a  new  crea 
ture  "  14  and  the  Father's  adopted  son.15  The  action 
of  Baptism  in  the  soul,  then,  may  be  looked  upon  as 
a  regenerating  action,  by  which  man  acquires  a  new 
birth,  the  supernatural  birth.  The  act  of  generation 
is  that  which  imparts  life  to  a  being;  Baptism  imparts 
to  man  spiritual  life;  hence  it  is,  according  to  St. 
Paul's  expression,  "  the  laver  of  regeneration  "  (Xovrpov 
TraAtyyeveo-tas).16  Salvation  is  brought  about  "by  the 
laver  of  regeneration  and  renovation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  Whom  he  hath  poured  forth  upon  us  abund 
antly  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour."  In  this 


10  'A.Tre\oiLKraff0e     .     .     .     ev    rw    ovo/JLari    rov    "Kvplov    -fj/nuv 
Xpicrrov.     A  manifest  allusion  to  Baptism  in  nomine  Jesu:  this 
is   the  way   baptism   is   described   in  the   Apostolic   writings.  — 
Cf.  /  Cor.,  vi,  9-1  1. 

11  This  is  at  least  a  probable  interpretation  of  the  many  texts 
which  exhibit  the  Holy  Ghost  as  given  by  Baptism. 

i*Eph.,  v,  27. 

13  Rom.,  vi,  4. 

14  Gal.,  vi,  15. 

15  Rom.,  viii,   15-17. 

16  Titus,  iii,  5.     Cfr.  W.  GRIMM,  Lexicon  Graeco-Latinum  in 
Libros  N.  T.  (Lipsise,  1903),  p.  330. 


ACCORDING  TO  HOLY  WRIT  99 

passage,  as  in  the  above  mentioned,  the  action  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  associated  with  that  of  the  baptismal 
bath,  in  the  work  of  man's  regeneration  and  renewal. 

In  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  the  regenerating  efficacy 
of  Baptism  is  affirmed  by  Jesus  Himself,  with  a  dis 
tinctness  far  greater  than  that  of  the  texts  quoted  so 
far.17  The  comparison  between  man's  bodily  and  his 
spiritual  generation  "  of  water  and  the  Holy  Ghost  " 
constitutes  the  chief  theme  of  the  conversation  of 
Jesus  with  Nicodemus.  In  fact  there  are  in  man  two 
kinds  of  generation :  the  bodily  generation,  which  has 
the  body  for  its  principle  and  imparts  physical  life; 
and  the  spiritual  generation,  which  has  for  its  prin 
ciple  water  and  the  Spirit,  and  gives  supernatural  life. 
This  spiritual  regeneration  is  absolutely  necessary  to 
enter  God's  kingdom,  since  the  latter  is  wholly  spirit 
ual  :  "  Amen,  amen  I  say  to  thee,  unless  a  man  be 
born  again  of  water  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  cannot 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  18  The  Holy  Ghost 
is  together  with  water,  the  agent  of  that  spiritual 
birth;  man  is  regenerated  by  two  united  principles: 
water  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  not  certain  that  the 
Savior  alludes  to  the  manner  in  which,  at  the  begin 
ning,  the  world  was  fashioned  with  water  and  with 
the  Holy  Ghost  moving  upon  it ;  19  but  this  compari 
son  illustrates  quite  well  the  text  of  the  Gospel. 

The  doctrine  of  the  sanctifying  and  regenerating 
efficacy  of  Baptism  is  then  fundamental  in  the  New 
Testament  writings,  and  that  efficacy  is  neither  sub 
jective,  as  Protestants  would  have  us  believe,  nor 

17  Joan.,  iii,   i-S.    Cfr.   CALMES,  L'Evangile  selon  saint  Jean 
(Paris,  1904),  pp.  179,  ff. 

18  Joan.,  iii,  5. 

19  A.  LOISY,  Le  quatrieme  Evangile  (Paris,  1903),  p.  311. 

8 


loo     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

magical,  since  it  requires  the  conversion  of  the  heart. 
After  the  baptismal  ablution,  the  Apostles  laid  hands 
on  the  newly  baptized,  and  thus  imparted  to  them  the 
Holy  Ghost.20  The  imposition  of  hands,  no  doubt 
accompanied  with  a  prayer,21  was,  then,  the  efficacious 
means  of  the  imparting  of  the  Holy  Spirit :  "  Sio,  T^S 

£7ri#e'<7e<DS  T<UV  \eipuv  TO>V  aTrocrroAwv  StSorat  TO  TrvevjJia  TO  ayiov." 

The  rite  which  conferred  the  Holy  Ghost  was  gener 
ally  administered  immediately  after  the  baptismal  ab 
lution,22  except  in  cases  when  deacons23  alone  were 
present:  these  could  baptize,  but  not  impose  hands. 
The  grant  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  resulted  from 
the  imposition  of  hands,  comprised  an  interior  sancti- 
fication  of  the  soul,24  and  charisms,  viz.,  powers  of 
performing  wonderful  actions,  like  that  "  of  speaking 
tongues  and  prophesying."  25  Those  charisms  were 
very  important  during  the  Apostolic  Age.  This  is 
why  they  are  considered  the  chief  effect  of  the  imposi 
tion  of  hands.26 

A  particular  charism,  that  of  the  government  of  the 
churches,  deserves  special  attention.  Several  times 
St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  charisms  "  that  relate  to  the  in 
terior  services  of  the  Christian  communities,"  like 
presiding  over  the  meetings  of  the  faithful,  and 
preaching.27  St.  Timothy  was  one  of  those  who  had 

20  Act.,  viii,  17,  19;  xix,  6. 

21  Act.,  viii,  15. 
™Act.,  xix,  5-6. 

23  Act.,  viii,  12,  16. 

24  St.  Paul  insinuates  it  clearly,  when  he  speaks  of  the  action 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  soul  of  the  baptized  Christian.    Rom., 
v,  5;  viii,  9-28. 

25  Act.,  xix,  6. 

26  See   the    description    of   these   charisms   in   L.    DUCHESNE, 
Early  History  of  the  Church  (N.  Y.,  1909),  pp.  35,  ff. 

27  /  Cor.,  xii,  28;  /  Thess.,  v,  12,  13.    DUCHESNE,  op.  cit.,  p.  36. 


ACCORDING  TO  HOLY  WRIT          101 

received  that  charism  of  ruling  the  churches  with 
which  he  was  entrusted,  and  that  charism  had  been 
conferred  on  him  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of 
the  Apostle  and  of  the  presbyterial  college.28  The 
imposition  of  hands,  conferring  the  charism  of  gov 
ernment,  was  performed,  not  on  neophytes  —  as  the 
rite  which  conferred  the  Holy  Ghost  —  but  on  the 
presbyters  (7rpeo-/?vrepoi)  of  the  Christian  communities. 
Our  sacrament  of  Order  is  connected  with  that  im 
position  of  hands,  its  essential  principle. 

One  of  the  functions  of  those  presbyters  was  to 
pray  over  the  sick,  whilst  anointing  them  with  oil  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord.  By  means  of  these  unctions, 
accompanied  with  prayer,  they  cured  those  faithful 
that  were  sick,  and,  in  case  of  need,  forgave  them 
their  sins.29  The  development  of  Christian  doctrine 
will  bring  out  with  precision  the  efficacy  of  those  unc 
tions  of  the  sick,  and  show  that  this  efficacy  is  objec 
tive,  and  does  not  come,  at  least  exclusively,  from 
the  gift  of  healing  which  so  many  personages  enjoyed 
during  the  Apostolic  Age.30 

We  come  now  to  the  rite  which,  with  Baptism,  held 
the  chief  place  in  Christian  worship:  the  Eucharist. 
St.  Paul  alludes  to  the  efficacy  it  has  of  making  par 
ticipant  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  Cross,  the  Christian  who 
eats  the  Eucharistic  bread,  and  drinks  from  the  cup 
of  the  New  Covenant.  Just  as  the  Jew,  by  eating  the 
flesh  of  the  victim  immolated,  shares  in  the  sacrifice 
he  offers,  the  Pagan,  by  eating  what  was  offered  to  an 
idol,  enters  into  communion  with  the  latter,  that  is 
to  say,  with  demons,  so  also  the  faithful  who  partake 

28  /  Tim.,  iv,  14 ;  /  Tim.,  I,  6. 

29  James,  v,  14-15. 

80  Cf.  /  Cor.,  xii,  9,  28. 


102     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

of  the  Eucharistic  bread  and  cup  participate  in  the 
sacrifice  offered  by  Christ  on  the  Cross.31 

In  St.  John's  Gospel,  the  efficacy  of  the  Eucharist 
is  set  forth  by  the  Savior  in  a  new  and  more  vivid 
light.  Christ's  flesh  is  a  food  and  His  Blood  is  a 
drink.32  The  Eucharist  is  the  spiritual  food  of  the 
Christian;  it  produces  in  the  soul  effects  similar  to 
those  which  the  material  food  produces  in  the  body. 
The  latter  is  assimilated  into  the  body  and  nourishes 
it.  Likewise,  by  the  Eucharist,  Jesus  is  closely  united 
with  the  Christian;  He  abides  in  the  Christian,  and 
the  Christian  abides  in  Him;  Jesus  communicates  to 
the  Christian,  with  whom  He  has  united  Himself,  the 
life  which  He  holds  from  the  Father.33  Thus,  the 
Eucharist  is  the  preeminently  efficacious  means,  by 
which  the  Christian  has  eternal  life  and  will  share, 
on  the  last  day,  in  the  glorious  resurrection.34 

So,  the  efficacy  of  the  Eucharist  and  that  of  Bap 
tism  drew  in  a  special  manner  the  attention  of  the 
minds  during  the  Apostolic  era;  for  these  two  rites 
made  up,  by  themselves,  the  chief  part  of  Christian 
worship.  The  subsequent  development  of  doctrine 
will  manifest,  with  all  the  precision  that  could  be  ex 
pected,  the  efficacy  of  the  other  rites  of  Christianity. 
The  efficacy  of  the  rite  of  Penance,  in  particular,  the 
efficacy  of  the  power  of  forgiving  sins,  entrusted  by 
Jesus  Christ  to  His  Apostles  and  to  His  Church  35  is 
soon  to  be  set  off  in  a  specially  vivid  manner. 


81  I  Cor.,  x,  14-21 ;  Cf.  BATIFFOL,  L'Eucharistie,  pp.  13-20. 

32  John,  vi,  56. 

33  John,  vi,  57. 

34  John,  vi,  58. 

35  John,  vi,  54,  55. 


ACCORDING  TO  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS     103 


In  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  of  the  2nd.  century, 
it  is  chiefly  the  efficacy  of  Baptism  and  that  of  the 
Eucharist  that  are  mentioned,  at  times  in  most  ex 
pressive  terms. 

The  apocalyptic  book  of  Hermas,  the  Shepherd, 
represents  the  necessity  and  efficacy  of  Baptism,  under 
this  beautiful  symbol.  In  one  of  his  visions,  Hermas 
saw  a  tower  which  typified  the  Church.  That  tower 
was  building  on  water,36  because,  according  to  the  ex 
planation  given  to  Hermas,  it  is  from  the  water  of 
Baptism  that  come  life  and  salvation.37  The  stones 
that  enter  into  the  structure  of  the  tower  figure  the 
faithful  of  the  Old  and  of  the  New  Covenant  who 
make  up  the  Church.38  All  the  stones  that  were  used 
for  the  construction  of  the  tower,  were  taken  from  the 
bottom  of  the  water  on  which  the  tower  was  built.39 
Hermas  asked  why  this  was  done.  Because  —  this 
was  the  reply  —  any  one  who  wishes  to  be  a  part  of 
the  tower  must  pass  through  the  waters  of  Baptism. 
For  it  is  in  the  baptismal  waters  that  man  gets  rid  of 
the  sins  of  his  past  life  and  draws  a  new  life,  without 
which  no  one  can  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 
"  For  before  a  man  has  borne  the  name  of  [the  Son 
of]  God,  he  is  dead;  but  when  he  has  received  the 
seal,40  he  layeth  aside  his  deadness,  and  resumeth  life. 
The  seal  then  is  the  water:  so  they  go  down  in  the 

36  Vis.,  iii,  24. 

37  Vis.,  iii,  35. 

38  Hermas  says  that  in  order  to  become  stones  of  that  tower 
and  thus  enter  the  Kingdom  of  God,  the  just  of  the  Old  Covenant 
were  baptised  in  Hades  by  the  apostles  and  the  didascali  who 
went  there  for  that  purpose. —  Sim.,  ix,  i65-7. 

39  Sim.,  ix,  1 6  *-2. 

.  Baptism  is  called  vfipayls   in  the  Shepherd,  as  in 


104     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

water  dead,  and  they  come  up  alive."  41  The  efficacy 
of  baptismal  waters  to  wash  sins  away  and  impart 
supernatural  life,  cannot  be  expressed  with  more 
energy. 

But  Hernias  notices  that  several  of  the  stones  that 
made  up  the  tower  are  being  thrown  aside.  These  are 
the  faithful  who  sinned  after  their  Baptism,  and  who 
can  resume  their  place  in  the  tower  if  they  do  pen 
ance.42  That  postbaptismal  penance,  an  extraordi 
nary  concession,  a  kind  of  jubilee  which  Hennas  grants 
only  once,  restores  to  sinners  the  grace  of  their  Bap 
tism.  On  account  of  their  deeds  of  repentance,  God 
renews  in  them  the  baptismal  "  seal  "  they  had  broken 
by  sinning.43 

The  Epistle  of  the  Pseudo-Barnabas  alludes  to  the 
efficacy  of  Baptism,  in  terms  similar  to  those  of  the 
Shepherd.  The  author  of  that  epistle  wrote  to 
strengthen  the  faith  of  a  Christian  community,  dis 
turbed  by  the  Judaizing  doctrines.  In  order  to  crush 
the  pretensions  of  the  false  teachers,  Barnabas  at 
tempts  to  prove,  by  means  of  an  exegesis  in  which 
allegorism  plays  an  important  part,  not  only  that  the 
Old  Covenant  has  come  to  an  end,  but  even  that  its 
only  purpose  was  to  betoken  and  prepare  the  New 
Covenant.  Hence  any  detail  of  the  Old  Law  be 
comes  for  him  the  figure  of  some  rite  of  the  New 
Law.  The  redeeming  passion  of  Christ  and  Baptism 
by  which  we  share  in  it,  were  foretold  several  times.44 
The  river  flowing  from  the  right  side  of  the  sanctuary, 

most  of  the  Greek  documents  of  the  2nd.  century.  This  word  ex 
presses  the  state  of  holiness  in  which  man  is  placed  by  Baptism. 

41  Sim.,  ix,  36  i'4.    Translation  Lightfoot.     Cf.  Hand,   iv,  31. 

42  Sim.,  ix,  13-14.     Cf.  TIXERONT,  op.  cit.,  p.  123,  ff. 

43  Sim.,  viii,  63. 

44  xi-xii. 


ACCORDING  TO  APOSTOLIC  FATHERS     105 

of  which  Ezekiel  speaks,45  represents  Baptism:  the 
fine  trees  that  spring  forth  from  it,  typify  the  Chris 
tians  coming  forth,  full  of  spiritual  fruits,  from  the 
baptismal  waters.  "  We  go  down  into  the  water  laden 
with  sins  and  filth,  and  rise  up  from  it  bearing  fruit, 
having  the  fear  of  God  in  the  heart,  and  hope  in 
Jesus  in  our  spirit."  46 

This  forgiveness  of  sins  and  this  renewal  of  the 
soul  by  Baptism  are  mentioned  also  by  St.  Justin  47 
and  by  St.  Irenseus,48  who  merely  reproduce  the 
teaching  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

Likewise  the  same  teaching  is  commented  on  by  the 
authors  of  the  2nd.  century,  when  they  speak  of  the 
efficacy  of  the  Eucharist.  The  Eucharistic  bread  and 
wine  are  the  means  which  the  Christian  may  use  to 
keep  up  in  himself  the  supernatural  life  he  received  in 
his  Baptism,  and  to  secure  the  resurrection  of  his 
body  at  the  end  of  time. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  2nd.  century,  in  keeping 
with  the  ideal  of  holiness  peculiar  to  the  early  Church, 
the  faithful  hardly  believed  that  a  baptized  person 
could  fall  into  sin  after  Baptism.  The  baptized  Chris 
tian  who  wishes  to  avoid  the  torments  of  Hell,  ought 
to  preserve  intact  the  purity  of  his  soul,  to  keep,  accord 
ing  to  the  Secunda  dementis  "  pure  and  unstained  the 
seal "  49  of  his  Baptism.  This  was  the  very  same 

45  Ez.,  xlvii,  12.  Barnabas  quotes  after  the  Septuagint :  "  And 
there  was  a  river  streaming  from  the  right  hand  and  beautiful 
trees  rose  up  from  it,  and  whosoever  shall  eat  of  them  shall  live 
for  ever." 

4QBarnab.,  xi,  n. 

^  I  Apol.,  61,  66. 

48  Adv.  Haer.,  iii,  i;2. 

49viii,  6;  vi,  9.  Such  high  ideal  of  the  holiness  of  life  in  a 
baptized  person  is  commonly  met  with  in  the  literature  of  this 
period,  especially  in  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas.  Mandat.,  iv,  32, 


106     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ideal  that  St.  Paul  proposed  to  the  early  Christians, 
when  he  entreated  them  with  so  much  insistence  no 
longer  to  commit  sin,  to  which  they  were  "  dead  "  by 
Baptism.50  Nay,  that  idea  of  the  holiness  of  a 
Christian's  life  was  pushed  to  the  extreme  during  the 
2nd.  century  by  some  who  fell  into  the  excesses  of 
Encratism.51 

That  lofty  conception  of  Christian  life  enables  us 
to  understand  the  great  part  ascribed  to  the  Eucharist, 
for  the  preservation  of  baptismal  holiness.  It  is  the 
Eucharist  that  makes  the  faithful  who  share  in  it 
"  incorruptible  "  in  the  midst  of  the  world,  "  immor 
tal  "  in  spite  of  all  the  causes  of  death,  with  which 
they  are  surrounded.  It  is,  according  to  St.  Ignatius 
of  Antioch,  "  the  medicine  of  immortality  and  the 
antidote,  that  we  should  not  die  but  live  forever  in 
Jesus  Christ."  52  This  same  idea  is  found  in  an  En- 
cratic  document  of  that  period,  the  Acta  Thomae. 
"  O  Lord,"  says  the  apostle,  when  blessing  the  Eucha- 
ristic  bread,  "  change  this  bread  into  the  bread  of  life 
so  that  they  who  shall  eat  of  it  may  remain  incor 
ruptible.  Since  Thou  hast  vouchsafed  that  they  re 
ceive  this  gift,  grant,  we  beseech  Thee,  that  they  may 
share  in  Thy  Kingdom,  that  they  persevere  unstained 
during  this  life,  so  that  they  may  be  partakers  of  Thy 
wonderful  and  immortal  blessings."  53 

The  Eucharist  is  efficacious  not  only  for  preserving 
the  life  of  the  soul,  but  also  for  securing  the  immor- 

™Rom.,  vi,  1-4.     Cf.  Hebr.,  vi,  4-8. 

51  L.  DUCHESNE,  op.  cit.,  pp.  373,  ff. 

52  Ephes.,  xx,  2. 

53  Quoted  by   Mgr.   BATIFFOL,   Les  origines   de  la  Penitence, 
Etudes  d'Histoire  et  de  Theologie  positive,  ire  serie,  Paris,  1906, 
p.  46. 


ACCORDING  TO  ST.  IREN^EUS        107 

tality  of  the  body  through  the  resurrection.  This 
point  was  set  forth  especially  by  those  authors  of  the 
2nd.  century,  who  had  to  convince  heretics  of  the 
dogma  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  In  the  text 
quoted  above  and  in  others  too,54  St.  Ignatius  has  in 
view  not  only  the  effects  of  the  Eucharist  as  to  the 
soul,  but  also  the  immortality  of  the  whole  man. 

It  is  chiefly  St.  Irenseus,  the  great  adversary  of  the 
Gnostics,  that  insists  on  this  principle  of  resurrec 
tion  deposited  in  our  souls  by  the  Savior's  flesh  and 
blood.  According  to  the  Gnostics  whom  he  opposes, 
there  is  in  us  an  antagonism  between  the  flesh  and 
the  spirit;  the  latter  alone  can  share  in  salvation,  the 
former,  being  a  principle  essentially  evil,  is  given  up 
to  perdition.  Now,  St.  Irenaeus  answers,  "  How  can 
they  say  that  the  flesh,  which  is  nourished  with  the 
body  of  the  Lord  and  with  His  blood,  goes  to  corrup 
tion  and  does  not  partake  of  life?"55  The  Eucha 
rist  places  in  our  bodies  a  principle  of  incorruption, 
which  will  raise  them  up  when  the  moment  comes. 
"  As  the  bread,  which  is  produced  from  the  earth, 
when  it  receives  the  invocation  of  God,  is  no  longer 
common  bread,  but  the  Eucharist,  consisting  of  two 
realities,  earthly  and  heavenly;  so  also  our  bodies, 
when  they  receive  the  Eucharist,  are  no  longer  cor 
ruptible,  having  the  hope  of  the  resurrection  to  eter 
nity."  56 

A  few  years  later  Tertullian  used  a  similar  argu 
ment  to  prove  to  the  Valentinians  and  to  the  Mar- 
cionites  the  dogma  of  the  resurrection.  The  flesh  will 
rise,  he  says,  because  it  is  the  essential  condition  of 

54  Cf.  Smyrn.,  vii,  I. 

55  Adv.  H<zr.,  iv,  i85. 

™Ibid.;  cf.  v,  2«.— Transl,  W.  H.  Rambaut. 


io8     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

salvation:  through  its  intermediary,  the  soul  is  sanc 
tified,  especially  in  the  reception  of  the  Sacraments  of 
the  Christian  initiation,  one  of  which  is  the  Eucha 
rist.  ;<  There  is  not  a  soul  that  can  at  all  procure  sal 
vation,  except  it  believe  whilst  it  is  in  the  flesh,  so 
true  it  is  that  the  flesh  is  the  very  condition  on  which 
salvation  hinges.  And  since  the  soul  is,  in  conse 
quence  of  its  salvation,  chosen  to  the  service  of  God,  it 
is  the  flesh  which  actually  renders  it  capable  of  such 
service.  The  flesh  indeed  is  washed,  in  order  that  the 
soul  may  be  cleansed;  the  flesh  is  anointed  that  the 
soul  may  be  consecrated ;  the  flesh  is  signed  [with  the 
cross],  that  the  soul  too  may  be  fortified;  the  flesh 
is  shadowed  with  the  imposition  of  hands,  that  the 
soul  also  may  be  illuminated  by  the  Spirit;  the  flesh 
feeds  on  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  that  the  soul 
likewise  may  fatten  on  [its]  God.  They  cannot  then 
be  separated  in  their  recompense  —  when  they  are 
united  in  their  service."  57 

That  forcible  affirmation  of  the  efficacy  of  the 
rites  of  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  the  Eucharist 
makes  us  realize  that  we  are  in  presence  of  a  doctrine 
which  was  already  considerably  developed.  We  find 
actually  in  Tertullian  the  first  speculations  about  the 
efficacy  of  the  Sacraments. 


§  III.     The  Earliest  Speculations  concerning  the  Efficacy  of 
the  Sacraments.     Tertullian  and  Origen. 

It  is  in  his  treatise  On  Baptism  that  Tertullian  ex 
poses  his  conception  of  the  efficacy  of  the  baptismal 
rite.  This  work  aims  at  instructing  catechumens  and 
at  forearming  the  faith  of  Christians  against  the 

57  De  Resurr.  carnis,  8. —  Transl.,  P.  Holmes. 


ACCORDING  TO  TERTULLIAN         109 

heretical  doctrines  of  a  certain  Quintilla.  For  this 
purpose,  Tertullian  takes  up  the  "  reasons  "  of  Chris 
tian  traditions,  in  order  to  oppose  them  to  the  perfidi 
ous  insinuations  of  the  heretical  "  serpent." 

The  effects  of  Baptism  are  those  we  have  already 
so  often  mentioned.  The  sacrament  blots  out  the 
sins  committed  "  whilst  we  were  blind " ;  sins  are 
stains  that  stick  to  the  soul  and  that  are  washed  away 
by  the  baptismal  waters.58  With  the  sins,  the  punish 
ment  also  is  removed.  By  blotting  out  the  sins,  Bap 
tism  frees  the  Christian  from  death,  and  restores  to 
him  the  divine  likeness  which  God  had  given  to  the 
first  man.59  Thus  Baptism  sets  us  on  the  path  of 
eternal  life,  and  imparts  us  a  new  birth:  for  we  are 
born  in  the  water,  like  the  Divine  Iffi*,  Jesus  Christ.60 

But  the  most  original  part  of  Tertullian' s  doctrine 
is  that  which  relates  to  the  mode  of  the  efficacy  of 
Baptism.61  Quintilla  seems  to  have  denied  chiefly  the 
efficacy  of  baptismal  water,  under  pretence  that  that 
efficacy  is  past  understanding.  How  can  a  beggarly 
element  like  water  impart  salvation?  G2  "  O  contemp 
tible  incredulity !  "  exclaims  the  vigorous  African : 
"  Is  it  not  the  proper  of  Divine  action,  to  combine 
power  with  simplicity?  God  did  really  impart  to  the 
water  that  wonderful  efficacy,  which  some  refuse  to 
admit." 

The  proofs  to  which  Tertullian  appeals  will  become 
classical.  At  the  beginning  of  the  world,  when  the 
Holy  Ghost  hovered  over  the  waters,  all  of  them  re- 

58  De  bapt.,  4. 

59  De  bapt.,  5. 

60  De  bapt.,  i. 

91  Cf.  D'ALES,  La  Theologie  de  Tertullien,  pp.  333,  ff. 
62  De  bapt.,  2. 


no     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ceived  the  power  of  sanctifying,  and  accordingly  it 
makes  no  difference  whether  a  man  be  baptized  in  a 
sea  or  a  pool,  a  stream  or  a  font,  a  lake  or  a  trough 
However,  in  order  that  the  waters,  thus 
destined  to  Baptism  from  the  very  beginning,  may 
have  the  power  of  sanctifying,  God  must  be  called 
upon.  As  soon  as  that  invocation  of  God  has  been 
made,  a  spirit  supervenes  from  Heaven,  as  formerly 
the  Angel  of  the  pool  of  Bethesda  (John,  v,  4),  rests 
over  the  waters  and  sanctifies  them.  These,  after 
being  thus  sanctified,  imbibe  the  power  of  sanctify 
ing.63  This  virtue  becomes  material,  as  it  were,  and 
passes  into  the  water  itself:  a  text  to  which  the  up 
holders  of  the  physical  causality  of  the  Sacraments 
will  not  fail  to  appeal. 

What  is  that  invocation  of  God,  which  makes  the 
water  efficacious?  The  Trinitarian  formula  that  ac 
companies  the  ablution,  or  the  prayer  of  the  blessing 
of  baptismal  water?  It  is  apparently  the  prayer  of 
the  blessing  of  the  water.64  Later  on,  after  St. 
Cyprian,  authors  will  teach  that  the  "  sanctification  " 
of  baptismal  water  is  brought  about  by  the  blessing  of 
the  pools,  immediately  before  the  conferring  of  Bap 
tism.65 

63  De  bapt.,  4:  Omnes  aquae  de  pristina  originis  praerogativa 
sacramentum  sanctificationis  consequuntur  invocato  Deo.     Super- 
venit  enim  statim  spiritus  de  caelis  et  aquis  superest  sanctificans 
eas  de  semetipso  et  ita  sanctificatae  vim  sanctificandi  combibunt. 
.     .     .     Igitur  medicatis  quodammodo  aquis  per  angeli  interven- 
tum,  et  spiritus  in  aquis  corporaliter  diluitur  et  caro  in  eisdem 
spiritaliter  mundatur.     Cf.  cap.  5. 

64  Undoubtedly  for  Tertullian,  Baptism  is  administered  in  the 
name  of  the  three  Divine  Persons :  De  bapt.,  13 ;  Adv.  Prax.,  26. 
But  it  is  not  certain  that  he  had  in  view  the  baptismal  formula, 
when   he   speaks   of   that   "  invocation   of   God "   by  which  the 
waters  are  sanctified. 

65  Cf.  above,  pp.  56,  ff. 


ACCORDING  TO  TERTULLIAN    in 

The  material  ablution,  produced  on  the  body  by  the 
sanctified  waters,  acts  then  on  the  soul  and  purifies  it. 
Likewise,  the  sacred  unction  which  the  neophyte  re 
ceives  after  the  baptismal  bath,  is  spiritually  profitable 
to  his  soul.66  The  imposition  of  hands  which  follows, 
and  which  is  accompanied  with  blessing  and  with  the 
invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  brings  down  that  Spirit 
into  the  baptized  Christian. 

Yet,  notwithstanding  the  efficacy  of  the  baptismal 
rite  for  cleansing  and  purifying,  the  catechumen  is 
obliged,  previously  to  his  Baptism,  to  do  a  serious 
penance.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Church  always  re 
quired  from  the  candidates  to  Baptism  a  sincere  pen 
ance  for  their  sins.67  According  to  the  Didache  one 
must  prepare  for  Baptism  by  one  or  two  days  of  fast 
ing;  the  minister  and  other  persons,  if  possible,  must 
also  fast.68  St.  Justin  is  still  more  explicit.  In  or 
der  to  be  admitted  to  Baptism,  he  says,  it  is  necessary 
to  believe  the  truth  of  Christian  doctrine,  to  promise 
to  live  according  to  that  doctrine,  to  pray  and  to  ask 
from  God,  in  fasting,  the  forgiveness  of  one's  sins.69 
At  the  time  of  Tertullian  that  preparation  for  Baptism 
was  a  regular  institution  and  formed  what  is  called 
the  catechumenate.  It  is  precisely  to  the  catechu 
mens  that  the  De  Paenitentia  is  addressed,  in  which 
the  penitential  doctrine  of  the  African  priest  is  found. 
The  first  part  of  the  book  (1-6)  treats  of  the  pen 
ance  that  has  to  be  done  before  Baptism.  That  pen 
ance,  required  from  the  catechumen,  is  so  perfect,70 

69  De  bapt.,  7. 

67  A cts,  ii,  38. 

68  Didache,  vii,  4. 

69  7  ApoL,  61. 

70  The  description  of  that  penance  is  found  in  the  De  Bap 
tism  o,  20. 


H2     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

and  is  so  efficacious  for  the  purification  of  the  sinner, 
that  one  might  be  tempted  to  deem  Baptism  useless.71 
Yet  this  is  not  Tertullian's  thought.  If  he  demands 
so  rigorous  a  conversion  of  those  who  wish  to  de 
scend  into  the  baptismal  waters,  it  is  in  order  to  be 
sure  that,  once  baptized,  the  Christian  will  never  fall 
again  into  sin.72  The  Church  must  consist  only  of 
saints ! 

However,  if  one  unfortunately  sins  after  Baptism, 
there  is  a  " secunda  tabula  post  naufragium"  a  second 
repentance,  to  which  recourse  may  be  had,  but  only 
once  during  one's  life.73  Hermas  had  spoken  of  this 
second  penance,  as  an  exceptional  and  temporary  fa 
vor.  Tertullian  presents  it  as  a  permanent  institu 
tion,  and  draws  a  detailed  description  of  it.74  The 
series  of  the  external  acts  which  constitute  postbap- 
tismal  penance,  is  called  exomologesis.  The  first  of 
these  acts  is  the  confession  of  sins; 75  the  second  is  the 
satisfaction,  always  public,  which  follows  the  confes 
sion;  76  the  third  is  the  intervention  of  the  Church  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sins.  This  last  act  interests  us  es 
pecially,  since  we  are  treating  of  the  efficacy  of  the 

71  De  paenit.,  6 :    Lavacrum  illud  obsignatio  est  fidei,  quse  fides 
a  paenitentiae  fide  incipitur  et  commendamr.     Non  ideo  abluimur 
ut  delinquere  desinamus,  sed  quia  desiimus  jam  corde  loti  sumus. 
Haec    enim   prima    audientis    intinctio    est,    metus    integer. —  To 
understand  rightly  Tertullian's  doctrine  on  this  point  we  must 
not  forget  that  the  distinction  between  contrition  and  attrition 
was  not  known  to  him. 

72  De  paenit.,  6;  De  bapt.,  20. 

73  De  paenit.,  7. 

74  De  paenit.,  7-12.     On  the  penitential  doctrine  of  Tertullian, 
see  TIXERONT,  op.  cit.,  pp.  364,  ff . ;  BATIFFOL,  op.  tit.,  pp.  69,  ff. ; 
D'ALES,  op.  cit.,  pp.  339,  ff. 

75  De  paenit.,  g. 

paenit.,  9. 


ACCORDING  TO  TERTULLIAN         113 

Sacraments.  Differently  from  Hernias,  Tertullian 
points  out  explicitly  that  intervention  of  the  Church 
in  the  forgiveness  of  sins:  the  Church  not  only  prof 
fers  the  pardon,  she  actually  grants  it.  True,  in  the 
De  Paenitentia,  that  intervention  of  the  Church  is  not 
represented  as  an  act  of  absolution  by  the  Bishop,  but 
as  a  prayer,  made  by  the  faithful,  to  obtain  from  God 
the  sinner's  forgiveness.  That  prayer  is  indeed  in 
fallibly  efficacious,  for  the  faithful  are  the  Church, 
the  Church  is  Jesus  Christ,  and  Jesus  Christ  is  always 
heard  by  His  Father: 

"  Ecclesia  vero  Christus.  Ergo  cum  te  ad  fratrum  genua 
protendis,  Christum  contrectas,  Christum  exoras.  yEque  illi 
cum  super  te  lacrymas  agunt,  Christus  patitur,  Christus  pa- 
trem  deprecatur.  Facile  impetratur  semper,  quod  Filius  pos- 
tulat."  « 

It  is  impossible  not  to  ascribe  to  that  prayer  of  the 
Church  a  real  efficacy  for  obtaining  from  God  the  for 
giveness  of  sins. 

In  the  De  Pudicitia,  Tertullian  sets  down  a  doctrine 
far  more  precise.  He  tells  us  that  the  Bishop  is  the 
depositary  of  the  power  of  remitting  sins,78  that  at 
Rome  Pope  Callistus  made  use  of  his  power,  to  remit 
the  sins  of  adultery  and  of  fornication: 

"  Ego  et  moechiae  et  fornicationis  delicta  paenitentia  func- 
tis  dimitto,"  79 

and  justified  his  conduct  by  alleging  the  power  of  the 

77  De  paen.,  10. 

78  De  pudic.,  18. 

79  De  pudic.,  i. 


ii4      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

keys,  entrusted  by  Christ  to  St.  Peter  and  to  his  suc 
cessors.80 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  Church  holds  from  Christ 
the  power  of  forgiving  sins.  But  at  the  beginning 
she  used  that  power  only  partially.  At  the  time  of 
Tertullian,  she  refused  to  forgive  three  kinds  of  sins: 
apostasy,  fornication  or  adultery,  and  murder;  the 
pardon  of  these  sins  was  reserved  to  God.  Pope  Cal- 
listus  mitigated  that  discipline  and  granted  forgive 
ness  to  sins  of  the  flesh.  It  is  this  measure  of  indul 
gence,  which  Tertullian,  after  becoming  a  Montanist, 
condemns  so  strongly  in  the  De  Pudicltia.  To  the 
practice  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  he  opposes  the  Mon- 
tanistic  theory.  God  alone  may  remit  the  sins  ad  mor 
tem,  viz.,  apostasy,  the  sins  of  adultery  and  fornica 
tion,  and  murder.  True,  the  Church  has  power  to 
remit  them,  but  she  ought  not  to  use  that  power,  and 
in  case  she  would  use  it,  she  should  do  so  not  through 
the  Bishops,  but  through  the  spiritual  men,  through 
the  prophets,  to  whom  the  charism  of  the  remission  of 
sins  has  been  granted.81  Tertullian  intended  thus  to 
take  away  from  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy  and  to 
transfer  to  Montanistic  illuminism,  the  power  of  for 
giving  all  sins.  Pope  Callistus,  on  the  contrary,  af 
firmed  by  his  actions  that  the  members  of  the  hier 
archy  alone  were  its  depositaries  and  may  use  it  as 
they  deem  proper. 

This  twofold  result  was  still  more  emphasized,  a 
few  years  later,  in  the  reconciliation  of  the  lapsi  and 
in  the  Novatian  crisis.82  St.  Cyprian's  protests 

80  De  pudic.,  21. 

81  De  pudicitia,  21.    Among  the  rigorists  there  was  also  HIP- 
POL  YTUS,  Philosoph.,  ix,  II. 

82 Cf.  TIXERONT,  pp.  373-380;  BATIFFOL,  pp.  in,  ff. 


ACCORDING  TO  TERTULLIAN         115 

against  the  pretensions  of  confessors  and  martyrs  to 
reconcile  the  lapsi  with  the  Church,  and  to  have  them 
admitted  into  the  communion,  "  penance  not  yet  per 
formed,  exomologesis  not  yet  made,  the  hands  of  the 
Bishop  not  yet  laid  upon  them,"  83  distinctly  prove 
the  clear  knowledge  the  Church  had  then,  that  the 
power  of  remitting  sins  resides  exclusively  in  her 
hierarchy.  And  this  power  is  unlimited,  since  Pope 
Cornelius,  following  on  the  footsteps  of  Callistus,  de 
cided  that  the  lapsi  might  be  absolved  from  the  crime 
of  apostasy  84 ;  a  decision  which  gave  rise  to  the  Nova- 
tian  schism,  just  as  the  decision  of  Pope  Callistus  had 
called  forth  the  protests  of  Tertullian,  after  he  be 
came  a  Montanist. 

From  all  these  discussions  of  the  3rd.  century  con 
cerning  Penance,  we  may  infer  the  universal  belief  in 
the  efficacy  of  the  forgiveness  granted  by  the  Church. 
The  Montanists  refused  to  admit  that  that  power  of 
forgiving  was  vested  in  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy; 
the  Novatians  claimed  that  that  power  was  limited ; 
but  nobody  questioned  its  value.  Penance  is  a  second 
Baptism;  any  one  that  passes  through  its  various  ex 
ercises,  recovers  his  innocence  before  God. 


It  is  not  only  in  the  West  that  the  pardon  granted 
by  the  Church  to  sins  committed  after  Baptism,  is 
considered  efficacious :  we  find  the  same  belief  in  the 
East,  particularly  at  Alexandria.  Origen  affirms  that 
the  function  of  remitting  sins  is  reserved  to  the  minis 
ters  of  the  Church,  especially  to  the  Bishops: 

83  Ep.  xvi,  2,  etc. 

84  ST.  CYPRIAN,  Ep.  Ixvii,  6. 


Ii6      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

"  Israelita,  si  peccet,  id  est  laicus,  ipse  suum  non  potest 
auferre  peccatum:  sed  requirit  levitam,  indiget  sacerdote, 
imo  potius  et  adhuc  horum  aliquid  eminentius  quaerit:  ponti- 
fice  opus  est,  ut  peccatorum  remissionem  possit  accipere."  85 

However,  the  ministers  of  the  Church  ought  not  to 
forgive  the  crimina  mortalia,  viz.,  idolatry,  adultery 
and  fornication,  and  murder.86  At  Alexandria,  as  at 
Carthage  in  Tertullian's  time,  these  sins  were  reserved 
to  God. 

Origen's  teaching  on  the  efficacy  of  Baptism  and  of 
the  Eucharist  is  more  precise.  If  Baptism  purifies  the 
soul  and  cleanses  it  from  all  its  stains,  it  is  owing  to 
the  "  power  of  the  invocation  of  the  adorable  Trin 
ity."  87  The  ablution  holds  from  that  invocation  all 
its  virtue.  Likewise,  it  is  the  word  pronounced  over 
the  bread,  that  is  to  say,  the  narrative  of  the  institu 
tion,  and  the  epiclesis,  that  imparts  to  the  Eucharist 
the  sanctifying  effect  which  it  produces  in  the  com 
municant  properly  disposed,  and  the  nature  of  which 
Origen  does  not  explain.88  These  principles  concern 
ing  the  efficacy  of  Baptism  and  of  the  Eucharist  will 
be  taken  up  again  and  developed  by  the  writers  of 
the  following  centuries. 

§  IV.     The  Part  of  the  Minister  and  that  of  the  Subject  in 
the  Efficacy  of  the  Sacraments. 

Three  agents  concur  in  producing  the  effects  of  the 
Sacraments :  the  minister,  the  subject  and  the  rite. 

85  In  Numeros,  horn,  x,  i ;  P.G.,  xii,  635. 

86  De  oratione,  28;  P.G.,  xi,  529. 

87  In  Joan.,  vi,  17;  P.G.,  xiv,  257. 

88  In  Matth.,  xi,  14;  P.G.,  xiii,  949.     According  to  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  the  Eucharist  is  a  food  and  a  drink  which  impart 
immortality.     Quis  dives,  23.     His  doctrine  does  not  differ  at  all 
from  that  of  the  above  mentioned  Fathers. 


PART  OF  THE  MINISTER  117 

What  is  the  special  part  of  each  one  of  them?  Pen 
ance  is  required  from  the  candidate  to  Baptism :  to 
what  extent  is  it  necessary,  that  the  sacrament  may 
be  valid?  And,  if  the  sacrament  happens  to  be  con 
ferred  by  a  heretic  or  even  merely  by  an  unworthy 
minister,  must  it  be  considered  null?  Up  to  that  time 
no  one  had  treated  these  questions.  Yet,  they  had  to 
be  solved,  before  the  dogma  of  the  efficacy  might  pro 
gress  at  all.  The  baptismal  controversy  in  the  time  of 
St.  Cyprian,  and  later  on  the  discussions  between  St. 
Augustine  and  the  Donatists  obtained  that  result ; 
hence  their  great  importance  in  the  history  of  Sacra- 
mentary  Theology. 

a. —  The  Baptismal  Controversy  —  St.  Cyprian  and  Pope  St. 
Stephen.89 

Can  a  heretic  confer  a  valid  Baptism?  This  is  the 
problem  which  confronted  the  Christian  mind  in  the 
first  half  of  the  3rd.  century.  It  was  not  raised  be 
fore,  because  up  to  that  time,  there  had  been  no  he 
retical  sect  separated  altogether  from  the  Church,  or 
ganized  and  administering  the  Sacraments  by  itself; 
there  had  been  heretics  more  or  less  isolated  and  hid 
den  among  the  faithful.  When  these  heretics  became 
converted  and  returned  to  the  true  faith,  it  was  un 
necessary  to  raise  any  question  as  to  the  value  of  their 
Baptism,  since  they  had  received  it  in  the  bosom  of  the 
true  Church :  all  that  was  demanded  of  them  was 
penance. 

But  towards  the  close  of  the  2nd.  century,  Marcion- 

89  Cf.    TlXERONT,   pp.    392-403;    DUCHESNE,    Op.    Clt.,   pp.    303-3! I  ; 

HEFELE,  History  of  the  Councils,  vol.  i,  pp.  98-116.  We  have 
confined  ourselves  to  the  doctrinal  aspect  of  this  famous  con 
troversy —  this  being  the  only  aspect  referring  to  our  question. 


nS      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ism  and,  somewhat  later,  Montanism  formed  inde 
pendent  churches,  which  baptized  their  adherents. 
Now  several  of  those  who  had  been  baptized  in  heresy 
gave  up  their  sect  and  asked  to  enter  the  Catholic 
Church.  Then  the  question  naturally  came  up :  What 
was  to  be  thought  of  the  value  of  the  Baptism  admin 
istered  in  heretical  sects?  Was  the  Christian  initia 
tion  performed  by  an  heretical  sect  to  be  looked  upon 
as  sufficient,  and  were  the  converts  from  that  sect  to 
be  admitted  immediately  into  the  Catholic  Church,  or 
were  the  Church  authorities  to  consider  it  void,  to 
treat  the  newcomers  as  heathens  and  begin  again 
every  ceremony  that  had  taken  place?  It  is  in  this 
most  practical  shape  that  the  problem  of  the  value  of 
heretical  Baptisms  presented  itself. 

The  first  solutions  that  were  given  were  likewise 
practical.  It  was  only  the  conflict  of  practices  that 
made  of  this  question,  chiefly  disciplinary  at  the  outset, 
a  question  of  doctrine  and  principle. 

Two  practices  were  adopted. 

At  Rome,  at  Csesarea  of  Palestine,  and  also  at 
Alexandria,  the  Baptism  conferred  in  an  heretical  sect 
was  admitted  as  valid,  provided  the  essential  rites  had 
been  observed.  The  ecclesiastical  authorities  con 
tented  themselves  with  reconciling  the  heretics  to  the 
Church  by  the  imposition  of  hands  and  by  the  unction 
with  oil,  the  consignation0  In  Africa,  especially  at 
Carthage,  and  in  the  churches  of  Syria  and  Asia 

90  The  rite  of  imparting  the  Holy  Spirit  was  the  same  for 
the  reconciliation  of  heretics  as  for  Confirmation.  ST.  CYPRIAN, 
Ep.  Ixxiii,  6.  Cf.  DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  pp.  338,  ff.,  who 
points  out  a  difference  of  expression :  consignatio  being  the  term 
employed  when  it  is  a  question  of  ordinary  confirmation,  whilst 
manus  impositio  designates  the  reconciliation  of  heretics. 


BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY  119 

Minor,  the  Baptism  conferred  in  heresy  was,  on  the 
contrary,  deemed  valueless;  the  Christian  initiation 
performed  by  an  heretical  sect  was  looked  upon  as  null 
and  had  to  be  wholly  repeated. 

This  disagreement  gave  rise  in  256  to  a  hot  contro 
versy  between  Pope  St.  Stephen  and  St.  Cyprian, 
Bishop  of  Carthage,  a  controversy  which  brought  the 
question  into  its  doctrinal  phase.  The  study  of  the 
thesis  and  of  the  arguments  of  both  sides  will  enable 
us  to  perceive  distinctly  the  state  of  the  sacramental 
doctrine  in  the  middle  of  the  3rd.  century,  and  to  un 
derstand  how  the  doctrine  of  the  objective  efficacy  of 
Baptism  came  out  of  all  these  discussions,  and 
triumphed  definitively. 


St.  Cyprian's  thesis  was  that  which  had  been  al 
ready  maintained  by  Tertullian  in  a  treatise  On  Bap 
tism,  about  the  year  200.  The  chief  reason  alleged 
by  Tertullian  for  discarding  the  Christian  initiation 
performed  by  heretics  is  drawn  from  the  unity  of  Bap 
tism.  There  is  only  one  Baptism,  according  to  the 
teaching  of  the  Gospel  and  of  Paul,  just  as  there  is 
only  one  God  and  one  Church  in  Heaven.  Heretics, 
who  are  outside  the  Catholic  communion,  have 
neither  our  God,  nor  our  Christ,  nor  our  Baptism.  If 
they  have  not  our  Baptism,  then  they  have  no  Baptism 
at  all :  otherwise,  we  would  say  that  there  are  two 
Baptisms.91  Hence,  he  who  has  been  baptized  in  an 
heretical  sect  must  be  looked  upon  as  a  heathen,  and 
even  as  less  than  a  heathen.92 

St.  Cyprian  takes  up  that  argument  and  strengthens 

91  DC  bapt.,  15. 

92  De  pudicitia,  19. 


120      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

it  with  his  copious  teaching  on  the  Church.93  The 
author  of  the  De  Catholicae  Ecclesiae  Unitate  could  un 
derstand  and  develop  Tertullian's  argumentation  with 
out  the  least  difficulty.  There  is  only  one  Baptism  as 
there  is  only  one  Church,  one  God,  and  one  Christ, 
and  this  Baptism  is  found  only  in  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  To  break  with  the  unity  of  the  Church  then 
is  to  break  with  Baptism,  the  sacrament  of  unity: 

"  Traditum  est  enim  nobis  quod  sit  unus  Deus  et  Christus 
unus  et  una  spes  et  fides  una  et  una  ecclesia  et  baptisma  unum 
non  nisi  in  una  ecclesia  constitutum,  a  qua  [unitate]  quisque 
discesserit  cum  haereticis  necesse  est  inveniatur,  quos  dum 
contra  ecclesiam  vindicat,  sacramentum  divinae  traditionis 
impugnat.  Cujus  unitatis  sacramentum  expressum  videmus 
etiam  in  cantico  canticorum  ex  persona  Christi  dicentis: 
hortus  conclusus,  soror  mea,  sponsa,  fons  signatus,  puteus 
aquae  vivae,  paradisus  cum  fructu  pomorum.^  .  .  .  Sen- 
tentiam  nostram  non  novam  promimus,  sed  jam  pridem  ab 
antecessoribus  nostris  statutam  .  .  .  censentes  scilicet  et 
pro  certo  tenentes  neminem  baptizari  foris  extra  ecclesiam 
posse,  cum  sit  baptisma  unum  in  sancta  ecclesia  constitu 
tum."  95 

Besides,  to  ascribe  some  value  to  the  Baptism  of 
heretics  would  be  to  forget  the  role  of  the  Church  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  in  the  imparting  of 
heavenly  gifts :  a  role  which  St.  Cyprian  exaggerates 
at  the  expense  of  the  sacramental  rite.  How  could  the 
Baptism  of  heretics  remit  sins  and  impart  grace,  since 
that  remission  cannot  take  place  outside  the  Church? 

93  The  arguments  in  favor  of  rebaptism  are  developed  in  St. 
Cyprian's  letters  (Ixix-lxxiv)  as  well  as  in  the  letter  of  Fir- 
milian  (Ixxv). 

94E/>.  Ixxiv,  ii.     Cf.  De  cathol.  eccl  Unit.,  n. 

»*Ep.  Ixx,  I.     Cf.  Ixxi,  i. 


BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY  121 

Far  from  remitting  sins,  heretics  do  but  multiply 
them.  How  could  heresy  bring  forth  children  to 
Christ  since  it  is  not  His  Spouse :  a  dignity  reserved 
to  the  true  Church?  It  can  bring  forth  children  only 
to  the  devil: 

"  Quomodo  baptizans  dare  alteri  remissam  peccatorum 
potest?  .  .  .  Intelligimus  remissionem  peccatorum  non 
nisi  in  ecclesia  dari,  apud  haereticos  autem  ubi  ecclesia  non 
sit  non  peccata  dimitti.96  ...  Si  autem  in  lavacro  id 
est  in  baptismo  est  regeneratio,  quomodo  generate  filios  Deo 
haeresis  per  Christum  potest  quae  Christi  sponsa  non  est? 
Ecclesia  est  enim  sola  quae  Christo  conjuncta  et  adunata 
spiritaliter  filios  generat,  eodem  apostolo  rursus  dicente: 
Christus  dilexit  Ecclesiam  et  se  ipsum  tradidit  pro  ea  ut  earn 
sanctificaret,  purgans  earn  lavacro  aquae.  Si  igitur  haec  est 
dilecta  et  sponsa  quae  sola  a  Christo  sanctificatur  et  lavacro 
ejus  sola  purgatur,  manifestum  est  haeresim,  quae  sponsa 
Christi  non  sit  nee  purgari  nee  sanctificari  lavacro  ejus  pos- 
sit,  filios  Deo  generare  non  posse.97  .  .  .  Vitae  fonte 
deserto  vitalis  et  salutaris  aquae  gratiam  pollicentur  [haere- 
tici].  Non  abluuntur  illic  homines  sed  potius  sordidantur, 
nee  purgantur  delicta  sed  immo  cumulantur.  Non  Deo 
nativitas  ilia  sed  diabolo  filios  generat."  98 

Besides  how  could  the  baptized  heretic,  who  has  not 
the  faith  of  the  Church,  receive  grace  and  obtain  the 
forgiveness  of  his  sins?" 

In  his  argumentation,  St.  Cyprian  does  not  distin 
guish  at  all  between  the  validity  of  Baptism  and  its 
fruitful  reception,  and  this  accounts  for  his  involun 
tary  errors.  For  it  is  quite  true  that  Baptism,  re- 

96  Ep.    1XX,    I,  2. 

97  Ep.  Ixxiv,  6. 

98  De  cathol.  eccl  Unit.,  n, 
89  Ep.  Ixxiii,  4,  17,  i8; 


122     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ceived  in  an  heretical  sect  by  a  subject  not  properly 
disposed  —  at  that  time  the  possibility  of  good  faith  in 
a  heretic  was  not  granted  —  does  not  remit  sins  nor 
impart  grace.  Yet,  an  unfruitful  Baptism,  even  out 
side  the  Church,  may  be  valid  and  produce  the  charac 
ter,  as  St.  Augustine  will  say  later  on.  But,  in  the 
middle  of  the  3rd.  century,  these  distinctions  were  not 
made ;  the  dogma  of  efficacy  had  not  yet  been  analyzed 
with  precision. 

Moreover,  St.  Cyprian  was  unable  to  find  out,  and 
even  to  understand  those  distinctions,  for  his  concep 
tion  of  the  efficacy  of  Baptism  is  opposed  to  them 
diametrically,  since  it  implies  the  denial  of  the  objec 
tive  value  of  the  Sacraments.  If  the  heretical  Bap 
tism  is  not  valid,  it  is  not  only  because,  outside  the 
Church,  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  bestowal  of 
grace  cannot  take  place,  but  also  because  after  all  its 
value  depends  on  the  minister's  subjective  dispositions, 
on  his  faith,  even  on  his  sanctity,  as  the  Bishop  of 
Carthage  affirms,  thus  pushing  his  view  to  its  utmost 
consequence.  Nobody,  he  says,  can  give  what  he  has 
not :  how  could  he  that  has  neither  the  true  faith,  nor 
grace,  nor  the  Holy  Ghost,  make  others  share  in  those 
gifts? 

"  Quis  autem  potest  dare  quod  ipse  non  habeat,  aut  quo- 
modo  potest  spiritalia  gerere  qui  ipse  amiserit  Spiritum  Sanc 
tum?  Et  idcirco  baptizandus  est  et  innovandus  qui  ad  Ec- 
clesiam  rudis  venit,  ut  intus  per  sanctos  sanctificetur."  * 

On  the  other  hand,  the  "  sanctification  "  of  the  bap 
tismal  piscina  is  absolutely  necessary  that  the  water 
may  have  the  power  of  purifying: 

*Ep.  Ixx,  2. 


BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY  123 

"  Oportet  vero  mundari  et  sanctificari  aquam  prius  a  sacer- 
dote,  ut  possit  baptismo  suo  peccata  hominis  qui  baptizatur 
abluere."  - 

But  "  how  could  he  who  is  impure  and  does  not  pos 
sess  the  Holy  Spirit  purify  and  sanctify  the  water?  "  3 
Heretics,  then,  cannot  sanctify  the  elements  of  the 
Sacraments:  the  water  of  Baptism,  the  oil,  the  Eu- 
charistic  bread.  Hence,  we  cannot  find  outside  the 
Church,  Baptism,  nor  Eucharist,  nor  Confirmation,4 
nor  Ordination.  Firmilian,  Bishop  of  Csesarea,5  held 
views  in  every  respect  identical  with  those  of  the 
Bishop  of  Carthage. 

They  contend  that  the  opponents  of  the  reiteration 
of  Baptism  themselves  acknowledge,  that  the  Con 
firmation  of  heretics  is  null,  since  they  repeat  the  im 
position  of  hands  and  the  consignatio  to  impart  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  the  converts  from  heresy.  Why  deal 
differently  with  the  two  Sacraments  by  which  we  are 
born  again  from  the  water  and  the  Spirit?  If  the  rite 
which  confers  the  Holy  Ghost  is  not  considered  valid 
among  heretics,  neither  ought  Baptism  to  be  considered 
such.6 

Grounded,  as  it  was,  on  arguments  apparently  quite 
solid,  and  maintained  by  men  who  enjoyed  a  great 
moral  authority,  the  thesis  of  rebaptism,  humanly 
speaking,  was  sure  to  triumph.  However,  the  Chris 
tian  mind  took  another  direction,  owing  to  the  super 
natural  action  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  guides  the 

*Ep.  Ixx,  i. 
*Ep.  Ixx,  i. 

*£/>.    IXX,    2. 

5£/>.  Ixxv  (Hartel,  ii,  810,  ss.). 

6  ST.  CYPRIAN,  Ep.  Ixxiv,  5;  Sententiae  episcoporum,  5  (HAR 
TEL,  I,  p.  439). 


I24     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Church  and  hinders  her  from  falling  into  error  at  the 
decisive  moment  when  she  becomes  explicitly  conscious 
of  the  revealed  truth.  In  the  baptismal  controversy, 
that  Divine  action  shows  itself  obviously,  so  little  did 
the  human  chances  of  success  seem  to  be  on  the  side 
of  the  Roman  Church. 

To  St.  Cyprian  and  Firmilian's  conception  of  the 
efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  Pope  St.  Stephen  opposes 
another  conception,  based  on  the  immemorial  custom 
of  the  Roman  Church,  and  which  supposes  the  objec 
tive  character  of  the  value  of  Baptism.  No  one,  says 
the  Pope,  must  rebaptize  the  heretics  that  come  back 
to  the  Catholic  Church,  but  be  content,  according  to 
the  custom,  to  impose  hands  on  them  for  penance.7 
This  is  the  practice  which  we  received  from  the  Apos 
tles,  and  which  we  follow.8  For  in  Baptism  we  must 
not  pay  attention  to  the  worth  of  the  minister,  but  to 
the  power  of  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity.9  The  in 
vocation  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  name  of  Jesus  is 
able  by  itself  to  produce  the  "  sanctification  of  Bap 
tism."  10  The  objective  efficacy  of  the  baptismal  rite, 
independent  of  the  minister's  faith,  is  thus  proclaimed 
both  by  the  practice  of  the  Roman  Church  and  by  the 
answers  of  the  Pope.  The  minister's  part  in  Baptism 
consists  in  performing  the  essential  ceremonies. 

However,  at  least  as  they  are  recorded  by  St.  Cy 
prian  and  by  Firmilian,  the  Pope's  answers  are  rather 

7  ST.  CYPRIAN,  Ep.  Ixxiv,  i. 

*Ep.  Ixxiii,  13. 

9  Ep.  Ixxv,  9;  Cf.  Ixxiv,  5. 

w  Ep.  Ixxv,  18,  g.  The  author  of  the  De  Rebaptismate  places 
great  stress  on  the  power  of  the  Divine  names  to  show  the 
validity  of  heretical  Baptism. 


BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY  125 

vague  and  open  to  many  objections.  Is  Baptism  so 
efficacious 

"  ut  quicumque  et  ubicumque  in  nomine  Christi  baptizatus 
fuerit  consequatur  statim  gratiam  Christi  "  X1  ? 

Are  the  subject's  dispositions  useless  for  the  produc 
tion  of  grace,  and  ought  not  Pope  St.  Stephen  to  dis 
tinguish  here  the  valid  reception  of  Baptism  from  its 
fruitful  reception? 

The  author  of  the  De  Rebaptismate  who  set  to  work 
in  order  to  defend  St.  Stephen's  party  and  to  refute 
the  rebaptizers'  objections,  will  outline  this  distinction. 
He  does  it,  by  resolving  a  difficulty  of  the  rebaptizers 
which  seemed  to  him  particularly  weighty.  This  dif 
ficulty,  which  we  have  already  mentioned,  is  as  fol 
lows: 

Baptismal  regeneration  is  brought  about  by  the 
water  and  by  the  Spirit,  according  to  the  Scripture; 
the  water  cannot  produce  it  without  the  Spirit,  nor  the 
Spirit  without  the  water.  This  is  why  that  regenera 
tion  is  wrought  by  the  two  Sacraments  of  Baptism 
and  Confirmation  acting  together.  Since  according  to 
all,  this  last  Sacrament  is  not  valid  among  heretics, 
neither  is  baptismal  regeneration  possible  among  them, 
and  their  Baptism  is  null.12 

"£/».  Ixxv,  18;  Ixxiv,  5. 

12  Sententiae  episc.,  5  (Hartel,  I,  p.  439)  :  In  evangelic  divina 
sua  voce  Dominus  noster  Christus  locutus  est  dicens:  nisi  quis 
renatus  fuerit  ex  aqua  et  Spiritu  non  potest  introire  in  regnum 
Dei.  Hie  est  Spiritus  qui  ab  initio  ferebatur  super  aquam. 
Neque  enim  Spiritus  sine  aqua  separa[tim  opera] ri  potest  nee 
aqua  sine  Spiritu.  Male  ergo  sibi  quidam  interpretantur  ut 
dicant,  quod  per  manus  impositionem  Spiritum  Sanctum  accipi- 
ant  et  sic  recipiantur,  cum  manifestum  sit  utroque  sacramento 
debere  eos  ren-asci  in  ecclesia  catholica.  Cf.  Epp.  Ixxiii,  21 ; 
Ixxii,  i ;  DC  rebapt.,  3.  At  that  time  Confirmation  was  not  yet 
clearly  distinguished  from  Baptism,  but  was  considered  by  re- 


126      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  author  of  the  De  Rcbaptismate  answers  that 
regeneration  by  water  may  be  separated  from  that  by 
the  Spirit :  one  may  exist  without  the  other,  and  pre 
cisely  this  happens  in  the  Baptism  of  heretics.13  Ow 
ing  to  the  virtue  of  the  invocation  of  the  name  of 
Jesus,  heretical  immersion  is  valid  and  begins  the  work 
of  regeneration;  hence  it  must  not  be  renewed.14  But 
regeneration  is  completely  wrought  only  by  the  "  Bap 
tism  in  the  Holy  Ghost,"  in  which  "  our  salvation  re 
sides/'  and  which  cannot  be  administered  outside  the 
Church.  Therefore  the  heretic,  baptized  in  heresy, 
cannot  be  saved  except  on  condition  that  he  gives  up 
his  errors,  does  penance,  and  receives,  in  the  Church, 
the  rite  that  confers  the  Holy  Spirit. 

"  Ideo  cum  salus  nostra  in  baptismate  Spiritus,  quod  ple- 
rumque  cum  baptismate  aquae  conjunctum  est,  sit  constituta 
.  .  .  si  .  .  .  ab  alienis  [haereticis]  traditum  fuerit 
[baptisma]  .  .  .  quia  Spiritus  Sanctus  extra  Ecclesiam 
non  sit,  fides  quoque  non  solum  apud  haereticos,  verum  etiam 
apud  eos  qui  in  schismate  constituti  sunt  sana  esse  non  pos- 
sit,  idcircoque  paenitentiam  agentibus  correctisque  per  doc- 
trinam  veritatis  et  per  fidem  ipsorum,  quae  postea  emendata 
est  purificato  corde  eorum,  tantummodo  baptismate  spiritali 
id  est  manus  impositione  episcopi  et  Spiritus  Sancti  submi- 
nistratione  subveniri  debeat."  15 

Baptism  administered  in  heresy  then  is  valid ;  but  it 
is  useful  for  salvation,  only  when  the  subject  becomes 
converted,  and  receives,  in  the  Church,  the  complement 
of  Baptism,  that  is  to  say,  the  rite  which  imparts  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  share  of  the  dispositions  of  the 

baptizers  as  producing  with  Baptism  but  one  effect,  viz.,  the  re 
generation  of  the  soul. 

13  De  rebapt.,  3,  4. 

14  De  rebapt.,  6,  12,  etc. 

15  De  rebapt.,  10. 


BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY  127 

baptized  Christian  in  the  reception  of  grace  is  some 
what  realized.  Although  far  more  precise,  the  doc 
trine  of  St.  Augustine  will  not  differ  from  that  of  the 
De  Rebaptismate. 


The  mind  of  the  Roman  Church  concerning  the 
value  of  the  Baptism  of  heretics  then  had  been  made 
quite  manifest  by  the  attitude  and  answers  of  Pope  St. 
Stephen.  However,  there  was  no  solemn  decision 
during  the  3rd.  century,  and  the  churches  kept  their 
respective  views  and  practice.  It  was  only  in  the 
Council  of  Aries  in  314,  that  the  Catholic  Church  of 
Africa  gave  up  rebaptism  which  henceforth  became 
in  the  West  the  exclusive  property  of  the  Donatist 
Churches.  The  East  was  more  obstinate  16  ;  during  the 
4th.  and  even  during  the  5th.  century,  several  churches 
continued  to  look  upon  the  Baptism  of  heretics  as  in 
valid.  This  practice  influenced  the  theories  of  the  effi 
cacy  of  Baptism,  set  forth  by  some  Greek  Fathers  of 
that  time. 

At  Alexandria,  St.  Athanasius,  abiding  by  Origen's 
tradition,  explained  the  efficacy  of  Baptism  by  the 
power  of  the  invocation  of  the  three  Divine  Persons. 
But,  he  points  out,  in  order  that  that  invocation  may 
be  efficacious,  one  must  have  the  true  faith  which  it 
expresses.  This  is  why  the  Arians  do  not  baptize 
validly,  although  they  administer  Baptism  in  the  name 
of  the  Trinity,  as  the  Gospel  commands ;  for,  in  real 
ity,  they  do  not  baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and 
of  the  Son,  but,  in  keeping  with  their  belief,  in  the 
name  of  the  Creator  and  of  a  creature.17  The  Mani- 

16  Cf.  DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  chap,  ix,  sect.  5. 

17  Contra  Arlanos,  ii,  42;  P.O.,  xxvi,  257.     We  must  not  lose 
sight  of  the   fact  that  Arians  would  often  introduce   into  the 


128     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

cheans,  the  Montanists,  the  followers  of  Paul  of  Sa- 
mosata,  as  well  as  all  those  who  share  the  Arian  views, 
administer  a  void  Baptism,  because  they  ascribe  a  false 
meaning  to  the  Trinitarian  formula.18 

St.  Basil,  who  explains  also  the  efficacy  of  Baptism 
by  the  power  of  the  Divine  Persons,  especially  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  present  in  the  baptismal  water,19  denies 
likewise  to  heretics  the  power  to  baptize.  How  could 
heretics  baptize  validly  since  like  the  Marcionites  20 
they  make  God  the  author  of  evil,  or,  like  the  Mon 
tanists,21  insult  the  Holy  Ghost  by  comparing  Him  to 
man?  Did  not  the  Bishops  of  old,  viz.,  Cyprian  and 
Firmilian,  consider  null  any  Baptism  conferred  outside 
the  Church,  because  outside  the  Church  the  grace  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  cannot  be  found  ?  22  Yet,  St.  Basil  re 
gards  as  valid  the  Baptism  of  schismatics.  As  to  or 
dinations,  he  seems  to  accept  only  those  that  were 
made  by  Catholics.23 

The  Apostolic  Constitutions2*  and  St.  Cyril  of 
Jerusalem25  account  for  the  practice  of  rebaptizing 
heretics  by  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  Baptism,  set 
forth  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  (iv,  5).  It  may 

baptismal  formula  —  altered  for  the  purpose  —  their  divagations 
on  the  Trinitarian  doctrine.  Cf.  TIXERONT,  op.  cit.,  p.  403. 

18  Contra  Arianos,  ii,  43.     The  Nicene  Council    (can.   19)   de 
cides    that   the    followers    of    Paul    of    Samosata   ought   to    be 
rebaptized;   whilst   it  considers   as   valid   the   Novatian  ordina 
tions  (can.  8). 

19  De  Spirit.  S.,  28,  35. 

20  Epist.,  cxcix,  47;  P.G.,  xxxii,  732. 

21  Epist.  clxxxviii,  can.  i ;  Ibid.,  668.    Cf.  ST.  GREG.  NAZ.,  Ora- 
tio  xxiii  contr.  Arianos,  16. 

22  ST.  BASIL,  Ibid. 

23  Epist.,  ccxl,  3. 

24  vi,  15  (t.  i,  p.  337,  ed.  FUNK). 

25  Procatech.,  7. 


BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY  129 

seem  surprising  that  St.  Cyril,  who  expressed  so  forci 
bly  the  efficacy  of  Baptism,  did  not  get  rid  of  the  views 
that  favored  rebaptism.  If  baptismal  water  contains 
the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  if  it  acquires,  by  the 
invocation  of  the  Divine  Persons,  the  power  of  sancti 
fying,26  must  not  its  efficacy  be  independent  of  the 
minister's  faith  ?  But,  in  the  East,  the  respective  part 
of  the  rite  and  of  the  minister  in  baptismal  regenera 
tion  had  not  yet  been  stated  with  precision ;  the  efficacy 
of  Baptism  was  merely  affirmed,  not  analyzed. 

It  was  the  introduction  of  the  Roman  practices,  far 
more  than  the  more  accurate  exposition  of  the  doc 
trine  that  caused  the  custom  of  rebaptism  to  disap 
pear  from  the  East.27  At  the  time  of  St.  Basil,  the 
Roman  decisions  were  followed  at  Iconium.28  In 
the  5th.  century,  the  document  known  as  the  7th.  canon 
of  Constantinople  29  divides  heretical  sects  into  two 
categories  :  those  of  which  the  Baptism  is  accepted,  and 
those  of  which  the  Baptism  is  rejected.  The  principle 
which  guided  in  this  choice  is  apparently  the  same  that 
had  been  followed  by  the  Council  of  Aries  in  314: 
heretical  Baptism  is  valid,  when  administered  accord 
ing  to  the  essential  rite;  otherwise  it  ought  to  be  re 
newed.  The  practice  of  the  Roman  Church  was 
triumphant. 

Whilst  the  East,  little  inclined  towards  Sacramen- 
tary  Theology,  paid  slight  heed  to  its  problems,  the 
West,  stimulated  by  the  Donatist  controversies,  was 
about  to  formulate  a  doctrine  of  the  efficacy  of  the 

26  Catech.,  iii,  3,  4. 

27  St.  Augustine  remarks  that  the  East  was  not  affected  at  all 
by  the  Donatist  controversies.     Contra  Crescon.,  iv,  32. 

28  Epist.  cxcix,  47. 

29HEFELE,  History  of  the  Councils,  vol.  ii,  p.  366. 


130     THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Sacraments,  a  doctrine  already  complete  and  definitive 
in  many  points. 

b. —  Donatism.     St.  Optatus  and  St.  Augustine. 

The  Donatist  schism  was,  indeed,  the  occasion  of 
considerable  progress  of  the  dogma  of  the  efficacy  of 
the  Sacraments.  The  share  of  the  minister  and  that 
of  the  subject's  dispositions,  in  the  production  of  the 
effects  of  Baptism  and  of  Ordination  were  determined 
with  a  precision  to  which  the  subsequent  ages  con 
tributed  but  few  immaterial  additions. 


On  February  24,  303,  Emperor  Diocletian  pub 
lished  an  edict  which  prescribed  the  cessation  of  Chris 
tian  meetings,  the  levelling  of  Churches,  abjuration  on 
the  part  of  all  Christians,  and  the  destruction  of  their 
Sacred  Books.  This  last  injunction  of  the  edict  was 
executed  with  special  rigor:  Christians  were  required, 
under  the  most  severe  punishments,  to  surrender  their 
Sacred  Writings.  Many  refused  to  do  so,  thus  risk 
ing  their  lives;  others  cunningly  gave  up  heretical 
books ;  finally  others  obeyed  and  were  stigmatized  with 
the  name  of  tr  adit  ores. 

Felix,  Bishop  of  Aptunga,  who  consecrated  Csecilius, 
Bishop  of  Carthage,  was  charged  with  having  surren 
dered  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  This  charge  was  made 
use  of  by  a  faction  of  malcontents,  which  had  been 
formed  against  Csecilius  at  the  instigation  of  Lucilla, 
an  influential  matron  and  an  enemy  of  the  new  Bishop. 
The  ordination  of  Csecilius,  they  said,  is  not  valid, 
since  it  was  performed  by  a  tradltor;  the  Sacraments 
administered  by  sinners  are  void.  The  Bishops  of  Nu- 


DONATISM  131 

midia  sided  with  the  malcontents,  they  met  together 
in  a  conventicle  at  Carthage,  proclaimed  the  deposition 
of  Caecilius  and  elected  Majorinus  in  his  stead.  The 
latter  died  a  short  time  after  his  election,  and  was  re 
placed  by  Donatus  the  Great.  Such  is  the  origin 
of  the  Donatist  schism.30 

On  account  of  social  as  well  as  religious  reasons  this 
schism  spread  quite  rapidly.31  Although  condemned 
in  314,  at  the  Council  of  Aries,32  it  still  continued 
to  exist.  At  the  beginning  of  the  5th.  century  all  the 
genius  of  St.  Augustine  was  required  to  do  away  with 
the  doctrinal  influence  of  Donatism. 

The  Donatist  teaching  concerning  the  minister  of 
the  Sacraments  is  subordinated  to  a  puritanical  con 
ception  of  the  Church,  which  is  connected  with  Nova- 
tianism :  the  Church  is  made  up  only  of  the  just ;  she 
does  not  admit  of  the  mixture  of  the  good  and  of  the 
wicked,  for  the  wicked  are  excluded  from  her  bosom.33 
However  on  account  of  the  special  object  of  their  con 
tention,  the  Donatists  limited  the  question  to  the 
sanctity  of  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy:  saintly  minis 
ters  alone  belong  to  that  hierarchy ;  the  traditores  and 
those  who,  like  the  Catholic  Bishops,  side  with  them, 
cease  to  be  its  members.  The  true  hierarchy  and  the 
true  Church  are  found  only  among  the  Donatists. 

Consequently,  the  Bishops  notoriously  unworthy 34 

30  Cf.  TILLEMONT,  Memoires,  t.  VI. 

31  Cf.  Revue  des  questions  historiques,  ier  Oct.   1904. 

32  The  I3th.  canon  admits  the  validity  of  the  ordinations  per 
formed  by  Traditores.    Cf.  HEFELE,  History  of  the  Councils,  vol. 
I,  p.  191. 

33  ST.  AUGUSTINE,  Brevic.  coll.  3*  dies,  10. —  Cf.  Donatistarum 
litterae,  P.L.,  xliii,  834. 

34  The  Donatists  admitted  the  validity  of  Sacraments  adminis 
tered  by  an  occult  sinner. 

10 


132     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

are  no  longer  true  Bishops.  They  have  lost  the  pow 
er  of  administering  the  Sacraments,  and  cannot  either 
ordain  or  baptize  validly: 

"  His  ergo  criminibus  septus,  esse  verus  episcopus  non 
potes."  35 

The  Catholics  persecute  the  Donatists  and  become 
their  tormentors;  but  wicked  tormentors  cannot  be 
God's  priests.36  Yet,  they  do  assume  that  title;  this, 
however,  should  not  cause  us  any  wonder:  does  not 
Satan  disguise  himself  as  an  angel  of  light? 

"  Nee  adeo  minim,  quod  tibi  nomen  episcopi  illicite  as- 
sumis.  Haec  est  vera  diaboli  consuetude,  ita  demum  deci- 
pere  si  sibimet  vindicet  vocabulum  sanctitatis."  37 

But  there  can  be  no  covenant  between  light  and  dark 
ness,  life  and  death,  innocence  and  crime.38  This 
is  why  the  unworthy  minister  is  excluded  by  this  very 
fact  from  the  Church  and  forfeits  the  powers  of  his 
ordination : 

"  Recedens  ab  Ecclesia  baptismum  quidem  non  amittit,  jus 
dandi  tamen  amittit."  39 

Thus  the  existence  of  the  hierarchy  depends  alto 
gether  on  the  moral  worth  of  the  minister. 

35  Contra  lift.,  Petil.,  ii,  21.    The  Donatist  system  is  exposed 
according  to  the  quotations  from  Donatist  writings  to  be  found 
in  the  works  of  St.  Augustine  and  in  the  De  schismate  Dona- 
tistarum  of  St.  Optatus. 

36  Ibid.,  42. 
vibid.,  40. 
88  Ibid.,  92. 

39  Contra  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  30. 


DONATISM  133 

To  this  erroneous  view  about  the  hierarchy  of  the 
Church  the  Donatists  added  the  thesis  of  the  rebaptiz- 
ers  and  amplified  it.  Nobody  can  give  what  he  has 
not,  and  everything  has  its  principle  in  something 
else.  Now  how  can  a  minister  laden  with  crimes,  im 
part  innocence  to  the  sinner  whom  he  baptizes  ?  How 
can  he  who  is  dead  give  life?  40 

"  Nunquam  divinae  legis  censura  patietur  ut  vivificare 
quemquam  mortuus  possit,  curare  vulneratus,  illuminare  cae- 
cus,  vestire  nudus,  et  mundare  pollutus."  41 

The  Donatists  ascribed  then  the  whole  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments  to  the  minister's  moral  dispositions:  it  is 
not  the  baptismal  rite  that  purifies,  but  the  minister's 
state  of  conscience.  The  latter  alone  we  must  take 
into  account: 

"  Conscientia  namque  dantis  attenditur,  qui  abluat  acci- 
pientis."  42 

Again,  outside  the  true  Church, —  that  is  to  say,  the 
Donatist  Church, —  Baptism  cannot  exist,  since  neither 
in  schism  nor  in  heresy  can  forgiveness  of  sins  and 
regeneration  be  found.43  When  one's  faith  is  vitiated 
by  error,  he  cannot  receive  the  effects  of  Baptism.44 
All  the  reasons  alleged  by  St.  Cyprian  are  taken  up  and 
developed. 

Finally  confirming  their  heresies  by  their  deeds,  the 

40  Contra  lift.  Petil.,  ii,  10,  12,  14.     Cf.  Contr.  epist.  Parmen., 
ii,  27. —  ST.  OPTATUS,  De  schism.  Donat.,  v,  4,  6. 

41  Contra  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  32. 

42  Contra  litt.  Petil,  ii,  6,  231,  etc.     ST.  OPTATUS,  op.  cit.,  v,  7. 

43  De  bapt.  contra  Donat.,  i,   17. 

44  Contra  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  35. 


I34     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Donatists  rebaptized  those  that  left  the  Catholic  Church 
and  came  to  them. 


St.  Optatus,  Bishop  of  Milevis,  wrote  his  work  DC 
Schismate  Donatistamm  to  refute  the  Donatist  er 
rors.  On  many  points  his  reasoning  is  incomplete,  and 
therefore  does  not  fully  reach  its  purpose :  neverthe 
less,  it  lays  down  fruitful  principles  which  St.  Augus 
tine  will  skilfully  develop  in  the  building  up  of  the  sys 
tem  which  he  will  victoriously  oppose  to  the  false 
views  of  the  schismatics. 

St.  Optatus  grants  to  the  Donatists  that  there  is 
only  one  Church,  that  she  is  holy,  and  cannot  be 
found  either  among  heretics  or  among  schismatics. 
But,  in  order  to  judge  which  is  the  true  Church,  he  ap 
peals  to  an  objective  principle.  The  truth  and  holi 
ness  of  the  Church  rest,  not  on  the  moral  qualities  of 
her  ministers,  as  the  Donatists  claim,  but  on  the  Sacra 
ments  : 

"  Ecclesia  una  est,  cujus  sanctitas  de  sacramentis  colligi- 
tur,  non  de  superbia  personarum  ponderatur :  ergo  hanc  unam 
columbam  et  dilectam  sponsam  suam  Christus  appellat."  45 

The  truth  of  the  Church  finds  also  its  guaranty  in  her 
Catholicity,  in  the  communion  of  all  the  Churches  of 
the  world  with  the  See  of  Rome.46  The  characters  of 
the  true  Church,  by  which  she  is  distinguished  from 
heretical  and  schismatical  sects,  are  thus  objective  and 
can  be  easily  discerned.  Donatism  does  not  possess 
them :  hence  it  is  not  the  true  Church. 

45  De  schism.  Donat.,  ii,  I. 
*•/«*.,  i,  2,  3. 


DONATISM  AND  ST.  OPTATUS        135 

Besides,  since  the  Sacraments  are  at  the  basis  of  that 
conception  of  the  Church,  and  since,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Donatists  ascribe  to  them  no  intrinsic  value,  St. 
Optatus  proves  forcibly  the  Catholic  thesis  of  their  effi 
cacy. 

He  states  the  problem  with  remarkable  precision. 
In  the  administration  of  Baptism,  he  says,  we  must 
distinguish  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity,  the  faith  of 
the  baptized  neophyte,  and  the  person  of  the  minister; 
however,  their  respective  action  is  not  equally  im 
portant. 

f  The  chief  part  belongs  to  the  Trinity,47  for  from  it 
Baptism  draws  all  its  efficacy,  and  not  from  the  min 
ister:  it  is  God  that  purifies  the  soul  and  imparts  His 
gifts.  Hence  the  Sacraments  are  holy  by  themselves, 
they  do  not  hold  their  sanctity  from  the  minister,  as  the 
Donatists  claim.  It  is  God,  and  not  the  minister,  that 
sanctifies  in  Baptism : 

"  Cum  ergo  videatis,  omnes  qui  baptizant,  operarios  esse, 
non  dominos  et  sacramenta  per  se  esse  sancta,  non  per  ho 
mines,  quid  est,  quod  vobis  tantum  vindicatis?  .  .  .  Dei 
est  mundare,  non  hominis."  48 

The  minister's  share,  then,  is  quite  secondary;  it  is 
merely  ministerial;  it  is  like  that  of  a  workman 
(operarius)  who  may  be  changed  and  replaced  at  will : 
the  baptismal  rite  alone  cannot  be  changed.  St.  Op 
tatus  is  in  full  harmony  with  the  tradition  of  Pope  St. 
Stephen.  However,  his  teaching  is  far  from  being  as 

47  De  schism.  Donat.,  v,  4:     Principalem  locum  Trinitas  pos- 
sidet,   sine   qua   res   ipsa  non   potest   geri :    hanc    sequitur   fides 
credentis:  jam  persona  operantis  vicina  est,  quae  simili  auctori- 
tate  esse  non  potest. 

48  De  schism.  Donat.,  v,  4,  2,  7.     Cf.  ii,  10. 


136     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

complete  as  that  of  St.  Augustine.     The  Bishop  of 
Milevis  failed  to  grasp  the  doctrine  of  the  character. 

That  incompleteness  is  felt,  especially  when  he  at 
tempts  to  state  with  accuracy  the  action  of  the  faith 
of  the  baptized  candidate,  in  the  production  of  grace. 
Not  only  is  that  faith  declared  necessary,  but  its  effi 
cacy  is  somewhat  exaggerated.  That  faith  is  com 
pared  to  the  faith  of  the  woman  with  a  flow  of  blood, 
mentioned  in  the  Gospel,  which,  according  to  Jesus 
Himself,  wrought  the  cure  by  itself,  and  to  the  faith 
of  the  centurion  which  brought  about  by  itself  the  cure 
of  the  servant.49  True,  the  sacramental  doctrine  of 
St.  Optatus,  taken  as  a  whole,  forbids  us  to  see,  in 
those  comparisons,  a  restriction  of  the  objective  effi 
cacy  of  Baptism.  Yet  it  must  be  confessed  that  they 
state  in  a  rather  confused  manner  the  part  assigned  to 
the  dispositions  of  the  subject:  a  point  on  which  St. 
Augustine  will  show  far  more  precision. 


The  whole  sacramental  teaching  of  St.  Augustine  is 
based  both  on  St.  Cyprian's  concept  of  the  Church,  and 
on  the  doctrine  of  the  character.  Like  St.  Cyprian 
and  the  Donatists,  St.  Augustine  admits  that,  outside 
the  true  Church,  forgiveness  of  sins  and  grace  cannot 
be  obtained.  But  with  Pope  St.  Stephen  and  St.  Op 
tatus,  he  defends  the  objective  efficacy  of  the  Sacra 
ments.  The  doctrine  of  the  character  enables  him 
to  reconcile  these  two  parts  of  his  system  and  to  har 
monize,  in  a  synthetic  system,  his  theology  of  the 
Church  with  that  of  the  Sacraments. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  objective  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments,  independent  of  the  minister's  faith  and 

48  De  schism.  Donat.,  v,  8. 


DONATISM  AND  ST.  AUGUSTINE       137 

moral  works,  is  emphatically  affirmed  by  St.  Augus 
tine.50 

The  Donatists  claimed  that  an  heretical  or  unworthy 
minister  cannot  either  baptize  or  ordain  validly,  for 
by  his  falls  he  has  forfeited  the  powers  of  his  Ordina 
tion.  No,  answers  St.  Augustine,  an  heretical  or  un 
worthy  minister  does  not  forfeit  his  powers.  Why 
should  he  forfeit  the  powers  of  his  Ordination  when 
he  does  not  forfeit  his  Baptism?  Now,  the  Donatists 
themselves  admit  that  neither  heresy  nor  unworthiness 
deprive  of  Baptism,  a  man  who  has  received  it  validly, 
since  they  do  not  rebaptize  those  apostates  who  are 
converted,  but  simply  submit  them  to  Penance.  Hence 
an  heretical  or  unworthy  minister  confers  the  Sacra 
ments  in  a  valid,  though  unlawful,  manner.51 

In  order  to  prove 'the  permanence  of  Ordination  as 
well  as  that  of  Baptism  in  an  unworthy  minister,  St. 
Augustine  appeals  to  the  doctrine  of  the  "  character." 
Baptism  and  Ordination  cannot  be  lost  through  moral 
failings,  for  they  produce  a  lasting  effect,  a  "  charac 
ter  "  which  cannot  be  lost  and  does  not  allow  of  these 
Sacraments  being  repeated.52 

"  Nulla  ostenditur  causa  cur  ille  qui  ipsum  baptismum 
amittere  non  potest,  jus  dandi  potest  amittere.  Utrumque 
enim  sacramentum  est;  et  quadam  consecratione  utrumque 
homini  datur ;  illud  cum  baptizatur ;  istud  cum  ordinatur ; 
ideoque  in  Catholica  utrumque  non  licet  iterari."  53 

50  Cf.   PORTALIE,  Dictionnaire  de   thcologie  catholique,  "  Saint 
Augustin,"  i,  2416,  ss. 

51  Coritr.  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  27,  28. 

52  St.  Augustine  calls  the  sacrament  of  Ordination  "  jus  dandi 
baptismum."    In  the  Sermo  ad  Caesareensis  Ecclesiae  plebem,  2, 
he  compares  it  to  the  indelible  "character"  of  the  soldier  de 
serter. 

53  Contr.  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  28.     Cf.  ii,  30;  Contr.  Crescon.,  ii, 
12-14. 


138      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

In  fact,  it  is  the  constant  practice  of  the  Church 
both  not  to  reordain  those  apostate  ministers  who 
come  back  to  the  one  fold,  nor  to  rebaptize  the  here 
tic  who  becomes  a  convert :  an  excellent  proof  that 
Baptism  and  Ordination  leave  in  the  soul  indelible 
traces : 

"  Sacramentum  enim  baptismi  est  quod  habet  qui  baptiza- 
tur:  et  sacramentum  dandi  baptismi  est  quod  habet  qui  or- 
dinatur.  Sicut  autem  baptizatus,  si  ab  unitate  recesserit, 
sacramentum  baptismi  non  amittit;  sic  etiam  ordinatus,  si 
ab  unitate  recesserit,  sacramentum  dandi  baptismi  non  amit 
tit.  Nulli  enim  sacramento  injuria  facienda  est;  si  discedit 
a  malis,  utrumque  discedit;  si  permanet  in  malis,  utrumque 
permanet.  Sicut  ergo  acceptatur  baptismus,  quern  non  potuit 
amittere  qui  ab  unitate  discesserat;  sic  acceptandus  est  bap 
tismus,  quern  dedit  ille  qui  sacramentum  dandi  cum  disce- 
deret  non  amiserat.  Nam  sicut  redeuntes,  qui  priusquam  re- 
cederent  baptizati  sunt,  non  rebaptizantur:  ita  redeuntes,  qui 
priusquam  recederent  ordinati  sunt,  non  utique  rursus  ordi- 
nantur;  sed  aut  administrant  quod  administrabant,  si  hoc 
utilitas  Ecclesiae  postulat,  aut  si  non  administrant,  sacra 
mentum  ordinationis  suae  tamen  gerunt."  54 

If  heretical  or  unworthy  ministers  can  validly  ad 
minister  the  Sacraments,  it  does  not  follow,  St.  Augus 
tine  continues,  that  they  administer  them  lawfully. 
Baptism  may  be  administered  validly  outside  the  unity 
of  the  Church ;  but  that  administration  is  unlawful  and 
injurious  both  to  the  minister  and  to  the  subject  of 
the  sacrament.  Heretical  ministers  sin  grievously 
when  they  confer  Baptism,  almost  as  grievously  as  a 
layman  who  would  baptize  outside  the  case  of  neces 
sity  and  thus  usurp  priestly  functions.55 

54  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2.     Cf.  De  bono  conjug.,  32. 

55  Contr.  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  28,  29;  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          139 

However,  St.  Augustine  adds  immediately  that  the 
illegitimacy  of  heretical  administration  takes  nothing 
from  its  value : 

"  Si  dicis :  Non  recte  datur,  respondents :  Sicut  non  recte 
foris  habetur,  et  tamen  habetur;  sic  non  recte  foris  datur, 
sed  tamen  datur."  56 

Just  as  the  royal  effigy  engraven  illegitimately  on  coins 
by  a  forger  will  be  made  authentic  by  the  public 
treasury,  after  they  have  been  confiscated,  or  just  as 
the  military  mark  impressed  unlawfully  on  a  man 
foreign  to  the  army,  will  cause  that  man  to  be  con 
sidered  a  deserter,  when  his  military  mark  is  seen,  and 
will  be  valid,  in  case  that  civilian  would  join  the  army, 
so  also,  the  Baptism  administered  by  an  unlawful  min 
ister  is  valid  and  must  not  be  repeated.  The  Chris 
tian  Sacraments  adhere  to  the  soul  as  closely  as  the 
military  mark  to  the  body.57 

Thus  for  St.  Augustine,  the  validity  of  the  Sacra 
ments  is  independent  of  the  minister's  moral  disposi 
tions,  since  it  is  connected  with  the  latter's  indelible 
"  character." 

But  how  account  for  the  fact  that  a  sacrament  can  ^/ 1 
be  valid,  when  it  is  conferred  by  heretics  or  by  per 
sons  laden  with  all  kinds  of  crimes?  As  our  readers 
remember,  Pope  St.  Stephen  solved  that  antinomy  by 
appealing  to  the  power  of  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity 
in  Baptism ;  St.  Optatus  declared  that  man's  action  in 
the  conferring  of  a  Sacrament  is  merely  ministerial; 
God  it  is  who  really  acts.  St.  Augustine  takes  up 
these  explanations  and  states  them  with  more  accuracy 

56  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2;  iii,  13,  etc. 

57  Contr.  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  29. 


140     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

by  means  of  his  theory  of  the  Church,  which  is  thus 
intimately  connected  with  his  sacramental  doctrine. 

According  to  the  holy  Doctor,  the  Church  is  the 
instrument  of  salvation;  through  her,  by  submitting 
to  her  authority,  man  can  reach  the  knowledge  of  re 
vealed  truth;  it  is  also  through  her  mediation  that 
grace  is  given  us.  Hence  the  Church  continues  here 
below  the  work  of  teaching  and  of  sanctification,  for 
merly  performed  by  Christ;  or  rather  through  His 
Church  Christ  continues  to  teach  and  sanctify  the 
world:  so  that  the  acts  of  the  Church  are  really  those 
of  Christ  Himself.58  Now  the  Church  acts  through 
her  ministers,  through  those  who  have  received  the 
"  character  "  of  Ordination,  and  who  are  thus  officially 
invested  with  the  power  of  exercising  the  sacred  func 
tions. 

The  consequence  of  this  doctrine  is  that  the  act  of 
the  minister  who  confers  a  sacrament  is  an  act  of 
Christ  Himself  acting  through  His  Church.  There 
fore  how  could  the  heresy  and  unworthiness  of  the 
minister  impair  the  value  of  the  sacrament? 

St.  Augustine  sets  forth  that  teaching  over  and  over 
again,  not  only  in  his  writings  against  the  Donatists, 
but  at  every  opportunity : 

"  Secura  Ecclesia  spem  non  ponit  in  homine  .  .  .  sed 
spem  suam  ponit  in  Christo,  qui  sic  accepit  formam  servi, 
ut  non  amitteret  formam  Dei,  de  quo  dictum  est:  Ipse  est 
qui  baptizat.  Proinde  homo  quilibet  minister  baptism!  ejus, 
qualemcumque  sarcinam  portet,  non  iste,  sed  super  quern 
columba  descendit,  ipse  est  qui  baptizat."  59 

58  Cf.  Epist.  cxl,  18;  Sermo  cxxix,  4;  De  doctrina  Christ.,  iii, 
44;  Enarr.  II  in  Ps.  xxx,  n.  4,  etc. 

59  Epistola  Ixxxix,  5. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          141 

That  the  minister  should  be  holy,  this  is  indeed  quite 
proper.  But  if  he  happens  not  to  be  holy,  Christ's 
sacrament  is  not  tainted  on  that  account;  for  the  Sa 
vior  can  make  use  of  a  despicable  channel  of  stone 
to  carry  the  waters  of  salvation  into  the  soul.60  Ac 
cording  to  the  Gospel,  Christ  baptized  through  the 
ministry  of  Judas,  the  traitor,  and  that  Baptism  was 
valid.  Hence  we  should  not  feel  uneasy  at  the  un- 
worthiness  of  the  ministers  of  the  Church,  but  rather 
consider  in  them  Christ  who  is  acting: 

"  Dictum  est  de  Domino  antequam  pateretur,  quia  bapti- 
zabat  plures  quam  Joannes:  deinde  adjunctutn  est,  quamvis 
ipse  non  baptisaret,  sed  discipuli  ejus  (Joan.,  IV,  i,  2). 
Ipse  et  non  ipse:  ipse  potestate,  illi  ministerio;  servitutem 
ad  baptizandum  illi  admovebant,  potestas  baptizandi  in 
Christo  permanebat.  Ergo  baptizabant  discipuli  ejus,  et 
ibi  adhuc  erat  Judas  inter  discipulos  ejus:  quos  ergo 
baptizavit  Judas  non  sunt  iterum  baptizati;  et  quos  bap- 
tizavit  Joannes,  iterum  baptizati  sunt.  Plane  iterum,  sed 
non  iterato  baptismo.  Quos  enim  baptizavit  Joannes, 
Joannes  baptizavit:  quos  autem  baptizavit  Judas,  Christus 
baptizavit.  Sic  ergo  quos  baptizavit  ebriosus,  quos  baptiza 
vit  homicida,  quos  baptizavit  adulter,  si  baptismus  Christi 
erat,  Christus  baptizavit.  Non  timeo  adulterum,  non  ebri- 
osum,  non  homicidam;  quia  columbam  attendo,  per  quam 
mihi  dicitur :  Hie  est  qui  baptizat."  61 

If  the  administration  of  Baptism  is  an  act  of  Christ 
acting  through  His  Church  in  the  person  of  the  minis 
ter  invested  with  the  character,  the  value  and  sanctity 
of  the  sacrament  are  intrinsic  to  it:  neither  the  un- 
worthiness  of  the  minister  nor  that  of  the  subject  can 
impair  it  in  any  way : 

60  In  Joan.,  tract,  v,  15. 

61  In  Joan.,  tract,  v,  18;  Contra  litt.  Petil,  iii,  59,  65-67. 


142      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

"  Non  eorum  mentis  a  quibus  ministratur,  nee  eorum  qui- 
bus  ministratur,  constat  baptismus,  sed  propria  sanctitate 
atque  veritate  propter  eum  a  quo  institutus  est,  bene  utenti- 
bus  ad  salutem."  Q2 

Man's  action  is  purely  ministerial :  he  uses  the  very 
power  of  Christ.  Hence  we  ought  to  pay  attention 
not  to  the  minister's  person,  like  the  Donatists,  but  to 
what  is  given  by  the  minister:  % 

"  In  ista  quaestione  de  baptismo  non  esse  cogitandum  quis 
det,  sed  quid  det;  aut  quis  accipiat,  sed  quid  accipiat;  aut  quis 
habeat,  sed  quid  habeat."  63 

By  his  doctrine  of  the  ministerial  action  of  the 
Church  in  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments  —  a 
doctrine  based  on  the  continuance  of  priestly  powers 
in  an  heretical  or  unworthy  minister  —  St.  Augustine 
was  able  to  reconcile  St.  Cyprian's  theology  of  the 
Church  with  the  objective  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments. 
Christ  acts  through  an  heretical  or  unworthy  minister, 
for,  by  his  character,  the  latter  represents  the  Church.64 

Nothing  then  on  the  minister's  part  impairs  in  any 
way  the  validity  of  the  sacrament;  it  suffices  that  the 
minister  performs  the  sacrament  according  to  the  es 
sential  rite. 

Is  this  also  the  case  with  the  subject?  Are  not  his 
evil  dispositions,  for  instance  heresy,  schismatic  ten 
dencies  or  attachment  to  sin,  an  absolute  obstacle  to  the 
efficacy  of  the  sacrament? 

As  we  have  already  seen,  St.  Cyprian,  and  the  Donat 
ists  as  well,  refused  to  admit  that  Baptism  was  valid, 

62  Contra  Cresc.,  iv,  19.     Cf.  De  bapt.,  contra  Donat.,  iii,  15. 

63  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  iv,  16. 

64  Cf.  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  14. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          143 

when  received  by  a  heretic  or  by  an  unworthy  person, 
who  was  incapable  of  obtaining  the  forgiveness  of  his 
sins  and  of  being  regenerated.  The  author  of  the 
De  Rebaptismate  thought  that  in  this  case,  Baptism  be 
gan  the  regeneration,  and  therefore  was  valid,  although 
the  regeneration  was  complete  and  profitable  for  salva 
tion,  only  when  the  subject  was  converted  and  re 
ceived,  in  the  Catholic  Church,  the  rite  that  conferred 
the  Holy  Ghost.  St.  Augustine  is  more  precise.  He 
solves  the  difficulty  by  the  distinction  between  grace 
and  character.  When  an  heretical  subject  is  baptized 
in  an  heretical  sect,  he  receives  the  character :  his  Bap 
tism  is  valid  and  must  not  be  repeated;  nevertheless 
he  will  obtain  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins  only  when  he 
is  converted  and  enters  the  Catholic  Church. 

The  heretical  minister  who  baptizes  in  his  own  sect 
is  like  a  soldier  who,  after  deserting,  marks  with  the 
"  royal  character  "  a  man  foreign  to  the  army.  When 
the  deserter  comes  back  to  his  duty,  and  when  he  who 
is  illegally  marked  enlists  in  the  army  —  to  which  he 
did  not  belong  —  their  "  character  "  is  not  renewed,  it 
is  simply  acknowledged  and  approved.65  When  the 
shepherd  recognizes  his  wandering  sheep  at  the  sign 
with  which  he  marked  them,  he  makes  them  come  back 
to  the  sheep  fold,  without  touching  in  any  way  the 
"  character  dominicus  "  he  had  impressed  on  them.66 
So  also  Baptism,  received  outside  the  Church  by  an 
heretical  or  schismatical  subject  or  by  one  who  is  ani 
mated  by  the  worst  dispositions,  always  confers  validly 
the  character,  for  the  latter,  to  be  produced,  requires 
no  disposition : 

65  Epist.  clxxxv,  23.     Cf.  In  Joan.,  tract,  vi,  14-16. 

66  Ibid.     Cf .  Sermo  ccxcv,  5 ;  Contr.  Crescon.,  i,  35. 


144     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

"  Christian!  baptismi  sacramentum  .  .  .  etiam  apud 
haereticos  valet  et  sufficit  ad  consecrationem,  quamvis  ad 
vitae  aeternae  participationem  non  sufficiat;  quae  consecra- 
tio  reum  quidem  facit  haereticum  extra  Domini  gregem  ha- 
bentem  dominicum  characterem,  corrigendum  tamen  admonet 
sana  doctrina,  non  iterum  similiter  consecrandum."  67 

Hence  Baptism  received  in  heresy  produces  the  char 
acter;  but  it  does  not  suffice  to  make  a  man  share  in 
the  eternal  life.  St.  Augustine  gave  out  his  whole 
mind  concerning  the  value  of  the  Baptism  of  heretics 
for  producing  grace.68  His  views  must  be  exposed 
with  accuracy:  this  will  enable  us  to  detect  the  short 
comings  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine  about  the  efficacy 
of  the  Sacraments. 

St.  Augustine,  who  parts  company  with  St.  Cyprian 
when  he  affirms  the  validity  of  the  Baptism  adminis 
tered  in  an  heretical  sect,  acknowledges  with  him  the 
inutility  of  that  Baptism  for  salvation.  Such  a  Bap 
tism  does  not  remit  sins,  nor  impart  grace : 

"  Nee  nos  abnuimus  eum  qui  apud  haereticos  vel  in  aliquo 
schismate  extra  communionem  Ecclesiae  baptizatur,  non  ei 
prodesse  in  quantum  haereticorum  perversitati  consentit."  69 

The  sacrament  will  produce  all  its  effects,  when  the 
heretic  is  converted  and  comes  back  to  the  Catholic 
unity,  just  as  Baptism,  administered  in  the  Church  to 
a  subject  not  properly  disposed,  produces  grace,  when 
he  does  penance. 

67  Epist.  xcviii,  5. 

68  St.  Augustine  did  not  make  known  his  idea  about  the  grace- 
producing  power  of   Ordination.     He  considered  but  one  effect 
of  the  sacrament  of  Holy  Orders,  the  imperishable  prerogatives 
which  it  confers. 

69  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  iii,  13. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          145 

"  In  communionibus  ab  Ecclesia  separatis  posse  homines 
baptizari,  ubi  Christi  baptismus  eadem  sacramenti  celebra- 
tione  datur  et  sumitur ;  qui  tamen  tune  prosit  ad  remissionem 
peccatorum,  cum  quis  reconciliatus  unitati,  sacrilegio  dis- 
sensionis  exuitur  quo  ejus  peccata  tenebantur,  et  dimitti  non 
sinebantur.  Sicut  enira  in  illo  qui  fictus  accesserat,  fit  ut 
non  denuo  baptizetur,  sed  ipsa  pia  correctione  et  veraci 
confessione  purgetur,  quod  non  posset  sine  baptismo,  ut  quod 
ante  datum  est,  tune  valere  incipiat  ad  salutem,  cum  ilia 
fictio  veraci  confessione  recesserit."  70 

St.  Augustine  finds  the  explanation  of  this  phe 
nomenon,  in  the  wicked  dispositions  of  a  heretical  sub 
ject.  He  who  allows  himself  to  be  baptized  in  heresy 
or  schism,  "  connives  with  heretical  wickedness," 
makes  himself  guilty  of  the  "  sacrilege  of  discord  " 
and  places  an  "  obstacle  to  the  producing  of  the  salu 
tary  fruits  of  the  sacrament."71  In  this  case,  Bap 
tism  can  no  more  remit  sins  and  impart  grace,  than  it 
can,  even  in  the  Catholic  Church,  forgive  sins  and  im 
part  grace  to  him  who  is  baptized  therein  without  being 
sincerely  converted. 

The  Bishop  of  Hippo  states  with  wonderful  ac 
curacy  the  share  which  belongs  to  the  dispositions  of 
the  subject  of  the  sacrament.  He  who  is  destitute  of 
them  "places  an  obstacle  (obicem  ponit)"  to  the  action 
of  the  sacrament.  The  Council  of  Trent  will  use  the 
same  words  in  order  to  express  the  influence  of  the 
subject's  dispositions  in  the  production  of  grace.72 

70  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  18.     Cf.  5,  11,  12,  etc. 

71  Epist.  xcviii,   10:    Qui  non  credit     .     .     .     profecto  infidelis 
est,  etsi  habeat  fidei  sacramentum ;  longeque  melior  est  illo  par- 
vulus,   qui    etiamsi   fidem   nondum   habet   in   cogitatione,   non    ei 
obicem  opponit  contrariae  cogitationis,  unde  sacramentum  ejus 
salubriter  percipit. 

72  Sess.  VII,  De  sacramentis  in  gcnere,  can.  6. 


146     .EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

But  when  the  subject,  that  has  been  baptized  in  an 
heretical  or  even  schismatical  sect,  acknowledges  his 
heresy,  is  converted  and  re-enters  the  Church,  then  his 
Baptism  begins  to  be  useful  and  advantageous  to  him. 

"  Sicut  autem  per  unitatis  reconciliationem  incipit  utiliter 
haberi  [Baptisma],  quod  extra  unitatem  inutiliter  habebatur; 
sic  per  eamdem  reconciliationem  incipit  utile  esse,  quod  ex 
tra  earn  inutiliter  datum  est." 73 

In  this  case  the  Baptism  "  revives  " ;  future  theolo 
gians  will  base  on  that  Augustinian  teaching  the  theory 
of  the  reviviscence  of  the  Sacraments. 

According  to  St.  Augustine,  then,  the  first  and  chief, 
but  not  the  only,  cause  that  hinders  the  sacrament, 
conferred  outside  the  Catholic  unity,  from  being  profit 
able,  is  the  subject's  evil  dispositions. 

Moreover,  if  the  heretical  or  schismatical  Baptism  is 
of  no  profit,  it  is,  after  all,  because  the  true  Church 
alone  is  the  organ  of  salvation,74  and  because  outside 
her  bosom  sins  cannot  be  forgiven.  In  fact,  to  the 
true  Church,  and  to  her  alone,  in  the  person  of  the 
Apostles,  Christ  gave  the  power  of  remitting  sin;  hence 

"  Pax  Ecclesiae  dimittit  peccata,  et  ab  Ecclesiae  pace  alie- 
natio  tenet  peccata." 

It  is  the  "  cooings  of  tne  dove,"  that  is  to  say,  the  pray 
ers  of  the  Church,  that  obtain  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 
Now  the  dove  cooes  only  in  behalf  of  those  who  are  at 
peace  with  her.75  Or  again,  it  is  charity  which  covers 

73  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2.    Cf.  18. 

74  De  bapt.  cont.  Donat.,  iv,  i :  Baptismus  Ecclesise  potest  esse 
extra  Ecclesiam,  munus  autem  beatae  vitae  non  nisi  intra  Ec- 
clesiam  reperitur;   quae  super  petram  etiam   fundata  est,   quae 
ligandi  et  solvendi  claves  accepit. 

75  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  iii,  23,  22. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE         147 

a  multitude  of  sins,  it  is  by  the  Holy  Spirit  that  they 
are  forgiven;  now  charity  and  the  Holy  Spirit  are 
found  only  in  the  Catholic  unity.76  This  is  why  all 
the  good  that  may  be  obtained,  outside  the  Church, 
is  unprofitable  to  salvation,  for,  as  St.  Cyprian  says: 
"  Salus  extra  Ecclesiam  nulla  est."  77  Although  good 
and  heard  by  God,  the  prayers  and  alms  of  Cornelius 
the  centurion  were  of  profit  for  his  salvation,  only 
after  he  had  been  incorporated  by  St.  Peter  into  the 
Christian  society  of  the  Church.78 

Is  not  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  somewhat  di 
minished  by  that  doctrine  concerning  the  Church,  a 
doctrine  which  is  exactly  that  of  St.  Cyprian?  St. 
Augustine  has  some  misgivings  about  it.79  Hence  in 
order  to  preserve  the  full  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments, 
without,  however,  keeping  anything  from  the  action  of 
the  Church  in  the  imparting  of  salvation,  the  holy  Doc 
tor  appeals  to  the  peculiar  hypothesis  of  the  revi- 
viscence  of  sins.  Baptism  received  in  an  heretical  or 
schismatical  sect,  may  remit  sins  for  a  while,  but  if 
the  subject  is  bent  on  remaining  in  heresy  or  schism, 
all  his  sins  will  revive  and  he  will  obtain  their  "  irre 
vocable  remission  "  only  when  he  becomes  reconciled 
with  the  Catholic  unity.80  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
Savior  assures  us  in  the  parable  of  the  unmerciful 
servant,  that  sins  revive,  when  brotherly  charity  is 
absent. 

76  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  iii,  21;  Sermo  Ixxi,  30,  33. 

77  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  iv,  24. 

78  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  10. 

79  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  16. 

80  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  18-21 ;  iii,  18 ;  v,  g.     Theologians 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  impressed  by  this  Augustinian  doctrine,  will 
ask  themselves:     Utrum  peccata  dimissa  redeant?  and  answer  the 
problem  in  the  negative.     Cf.  the  Epitome  of  ABELARD,  28;  RO 
LAND,  Sent.   (GIETL,  p.  249). 

11 


148     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

"  Nam  redire  dimissa  peccata,  ubi  fraterna  charitas  non 
est,  apertissime  Dominus  docet  de  illo  servo,  quern  cum  in- 
venisset  debitorem  decem  millium  talentorum,  deprecanti 
omnia  dimisit.  Ille  autem  conservum  suum  qui  ei  debebat 
centum  denarios,  cum  miseratus  non  fuisset,  jussit  eum  domi- 
nus  reddere  quae  ei  dimiserat."  81 

That  reviviscence  of  sin  takes  place  likewise  in  the 
Catholic  Church  when  the  subject  of  Baptism  is  insuf 
ficiently  disposed  at  the  time  he  receives  the  sacrament. 

As  we  see  from  what  precedes,  St.  Augustine  did 
not  ascribe  to  Baptism  an  efficacy  altogether  independ 
ent  of  the  Church,  and  therefore  did  not  keep  clear 
altogether  of  St.  Cyprian's  views.  The  holy  Doctor 
even  hesitates  to  affirm  that  the  sacrament  can  fully 
forgive  the  sins  of  a  schismatic  or  of  a  heretic  in  good 
faith,  who  would  not  be  in  danger  of  death. 

Those,  he  says,  who  believe  that  Donatism  is  the 
true  Church,  and  have  themselves  baptized  therein,  are, 
no  doubt,  less  guilty  than  those  who  would  act  thus  by 
malice.  Yet  they  are  "  wounded  by  the  sacrilege  of 
schism  " : 

"  Illi  vero  qui  per  ignorantiam  ibi  baptizantur,  arbitrantes 
ipsam  esse  Ecclesiam  Christi,  in  istorum  quidem  compara- 
tione  minus  peccant ;  sacrilegio  tamen  schismatis  vulneran- 
tur:  non  ideo  non  graviter,  quod  alii  gravius.  Cum  enim 
dictum  est  quibusdam:  Tolerabilius  erit  Sodomis  in  die  jn- 
dicii  quam  vobis  (Matt.,  XI,  24)  :  non  ideo  distum  est  quia 
Sodomitae  non  torquebuntur,  sed  quia  illi  gravius  torquebun- 
tur."  82 

Had  St.  Augustine  considered  the  efficacy  of  Bap- 

81  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  20. 

82 De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  6,  10,  11 ;  Cf.  Contr.  Crescon.,  i,  34; 
Sermo  Ixxi,  28. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          149 

tism  in  the  production  of  grace  to  be  independent  of 
the  Church,83  he  would  not  have  used  these  expres 
sions.  According  to  him,  it  is  not  the  rite  that  pro 
duces  grace,  it  is  God  who  imparts  it  to  the  subject  of 
the  sacrament,  and  that  imparting  takes  place  in  the 
true  Church.  The  conception  of  a  relation  of  cau 
sality  strictly  so  called  between  the  sacramental  rite 
and  grace  is  altogether  beyond  the  holy  Doctor's  hori 
zon.  Hence,  while  the  Augustinian  doctrine  sets  forth 
with  wonderful  precision  the  share  of  the  minister 
and  that  of  the  subject's  dispositions  in  the  production 
of  grace,  this  is  not  the  case  for  the  share  of  the  rite 
itself.  In  this  regard,  its  shortcoming  is  manifest:  a 
considerable  progress  was  still  necessary  for  the  full 
development  of  the  dogma  of  efficacy. 

To  sum  up,  according  to  St.  Augustine,  Baptism  and 
Ordination  are  efficacious  independently  of  the  minis 
ter's  moral  dispositions;  for  the  power  of  administer 
ing  the  Sacraments  cannot  be  lost.  That  power  is 
the  power  of  Christ  Himself  who  acts  through  His 
Church  in  the  person  of  the  minister.  The  whole 
function  of  the  minister,  in  the  making  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  consists,  then,  in  performing  the  rite  accord 
ing  to  its  essential  forms. 

The  subject's  moral  dispositions  are  not  necessary 
for  the  validity  of  Baptism  and  Ordination,  that  is 
to  say,  for  the  production  of  the  character.  How 
ever,  the  beneficial  effects  of  Baptism  are  not  ob 
tained,  when  these  dispositions  are  missing.  That  the 
subject,  baptized  in  heresy  or  schism,  may  obtain  "  the 

83  St.  Augustine  grants,  however,  that  Baptism  received  in  an 
heretical   or   schismatical   sect   by   a  person   in   good   faith   and 
in  danger  of  death  is  profitable  for  salvation.    De  bapt.  contra  , 
Donat.,  vii,  100. 


ISO      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

irrevocable  remission  "of  his  sins,  he  must  be  recon 
ciled  with  the  Catholic  Church.  As  to  the  subject 
who  received  "  fictitiously "  Baptism  in  the  true 
Church,  he  will  obtain  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins, 
when  he  is  converted. 

Hence  the  sacramental  rite  is  efficacious  objec 
tively  :  it  is  an  act  of  Christ  acting  through  His  Church. 
This  lofty  conception  of  a  sacrament  will  later  on  in 
fluence  considerably  the  Christian  mind.  Yet,  it  must 
be  acknowledged  that  the  Bishop  of  Hippo  did  not 
sufficiently  distinguish  the  efficacy  of  the  rite  from  the 
action  of  the  Church  in  the  bestowal  of  grace. 

When  St.  Augustine  formulated  that  doctrine  of  the 
efficacy,  he  had  in  view  exclusively  Baptism  and  Or 
dination,  which  alone  came  up  for  consideration  in 
the  Donatist  controversies.  It  is  only  later  on  that 
the  Augustinian  doctrine  was  applied  to  all  the  Sacra 
ments.  Although  less  precise,  the  views  of  the  holy 
Doctor  on  the  efficacy  of  the  other  Sacraments  deserve 
also  our  attention ;  the  more  so  that  they  are  influenced 
to  some  extent  by  his  doctrinal  position  against  the 
Donatists. 

The  unction  which  follows  Baptism,  the  "  sacramen- 
tum  chrismatis  "  has  the  power  of  imparting  the  Holy 
Ghost  and,  together  with  the  other  Sacraments,  of  pre 
paring  the  Christian  to  bear  all  kinds  of  trials.84 

The  Eucharist  is  valid  notwithstanding  the  un- 
worthiness  of  the  minister  85  and  that  of  the  subject, 
although  the  latter,  if  not  properly  disposed,  whilst 
participating,  like  Judas,  in  Christ's  Body  and  Blood, 
does  not  receive  salvation: 

84  Contr.  litt.  Petil.,  ii,  230;  In  I  Joan.,  iii,  5;  Contr.  Faust.,  xix, 
cap.  xiv. 

85  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  v,  28. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          151 

"  Sicut  enim  Judas,  cui  buccellam  tradidit  Dominus,  non 
malum  accipiendo,  sed  male  accipiendo  locum  in  se  diabolo 
praebuit;  sic  indigne  quisque  sumens  dominicum  sacramen- 
tum  non  efficit  ut  quia  ipse  malus  est,  malum  sit,  aut  quia 
non  ad  salutem  accepit,  nihil  acceperit.  Corpus  enim  Domi 
ni  et  sanguis  Domini  nihilominus  erat  etiam  illis  quibus 
dicebat  Apostolus:  Qui  manducat  indigne,  judicium  sibi 
manducat  et  bibit."  86 

Thus  the  Christian  Sacraments,  especially  Baptism 
and  the  Eucharist,  possess  a  far  greater  efficacy  than 
that  of  the  Sacraments  of  old.  The  latter  were  looked 
upon  by  St.  Augustine  as  rites  only  figurative,  des 
tined  to  announce  Christ  and  to  recall  to  men  the 
Divine  promises,  whilst  the  Christian  Sacraments  give 
salvation : 

"  Alia  sunt  sacramenta  dantia  salutem,  alia  promittentia 
Salvatorem.  Sacramenta  Novi  Testament!  dant  salutem; 
sacramenta  Veteris  Testamenti  promiserunt  Salvatorem. 
.  .  .  Mutata  sunt  sacramenta;  facta  sunt  faciliora,  pauci- 
ora,  salubriora,  feliciora."  87 

When  Christ,  announced  by  the  figurative  rites  of  the 
Jews,  came,  He  did  away  with  the  Sacraments  of  old 
and  established  others  that  are  far  more  efficacious 
and  will  last  until  the  end  of  time.88  Christ's  Sacra 
ments  then  are  superior  to  the  Mosaic  rites  by  their 
purpose,  their  effects  and  their  duration.  St.  Augus 
tine  does  not  state  accurately  the  great  difference  be 
tween  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  and  those  of  the  Old 
Law  as  regards  their  respective  efficacy.  However, 
mediaeval  theologians  will  build  up  on  his  teaching  the 

88  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  v,  9.    Cf.  Sertno  Ixxi,  17. 

8T  Enarr.  in  psal.  Ixxiii,  2. 

88  Contr.  Faust.,  xix,  cap.  xiii. 


1 52      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

antithesis  by  means  of  which  they  will  set  forth  the 
efficacy  ex  opere  operate  peculiar  to  the  Sacraments  of 
Christianity,  and  oppose  it  to  the  efficacy  ex  opere 
operantis  of  the  Jewish  rites. 

Concerning  Penance,  St.  Augustine  attempted  to 
state  with  precision  the  object  and  the  efficacy  of  the 
intervention  of  the  Church,  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
committed  after  Baptism.  St.  Pacian,  Bishop  of  Bar 
celona,  in  his  Letters  to  Senipronius,  and  St.  Ambrose, 
in  his  treatise  De  paenitentia  had  proved  to  the  Nova- 
tians,  by  means  of  Scripture,  the  Divine  institution  of 
the  power  of  the  Church  to  forgive  all  sins.  But 
neither  of  them  had  accounted  for  the  efficacy  of  that 
power.  However,  St.  Ambrose  had  seen  in  the  resur 
rection  of  Lazarus  the  image  of  the  sinner's  justifica 
tion  through  Penance.  The  word  Veni  foras  pre 
scribes  the  confession  of  sins;  and  the  disciples'  inter 
vention  in  unloosing  Lazarus  risen  from  the  dead, 
represents  the  action  of  the  Church  in  the  work  of 
the  sinner's  justification.89  St.  Augustine  took  up 
this  explanation,  and  stated  it  more  accurately.  When 
the  sinner  confesses  his  sins,  he  is  already  arisen  from 
the  dead,  he  comes  outside,  as  Lazarus  came  out  of 
the  grave  at  the  call  of  Christ : 

"  Qui  confitetur  foras  prodit.     Foras  prodire  non  posset, 
nisi  viveret :  vivere  non  posset  nisi  resuscitatus  esset."  90 

The  function  of  the  Church  consists  in  setting  the 
risen  sinner  free  from  his  bonds,  just  as  the  Apostles 
loosed  the  bandages  of  Lazarus  after  his  resurrection : 

89  De  paenlt.,  ii,  54-58. 

*°Sermo  Ixvii,  2.     Cf.  TURMEL,  Hist,  de  la  theol.  posit.,  liv. 
I,  ire  partie,  ch.  xii. 


ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  DOCTRINE          153 

"  Quid  ergo  facit  Ecclesia,  cui  dictum  est  :  Quae  solveritis, 
soluta  erunt,  nisi  quod  ait  Dominus  continuo  ad  discipulos: 
Solvite  ilium  et  sinite 


This  vague  teaching  about  the  efficacy  of  absolution 
had  its  echo  in  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages.  It 
was  adopted  by  St.  Gregory  the  Great,92  and  is  still 
found,  with  a  few  modifications,  in  Peter  Lombard. 
It  is  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  constitutive 
elements  of  the  sacrament  of  Penance  were  not  suffi 
ciently  analyzed,  a  defect  which  characterizes  the 
Patristic  age.  Perhaps  we  may  see  in  it  a  misappli 
cation  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine  on  the  efficacy  of 
the  Sacraments.  As  we  have  seen,  in  order  to  make 
the  virtue  of  Baptism  altogether  independent  of  the 
minister's  unworthiness,  St.  Augustine  constantly  af 
firms  that  it  is  God,  Christ,  or  the  Holy  Spirit,  that 
forgives  sins  and  imparts  grace,  when  the  rite  is 
performed.  Likewise  it  is  God  that  forgives  the  sins 
of  the  Christian  who  submits  to  canonical  penance. 
The  efficacy  of  the  absolution  of  the  Church  in  that 
remission  of  sins  is  left  in  the  background,  until  the 
development  of  the  doctrine  assigns  to  it  its  true 
place.93 

Another  development  will  be  needed  also  to  render 
the  Christian  mind  conscious  of  all  the  efficacy  of  mar 
riage.  According  to  St.  Augustine,  Christian  Mar 
riage  has  for  its  effect  the  unique  and  indissoluble  bond 

01Sermo  Ixvii,  3;  Cf.  Sermo  xcviii,  6;  ccxcv,  2;  ccclii,  8. 

92  Homil.  xxvi,  6. 

93  In   the    I3th.   century,    St.    Thomas   teaches    very   explicitly 
that  the  absolution  effects  the  remission  of  sins.    IV  Sent.,  dist. 
XVIII,  qu.  i,  art.  3  ;  Sum.  theol,  3*  p.,  q.  LXXXIV,  art.  3. 


154      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

which  typifies  the  union  of  Christ  with  His  Church.94 
That  bond  is  undoubtedly  most  holy,  because  of  the 
excellence  of  its  symbolism;  hence  it  ought  never  to 
be  broken.95  Likewise  the  sanctity  of  the  marriage- 
bond  forbids  polygamy: 

"  In  nostrarum  quippe  nuptiis  plus  valet  sanctitas  sacra- 
menti  quam  fecunditas  uteri."  96 

Nay,  a  bigamist  is  excluded  from  the  episcopal 
ordination,  for  he  has  lost  the  " norma  sacramenti" 
since  the  sacramental  symbolism  of  marriage  can  truly 
exist,  only  in  the  union  of  one  man  and  of  one 
woman.97  Thus,  according  to  St.  Augustine,  the 
matrimonial  bond  is  a  most  holy  symbol,  which  places 
the  couple  in  a  state  of  holiness  calling  for  special 
duties.  However,  marriage  is  not  looked  upon  as  a 
source,  properly  so  called,  of  grace,  as  a  sacrament 
in  the  modern  meaning  of  the  word.98 

But  we  cannot  claim  to  find  in  St.  Augustine's  writ 
ings  the  sacramentary  theology  completely  evolved. 
The  holy  Doctor's  contribution,  though  incomplete,  is 
most  important;  it  will  direct  the  thought  of  the  me 
diaeval  authors  towards  the  definitive  explanations. 

Up  to  that  time,  no  Patristic  writer  had  studied  from 
a  speculative  point  of  view  the  efficacy  of  the  anoint 
ing  of  the  sick.  The  letter  of  Pope  Innocent  I  to  the 

84  De  bono  conjug.,  21. 

95  De  bono  conjug.,  32. 

96  De  bono  conjug.,  21. 

97  De  bono  conjug..,  21. 

88  Cf.  DE  SMEDT,  Principes  de  la  critique  historique,  Liege, 
1883,  pp.  111-115.  St.  Thomas  showed  clearly  the  power  of  pro 
ducing  grace  which  is  in  Christian  Marriage.  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist. 
XXVI,  q.  II,  art.  3, 


ST.  C^ESARIUS  ON  EXTREME  UNCTION  155 

Bishop  of  Eugubium,  Decentius,  contains  some  definite 
details  concerning  the  minister  and  the  subject  of  these 
unctions.  As  to  the  effects,  it  simply  repeats  the  de 
scription  made  of  them  in  the  Epistle  of  St.  James. 

A  century  later,  St.  Csesarius  of  Aries  regards  these 
unctions  as  a  means  of  bodily  cure  and  forgiveness  of 
sins,  which  he  opposes  to  the  magical  medical  treat 
ment,  quite  customary  among  his  people."  But  the 
unctions  spoken  of  by  the  Bishop  of  Aries  are  those 
which  the  faithful  traced  on  themselves  in  their  sick 
ness,  with  oil  that  had  been  blessed.  St.  Csesarius 
does  not  mention  the  unctions  made  by  priests.  It  is 
a  well  known  fact  that  formerly  the  faithful  were  wont 
to  anoint  themselves  with  sacred  oil,  to  obtain  their 
cure.  St.  Genevieve  of  Paris  is  said  to  have  thus 
healed  many  sick.  Differently  from  Caesarius,  Pope 
Innocent  I  distinguished  the  unctions  that  were  made 
by  the  ordinary  faithful,  from  those  performed  by 
bishops  and  priests.  The  writers  of  the  following 
centuries  will  emphasize  that  distinction;  and,  during 

Q9App.  Sermo  cclxv,  3;  P.L.  xxxix,  2238-2239:  Quoties 
aliqua  infirmitas  supervenerit,  corpus  et  sanguinem  Christi  ille  qui 
aegrotat  accipiat;  et  inde  corpusculum  suum  ungat;  ut  illud 
quod  scriptum  est  impleatur  in  eo :  "  Infirmatur  aliquis  .  .  ." 
(Jac.,  v,  14-15).  Videte,  fratres,  quia,  qui  in  infirmitate  ad 
ecclesiam  cucurrerit,  et  corporis  sanitatem  recipere  et  peccato- 
rum  indulgentiam  merebitur  obtinere.  Cum  ergo  duplicia  bona 
possint  in  ecclesia  inveniri  quare  per  praecantatores,  per  fontes 
et  arbores  et  diabolica  phylacteria,  per  characteres  et  aruspices 
et  divinos  vel  sortileges  multiplicia  sibi  mala  miseri  homines 
conantur  inferre?  Cf.  App.  Sermo  cclxxix,  5;  Ibid.,  2273. 
These  unctions  are  made  in  the  church,  after  the  distribution 
of  the  Eucharist.  The  bodily  cure  and  the  remission  of  sins 
are  attributed  to  the  anointing,  not  to  the  Eucharist,  since 
St.  Caesarius  bases  his  teaching  on  the  text  of  St.  James. —  P. 
Lejay  explained  these  extracts  from  St.  Caesarius'  sermons,  in  the 
Revue  d'Histoire  et  de  Litterature  religieuses,  t.  x,  pp.  606-610. 


156     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

the  1 2th.  century,  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,1  Peter  Lom 
bard,2  Roland,3  and  the  other  theologians  will  have  in 
view  only  the  unctions  made  by  priests,  when  they 
teach  that  the  "  sacrament  of  the  anointing  of  the  sick 
was  instituted  to  forgive  their  sins  and  alleviate  their 
bodily  pains." 

When  synthetical  studies  of  the  Sacraments  were 
made,  the  mode  of  efficacy  of  the  anointing  of  the  sick 
was  compared  to  the  mode  of  efficacy  of  the  other 
Sacraments. 


§  V.  The  Efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  in  the  Early  Part  of 
the  Middle  Ages  —  Reordinations — The  Sacraments  Ad 
ministered  by  those  that  are  Excommunicated  —  The  Here 
sies  of  the  isth.  Century. 

Although  defeated  by  St.  Augustine,  Donatism  had 
not  been  destroyed.  No  definition  of  the  Church 4 
came  to  sanction  the  Augustinian  doctrine  and  brand 
Donatism  with  the  note  of  heresy.  The  Pelagian  er 
rors  concerning  original  sin  and  those  of  Nestorius 
about  the  Incarnation  absorbed  the  whole  attention  of 
the  Catholic  mind.  The  absence  of  definition  on  the 
part  of  the  Church  explains  the  revivals  of  the  Dona- 
tist  teaching,  and  the  attacks  it  made  against  the 
Augustinian  doctrine  during  the  early  part  of  the  Mid 
dle  Ages. 

1  De  sacramentis,  lib.  II,  pars  xv,  2. 
*Sentent.,  IV,  Dist.  XXIII,  2. 

3  GIETL,   Die  Sentenzen  Rolands,  pp.  261-264:   A  solis  sacer- 
dotibus  et  episcopis  tradi  debet  [unctionis  olei  sacramentum]. 

4  The    Council    of    Aries    had    not    formulated    any    doctrinal 
definition  against  Donatism,  but  simply  declared  the  ordinations 
made  by  traditores  to  be  valid  and  forbade  rebaptizing.     It  is 
the   Council  of  Trent   which  defined  the  anti-donatist  doctrine. 
Sess.  vii,  De  sacram  in  genere,  can.  12;  De  Bapt.,  can.  4. 


IN  EARLY  MIDDLE  AGES  157 

In  the  West,  until  the  8th.  century,  St.  Augustine's 
principles  were  faithfully  followed.  The  3rd.  Council 
of  Carthage  in  397  5  renews  the  ancient  prescription 
not  to  rebaptize  nor  to  reordain.  Pope  St.  Leo  styles 
Donatists  those  who  repeat  ordinations.6  However, 
Innocent  I  rejects  apparently  the  ordinations  made  by 
the  Arians: 

"  Arianos  praeterea,  ceterasque  hujusmodi  pastes     .     .     . 

non   videtur   clericos    eorum    cum   sacerdotii  aut   ministerii 

cujuspiam    recipi    debere   dignitate,    quoniam  quibus    solum 
baptisma  ratum  esse  permittimus."  7 

This  obscure  text  of  Pope  Innocent  I  will  puzzle 
many  an  author  during  the  nth.  century. 

After  the  8th.  century,  reordinations  became  now 
and  then  a  weapon  used  both  by  the  friends  and  by  the 
enemies  of  the  Church.  The  ordinations  made  by  the 
intruded  Pope  Constantine  in  767  were  probably  de 
clared  null.  At  all  events,  it  is  certain  that  Pope  Ser- 
gius  III  (904-911),  yielding  to  a  sentiment  of  mean 
revenge,  had  the  ordinations  made  by  Pope  Formosus 
repeated.8 

The  East  witnessed  also  similar  facts.  In  the  6th. 
century,  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  Joannes 
Scholasticus,  prescribed  that  the  Monophysite  clerics 
that  might  be  converted  to  the  Catholic  Church,  should 
be  ordained  again.9 

5  Can.  38,  BRUNS,  Concilia,  t.  i,  p.  128. 
*Epist.  xii,  6;  cf.  Eplst.  clxvii,  i. 

7  Innocentii  Romani  Pontif.  espist.  XXIV  ad  Alex.  Antioch.,  4. 
J.  MORIN,  De  sacris  Ecclesiae  ordinationibus,  p.  Ill,  exerc.  v,  c. 
vii,  6,  thinks  that   Innocent   I   declares   invalid  the  ordinations 
conferred  by  Arians.     Mgr.  Many  rejects  that  interpretation.    De 
Sacra  Ordinatione,  p.  64. 

8  MORIN,  Ibid.,  cap.  iii ;  MANY,  pp.  70-72. 

9  MANY,  p.  65.    The  question  of  reordinations  will  be  treated 


158      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

These  facts,  some  of  which  are  beyond  doubt,  show 
the  persistence  of  the  Donatist  doctrine.  However, 
the  Augustinian  thesis  had  always  some  upholders; 
the  episode  concerning  Pope  Formosus  determined 
many  to  take  up  its  defense.10  Another  conflict  be 
tween  the  two  doctrines  thus  became  unavoidable.  It 
did  arise,  during  the  nth.  century,  on  occasion  of  the 
many  excommunications  pronounced  against  simoniac 
and  incontinent  clerics. 

The  moral  state  of  the  clergy  in  the  nth.  century 
was  indeed  deplorable.  The  law  of  clerical  celibacy 
had  become  a  dead  letter ;  and  all  the  ecclesiastical  of 
fices  in  Germany,  Italy,  and  Gaul  were  sold  for  money. 
Incontinence  and  simony  were  the  two  plagues  with 
which  the  clergy  was  afflicted  and  of  which  it  had  to  be 
cured  at  any  cost. 

The  reform  was  started  by  St.  Leo  IX  (1048- 
1054)  and  vigorously  continued  by  St.  Gregory  VII 
(1073-1085).  Incontinents  and  simoniacs  were 
anathematized;  the  faithful  were  expressly  forbidden 
to  have  recourse  to  excommunicated  ministers,  for  the 
reception  of  the  Sacraments.11  Nevertheless,  these  un 
worthy  men  continued  to  ordain  and  to  administer  the 
other  Sacraments.  Then  it  was  that  the  painful  ques 
tion  came  up  to  the  minds  of  the  faithful,  as  to  the 
value  of  the  Sacraments  conferred  by  bishops  and  by 
priests  excluded  from  the  bosom  of  the  Church,  and 
generally  by  any  unworthy  minister. 

at  length  in  the  next  chapter  in  connection  with  the  character. 
Cf.  also  L.  SALTET,  Les  Re  ordinations,  Paris,  1907  [Tr.]. 

10VuLGARius,  De  causa  Formosiana  (ed.  DUMMLER)  ;  Auxi- 
LIUS,  Infensor  et  defensor;  P.L.,  cxxix. 

11  Cf.  J.  PEYRET,  Bernold  de  Constance,  a  thesis  for  the  degree 
of  doctor  in  theology,  presented  at  Lyons  in  1904,  pp.  93  ff. 


IN  EARLY  MIDDLE  AGES  159 

Many  were  the  solutions  given  to  the  problem ;  their 
variety  indicates  a  great  intellectual  uncertainty  and 
confusion  and  shows  how  much  precision  was  still 
wanting  in  the  dogma  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra 
ments. 

Quite  naturally,  the  supporters  of  the  reform  and  the 
friends  of  the  Papacy  12  were  not  slow  to  declare  null 
the  Sacraments  administered  by  excommunicated 
ministers.  On  the  contrary  the  opponents  of  the  re 
form  13  preferred  the  Augustinian  thesis  and  used  it 
as  a  weapon  to  fight  their  adversaries.  However,  St. 
Augustine's  doctrine  was  also  defended  by  some  most 
devoted  champions  of  the  Roman  Church,  as  Peter 
Damian,14  for  instance.  Others  took  up  intermediary 
positions  and  taught  that  the  Sacraments  of  excom 
municated  ministers  produced  grace,  although  the  ef 
fect  of  that  grace  was  neutralized  and  became  useless 
to  the  faithful.15  Finally,  some  authors  like  Bernold 

12  GUI  OF  AREZZO,  Monumenta  Germaniae  Lib.,  t.  i,  p.  6;  HUM 
BERT,  Ibid.,  p.   100;  BERNARD,  Ibid.,  t.  ii,  p.  28. 

13  SIGEBERT,  M.   G.   Lib.,    t.   ii,  p.  439;   WENRICH   OF  TREVES, 
Ibid.,  t.  i,  p.  298;  GUIBERT,  Ibid.,  p.  623. 

14  Opusc.    VI,    Liber    qui   dicitur   gratissimus,    cap.    xii,    P.L., 
cxlv,    115:    Cujuscumque   ergo   criminis    reus   exstiterit   ille   qui 
consecrat:   nimirum   sive   superbus,   sive   luxuriosus,   sive   homi- 
cida,  sive  etiam  simoniacus;  ipse  quidem  pollutus  est,  et  lethali 
procul  dubio  lepra  perfusus :   sed   donum   Dei,   quod   per   ilium 
transit,  nullius  labe  polluitur,  nullius  contagione  foedatur     .     .     . 
Ponamus    ergo    ut    mali    sacerdotes    quodammodo    lapidei    sint 
canales:   in   lapideis  autem  canalibus   aqua  nil   germinat,  donee 
per  eos  decurrens,  in  fecundas  se  areolas  fundat.     .     .    .     Non 
enim   exhorreat   columba,   non   nauseat   sordentium   quorumlibet 
ministerium,   dum  ille,   in   quern  tota  descendit,   solus   consecra- 
tionis    teneat    principatum. —  St.    Peter    Damian,    however,    does 
not  make  use  of  the  doctrine  of  the  character  to  prove  the  va 
lidity  of  the  ordinations  performed  by  unworthy  ministers. 

15MANEGOLD,  M.  G.  Lib.,  t.  i,  p.  430;  ANSELM  OF  LUCCA,  Ibid., 
p.  522. 


160      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

of  Constance,  after  having  exposed  and  adopted  suc 
cessively  diverse  solutions,  finally  adhered  to  the  doc 
trine  of  St.  Augustine.16 

Bernold's  hesitations  are  found  again  during  the 
middle  of  the  i2th.  century  in  Peter  Lombard  and  Gra- 
tian.  The  Master  of  Sentences  records  17  the  four 
opinions  which  were  held  by  his  contemporaries  con 
cerning  the  value  of  heretical  —  viz.,  simoniacal  —  or 
dinations,  and  does  not  embrace  any  of  them.  Gratian 
looks  upon  as  null  the  ordination  to  deaconship  made 
by  heretics.18 

There  is  no  rashness  in  believing  that  these  discus 
sions  about  the  value  of  the  Sacraments  conferred  by 
unworthy  men,  as  well  as  the  condition  of  the  morals 
of  the  clergy,  helped  the  spread  of  the  heresies  of  the 
1 2th.  century.  Among  those  heresies,  that  of  the  Al- 
bigenses  and  that  of  the  Waldenses  taught  explicitly 
the  necessity  of  the  minister's  sanctity  for  the  validity 
of  the  Sacraments.  This  error  was  condemned  at 
the  beginning  of  the  I3th.  century  by  the  Church, 
through  the  voice  of  Pope  Innocent  III.  A  profes 
sion  of  faith  was  drawn  up  and  imposed  on  the 
Waldenses  who  became  converts  to  the  Catholic 
Church.  In  it  the  Augustinian  doctrine  is  solemnly 
affirmed : 

"  Sacramenta  quoque,  quae  in  ea  [Ecclesia]  celebrantur, 
inaestimabili  atque  invisibili  virtute  Spiritus  Sancti  coope- 
rante,  licet  a  peccatore  sacerdote  ministrentur,  dum  Ecclesia 
eum  recipit,  in  nullo  reprobamus,  nee  ecclesiasticis  officiis 

16  See  his   treatise  De  sacramentis   excommunicatorum,  P.L., 
cxlviii,  1061. 

17  Sent.,  lib.  iv,  Dist  XXV.    Cf.  ROLAND,  Sent.  (GiETL,  p.  217). 

18  Diet,  ante  can.  Daibertum,  24,  caus.  i,  q.  VII.     Corpus  Juris 
canonici,  ed.  Richter,  Lipsise,  1833,  t.  i,  p.  374. 


IN  EARLY  MIDDLE  AGES  161 

vel  benedictionibus  ab  eo  celebratis  detrahimus,  sed  benevolo 
animo  tanquam  a  justissimo  amplectimur,  quia  non  nocet 
malitia  episcopi  vel  presbyteri  neque  ad  baptismum  infantis, 
neque  ad  eucharistiam  conferendam,  vel  ad  caetera  ecclesias- 
tica  officia  subditis  celebrata."  19 

The  faithful  felt  uneasy  especially  as  regards  the 
value  of  the  Eucharist  celebrated  by  unworthy  minis 
ters. 19a  Hence  Pope  Innocent  III  takes  up  again  this 
point  in  his  treatise  De  Sacro  altaris  Mysterio.20  The 
ministers  not  excluded  from  the  bosom  of  the  Church 
—  Innocent  speaks  only  of  these  —  whatever  may 
be  their  unworthiness,  truly  consecrate  the  Eucharist : 

"  In  Sacramento  corporis  Christi  nihil  a  bono  majus,  nihil 
a  malo  minus  perficitur  sacerdote,  dummodo  sacerdos  cum 
caeteris  in  area  consistat,  et  formam  observet  traditam  a  co- 
lumba,  quia  non  in  merito  sacerdotis,  sed  in  verbo  conficitur 
Creatoris.  Non  ergo  sacerdotis  iniquitas  effectum  impedit 
sacramenti,  sicut  nee  infirmitas  medici  virtutem  medicinae 
corrumpit.  Quamvis  igitur  opus  operans  aliquando  sit  im- 
mundum,  semper  tamen  opus  operatum  est  mundum." 

At  the  beginning  of  the  I2th.  century,  the  reform 
started  by  Popes  Leo  IX  and  Gregory  VII  reached  its 
results;  the  passions  which  it  had  aroused  gradually 
subsided;  the  controversies  about  simoniacal  ordina 
tions  came  to  an  end  by  the  very  fact,  and  the  Au- 
gustinian  teaching,  forgotten  for  a  while,  resumed  the 
place  it  occupied  formerly.  Thus  fully  brought  out, 
the  dogma  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  was  about 

19DENziNGER,  Enchiridion,  n.  370  (new  ed.,  n.  424). 

19a  Roland  remarks  that  in  the  I2th.  century  they  had  it  as  an 
axiom  that  "Verba  imprecantis  sacerdotis  non  faciunt  eucharis- 
tium,  sed  vita." 

20  Lib.  Ill,  cap.  v;  P.L.,  ccxvii,  844.  Cf.  MARBODE,  Bishop  of 
Rennes  (f  1123),  Epistola  II;  P.L.,  clxxi,  1472  sq. 


1 62     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

to  be  studied  in  all  its  various  aspects  by  the  great 
scholastic  theologians. 

§VI.     The  Formula  Ex  Opere  Operate.     The  Problem  of 

the  Causality  of  the  Sacraments  during  the  i$th.  Century. 

The  controversies  about  simoniacal  ordinations,  and 
generally  concerning  the  Sacraments  administered  by 
unworthy  ministers,  resulted  in  the  invention  of  the 
formulas  opus  operatum  and  opus  operantis. 

Although  an  unworthy  minister  sins  grievously 
when  he  confers  a  sacrament,  nevertheless  the  sacra 
ment  itself  is  not  tainted.  Compelled  as  they  were  to 
express  this  truth,  theologians  were  led  to  distinguish, 
in  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments,  between  the 
action  of  the  minister  who  confers  the  rite,  opus 
operans,  and  the  rite  itself  which  is  performed,  opus 
operatum.  Peter  of  Poitiers  (fi2O5)  was  the  first 
who  applied  that  distinction  to  Baptism,  in  order  to 
show  that  the  value  of  this  sacrament  does  not  depend 
on  the  merits  of  the  minister  nor  on  those  of  the  sub 
ject.21 

This  same  distinction  was  used  in  the  schools,  at 
the  beginning  of  the  I3th.  century,  for  expressing  in 
every  action,  the  agent's  cooperation  (actio,  opus  op 
erans)  and  the  act  itself  (actum,  opus  operatum). 
The  actio,  the  opus  operans  may  be  good  or  it  may  be 
bad,  according  to  the  agent's  dispositions;  the  actum, 
the  opus  operatum  has  an  objective  value,  independent 
of  that  of  the  actio.  When  the  Jews  put  Christ  to 

21  Sententiarum  lib.  V,  cap.  vi;  P.L.,  ccxi,  1235:  Baptizatio 
dicitur  actio  illius  qua  baptizat,  quae  est  aliud  opus  quam  bap- 
tismus,  quia  est  opus  operans,  sed  baptismus  est  opus  operatum 
ut  ita  liceat  loqui. 


FORMULA  EX  OPERE  OPERATO      163 

death,  their  deed,  says  Peter  of  Poitiers,  was  heinous ; 
on  the  contrary,  the  Savior's  death  was  praiseworthy 
and  willed  by  God: 

"  Approbavit  Deus  passionem  Christi  illatam  a  Judaeis  et 
quod  fuit  opus  Judaeorum  operatum;  non  approbavit  opera 
Judaeorum  operantia,  et  actiones  quibus  operati  sunt  illam 
passionem."  2- 

Likewise  the  actions  of  the  devil  are  wicked,  for  they 
spring  from  his  malice ;  on  the  contrary,  the  final  out 
come  of  his  acts  contributes  to  the  glory  of  God : 

"  Omnia  ei  [Deo]  serviunt,  id  est  praestant  materiam  lau- 
dis,  et  diabolus  ei  servit  et  approbat  ejus  opera  quae  opera- 
tur,  non  quibus  operatur;  opera  operata  ut  dici  solet,  non 
opera  operantia,  quae  omnia  mala  sunt,  quia  nulla  ex  chari- 
tate  .  .  .  pro  actione  enim  diaboli  offenditur  Deus  sed 
non  pro  acto."  23 

The  application  of  that  theory  to  the  Sacraments 
was  quite  natural  and  sure  to  be  made  sooner  or  later. 
The  celebration  of  a  sacramental  rite  by  an  unworthy 
minister  is  a  bad  action,  a  sacrilege,  but  what  is  cele 
brated  is  always  good : 

"  Quamvis  igitur  opus  operans  aliquando  sit  immundum, 
semper  tamen  opus  operatum  est  mundum," 

as  Innocent  III  said.  As  we  might  expect,  in  order 
to  express  the  objective  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments, 
they  used  the  formula  ex  opere  operato,  which  became 
the  symbol  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine,  and  they  op- 

22  Sententiarum   lib.  I,  cap.  xvi. 

23  Ibid. 

12 


164     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

posed  it  to  the  formula  ex  opere  operantis,  which  em 
bodied  the  Donatist  error. 

In  the  middle  of  the  I3th.  century,  these  two  formu 
las  were  commonly  used  in  the  schools.  They  were 
employed  particularly  in  pointing  out  the  difference 
which  exists,  from  the  point  of  view  of  efficacy,  be 
tween  the  Christian  Sacraments  and  the  Mosaic  rites. 
To  set  forth  that  difference  the  authors  distinguished 
between  the  sacramental  rite,  opus  operatum,  and  the 
use  of  the  rite,  opus  operans.24  Did  the  Jewish  sacra 
mental  rite,  the  opus  operatum,  bestow  grace  ?  To  this 
question,  some  —  and  they  could  appeal  to  the  authori 
ty  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  —  replied  that  the  Jewish 
sacramental  rite  produced  grace,  but  not  immediately 
and  directly,  like  a  sacrament  of  the  New  Law ;  it  pro 
duced  grace,  not  as  a  cause  of  grace,  but  rather  as  a 
figure  of  the  Christian  Sacraments.  The  Jewish  rite 
was  efficacious  because  of  the  relation  of  figure,  by 
which  it  was  united  to  the  passion  of  Christ  and  to  the 
Christian  Sacraments  of  which  it  was  the  symbol.25 
Others  —  St.  Thomas  among  them  —  denied  any  ob 
jective  efficacy  to  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law,  ex 
cept  circumcision : 

"Alii  dicunt  et  melius  quod  nullo  modo  sacramenta  ipsa 
veteris  legis,  id  est  opus  operatum,  in  eis  gratiam  conferebat, 
excepta  circumcisione."  26 

24  ST.  THOMAS,  In  IV,  Dist.  I,   q.  I,  art.  5 :    In  sacramento 
est  duo  considerare,  scilicet  ipsum  sacramentum  et  usum  sacra- 
menti.     Ipsum  sacramentum  dicitur  a  quibusdam  opus  operatum ; 
usus  autem  sacramenti  est  ipsa  operatio,  quae  a  quibusdam  opus 
operans  dicitur. 

25  ST.   THOMAS,   Ibid.:    Indirecte   et   ex   consequent!  habebant 
justificare    [sacramenta  v.   1.],   quasi   mediantibus   nostris   sacra- 
mentis  per  ea  significatis  a  Deo  significationem  habentia. 

26  Ibid. 


FORMULA  EX  OP  ERE  OP  ERATO      165 

The  Christian  Sacraments  alone  are  efficacious  ex  opere 
operate. 

But  if  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law  were  not  effi 
cacious  ex  opere  operato,  did  they  not  possess  at  least 
some  efficacy  ex  opere  operantisf  Here  again  two 
systems  were  followed.  Some  theologians,  after  Pe 
ter  Lombard,  thought  that  the  use  of  the  Jewish  rites 
was  of  no  benefit  and  merit,  even  for  those  who  prac 
tised  them  with  faith  and  charity.  On  the  contrary, 
St.  Thomas  27  and  many  others  taught  that,  when  ac 
companied  with  charity,  the  use  of  the  Mosaic  Sacra 
ments  produced  grace.  Thus  the  Jewish  rites  were 
efficacious  ex  opere  operantis. 

The  teaching  of  St.  Thomas  actually  prevailed.  It 
was  admitted  by  all  theologians  in  the  i6th.  century. 
It  was  against  this  doctrine  that  Protestants  set  forth 
their  errors :  like  those  of  the  Old  Law,  the  Sacraments 
of  the  New  Law  are  efficacious  merely  ex  opere  ope 
rantis. 


Whilst  the  theologians  of  the  I3th.  century  disagreed 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  of 
the  Old  Law,  all  affirmed  most  positively  that  the 
Sacraments  of  the  New  Law  "  confer  grace  ex  opere 
operato  and  produce  what  they  signify,  unless  the  sub 
ject  places  an  obstacle  thereto."  28 

Furthermore,  in  their  fondness  of  accuracy  and  in 
their  eagerness  for  interpreting  dogma  in  dependence 

27  Ibid.:     Communiter   tenetur    quod    usus    eorum    [sacramen- 
torum   v.    1.]    meritorius    esse   poterat,   si    ex   charitate   fieret — 
See  these  various  opinions  in  St.  Bonaventure,  In  IV  Sent.  Dist. 
I,  pars  i,  art.  i,  quaest.  5. 

28  ST.  BONAVENTURE,  In  IV  Sent.  Dist.  I,  pars  i,  art.  i,  q.  3; 
ST.  THOMAS,  Ibid. 


166     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

of  philosophy,  theologians  attempted  to  determine  by 
means  of  the  idea  of  cause  what  is  the  efficacy  of  the 
opus  operatum.  Thus  dogma  entered  into  a  new 
phase,  a  phase  altogether  metaphysical  and  not  yet 
over. 

All  theologians  agreed  that  the  Sacraments  of  the 
New  Law,  efficacious  ex  opere  operato,  are  in  some 
way  causes  of  grace.  The  greatest  variety  of  opin 
ions  arose  concerning  the  way  of  explaining  that  sac 
ramental  causality.29 

If  the  sacrament  is  a  cause  of  grace,  it  can  be  ap 
parently  only  its  efficient  cause.  Now  there  seem  to 
be  some  most  serious  difficulties  against  the  sacra 
ment,  which  is  a  bodily  rite,  being  the  efficient  cause 
of  a  spiritual  effect,  that  is  to  say,  against  its  pos 
sessing  in  itself  the  power  of  producing  such  an  effect. 
For  the  causative  power  imparted  to  a  being  must  be 
in  conformity  with  the  essence  of  that  being: 

"  Quod  recipitur  ab  aliquo,  est  in  eo  per  modum  recipien- 
tis." 

Besides  it  is  impossible  to  understand  what  that  causa 
tive  power  the  sacrament  would  possess  is  in  itself, 
or  when  it  is  communicated  to  the  rite  —  is  it  when 
the  sacrament  was  instituted  by  Christ,  or  when  it  is 
administered  by  the  priest  ?  —  and  how  long  it  adheres 
to  the  sacrament.30  The  problem  evidently  was  a 
most  difficult  one. 

29  ST.  THOMAS,  In  IV  Sent.  Dist.  I,  quaest.  i,  art.  4 :  Omnes 
coguntur   ponere    sacramenta    novae    legis    aliquo    modo    causas 
gratiae  esse,  propter  auctoritates  quae  hoc  expresse  dicunt.     Sed 
diversi  diversimode  eas  causas  ponunt. 

30  See    these    objections    summed    up    in    ST.    THOMAS,    Sum. 
Theol.,  3  p.,  q.  62,  art.  4;  In  IV,  D.  I,  q.  I,  a.  4;  and  ST.  BONA- 
VENTURE,  IV  Sent.  D.  I,  p.  I,  a.  I,  q.  4. 


SYSTEMS  OF  CAUSALITY  167 

Three  principal  systems  were  framed  for  its  solu 
tion,  and  they  deserve  our  attention  on  account  of  the 
great  importance  they  formerly  enjoyed :  the  system 
of  the  occasional  causality,  that  of  the  dispositive  in 
strumental  causality,  and  that  of  the  efficacious  in 
strumental  causality  of  grace. 

Many  theologians,  whom  St.  Bonaventure  styles 
magni  magistri,  resolved  the  problem  by  suppressing 
it.  According  to  them,  the  Sacraments  are  not  causes, 
properly  so  called,  of  grace;  they  have  not  in  them 
selves  the  power  of  producing  it.  They  are  causes 
improperly  so  called, — causae  sine  quibus  non,— 
mere  occasional  causes  of  grace.  This  system  we 
call  the  system  of  occasional  causality.  It  was  adopted 
by  St.  Bonaventure,31  and  later  on  by  Duns  Scotus  32 
and  by  the  Franciscan  school. 

In  this  system,  the  Sacraments  have  in  themselves 
no  causative  virtue  that  concurs  effectively  in  the 
production  of  their  effects;  this  is  why  they  are  not 
true  causes.  A  sacrament  produces  grace  by  a  kind 
of  concomitance ;  in  consequence  of  an  order  estab 
lished  by  God,  a  Divine  virtue  accompanies  a  sacra 
ment,  and  it  is  that  virtue  which  acts  directly  in  the 
soul  of  the  subject.  God  bound  Himself  by  a  sort 
of  an  agreement, —  by  a  compact  drawn  with  the 
Church,  Duns  Scotus  will  say  later  on, —  to  impart 
His  grace  to  all  those  who,  being  properly  disposed, 
receive  the  Sacraments.  The  whole  efficacy  of  a  sac 
rament  comes  from  that  Divine  agreement :  a  sacra 
ment  is  merely  the  occasion  which  recalls  to  God  His 
promises;  it  is  a  mere  condition  sine  qua  non;  it  has 
in  itself  no  virtue  productive  of  grace. 

31  ST.  BONAVENTURE,  Ibid,  ad  II  quaest.  later. 

32  D.  SCOTUS,  In  IV,  D.  I,  Quaest.  4  et  5. 


i68     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

To  illustrate  this  doctrine,  a  classical  comparison 
was  brought  forward.  A  sacrament  is  like  a  lead 
denarius  which  has  no  value  in  itself,  but  which,  by  the 
king's  command,  might  entail  for  its  possessor  the 
privilege  of  receiving  five  hundred  pounds.  Or 
again,33  Naaman  was  cured  of  leprosy  by  bathing  in 
the  Jordan,  on  the  advice  of  Prophet  Eliseus.  Neither 
the  water  of  the  river,  nor  the  word  of  Eliseus  pos 
sessed  the  power  of  healing.  The  cause  of  the  cure 
was  the  Divine  power  which  accompanied  Naaman's 
ablution.  Likewise  it  is  not  the  sacrament  that  sanc 
tifies  by  itself,  it  is  the  Divine  action  accompanying 
the  administration  of  the  sacrament.  There  is  no 
production  of  grace  by  the  sacrament,  but  a  mere  con 
comitance  of  the  production  of  grace  and  of  the  sac 
rament.34 

This  system  was  deemed  the  most  reasonable  of  all, 
and  in  no  way  detrimental  to  faith : 

"  Huic  positioni,"  said  St.  Bonaventure,  "  pietas  fidei  non 
repugnat  et  ratio  consentit." 

Hence  it  enjoyed  a  real  success 35  until  the  time  of 

33  ST.  BONAVENTURE,  Ibid. 

34  This   system   is   thus   summed   up  by   ST.   THOMAS,   In  IV, 
D.  I,  q.  I,  art.  4:  Quiclam  enim  dicunt,  quod  non  stint   [sacra- 
menta]  causae  quasi  facientes  aliquid  in  anima,  sed  causae  sine 
quibus  non:  quia  increata  virtus,  quae  sola  effectus  ad  gratiam 
pertinentes    in    anima    facit,    sacramentis    assistit    per    quamdam 
Dei    ordinationem,   et   quasi   pactionem.     Sic   enim   ordinavit,   et 
quasi   pepigit   Deus,   ut   qui    sacramenta   accipiunt,    simul   ab   eo 
gratiam  recipiant,  non  quasi  sacramenta  aliquid  faciant  ad  hoc. 
Et  est  simile  de  illo,  qui  accipit  denarium  plumbeum  facta  tali 
ordinatione,  ut  qui  habuerit  unum  de  illis  denariis,  habeat  cen 
tum  libras   a   rege,   qui   quidem  denarius  non   dat   illas   centum 
libras,   sed   solus   rex  accipienti  ipsum.     Cf.   Sum.   Theol,  3   p., 
q.  62,  a.  i  et  4;  Quodl.  12,  art.  14 

35  Such   was   substantially  the   system  of  Durandus  of   Saint- 


SYSTEMS  OF  CAUSALITY  169 

the  Council  of  Trent  when  it  was  transformed  into 
the  modern  system  of  moral  causality. 

However,  the  opinion  of  the  Franciscan  school  was 
far  from  winning  universal  approbation.  Many  theo 
logians,  like  St.  Thomas,  thought  it  lessened  too 
much  altogether  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments.  As 
no  end  was  assigned  to  them  but  that  of  reminding 
God  of  His  promise,  they  were  reduced  to  the  part 
of  mere  signs. 

"  Sed  hoc  non  videtur  sufficere  ad  salvandum  dicta  sanc 
torum," 

the  Angelic  Doctor  objected.  What  became,  in  this 
system,  of  the  expression  "  continent  gratiam  "  used 
by  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  and  of  the  definition  of  a  sac 
rament,  given  by  Peter  Lombard?  This  is  why,  in 
the  name  of  Tradition,  many  theologians  affirmed  the 
existence,  in  the  Sacraments,  of  a  power  productive 
of  grace.  They  did  not  shrink  from  the  problem  of 
sacramental  causality,  and,  for  its  solution,  they  had 
recourse  either  to  the  system  of  dispositive  instru 
mental  causality,  or  to  that  of  the  efficient  instrumental 
causality.3** 

After  Peter  Lombard,  the  upholders  of  the  system 
of  the  dispositive  causality  distinguished  two  effects 
of  the  Sacraments :  the  sacramentum  et  res  and  the 
res  tantum.  The  sacramentum  et  res  is  the  character, 
for  the  Sacraments  that  produce  this  character,  and 

Pourgain,  Occam  and  all  the  Nominalists.  Their  doctrine  is 
to  be  found  in  the  IVth.  book  of  Sentences  of  Peter  Lombard. 
36  Our  English-speaking  readers  will  forgive  us  these  somewhat 
barbarous  expressions,  translated  literally  from  the  Latin.  To 
replace  these  scholastic  terms  by  terms  of  a  genuine  Anglo- 
Saxon  ring  is  an  impossible  task.  [Tr.] 


170     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

for  the  others,  a  spiritual  ornament  the  nature  of 
which  is  not  described;  the  res  tantum  is  grace.  The 
sacrament  is  truly  the  efficient  cause  of  the  first  ef 
fect:  the  character  or  the  ornament;  God  gave  to  the 
sacrament  the  power  of  producing  it  effectively.  As 
regards  the  second  effect,  namely  grace,  the  sacrament 
is  only  a  dispositive  cause.  The  sacrament,  by  means 
of  the  character  or  of  the  ornament,  disposes  the  soul 
in  such  a  way  that  God  is  necessarily  prompted  to  in 
fuse  His  grace  into  that  soul  if  the  subject  places  no 
obstacle  to  the  Divine  action.  This  disposition  calls 
for  grace.  Hence  by  bringing  about  this  disposition 
the  sacrament  produces  grace  indirectly  and  immedi 
ately  : 

"  Alii  dicunt  quod  in  sacramentis  duo  consequuntur  in 
anima,  unum  quod  est  sacramentum  et  res,  sicut  character, 
vel  aliquis  ornatus  animae  in  sacramentis,  in  quibus  non  im- 
primitur  character.  Aliud  quod  est  res  tantum,  sicut  gratia. 
Respectu  ergo  primi  effectus  sunt  sacramenta  causae  aliquo 
modo  efficientes:  sed  respectu  secundi  sunt  causae  dispo- 
nentes  tali  dispositione  quae  est  necessitas  nisi  sit  impedi- 
mentum  ex  parte  recipientis."  37 

The  author  of  this  system,  or  rather  the  first  who 
exposed  it  in  his  writings,  was  the  Franciscan  Alex 
ander  of  Hales,38  of  the  earlier  part  of  the  I3th.  cen- 

s7  ST.  THOMAS,  In  IV,  D.  I,  q.  I,  art  4.  Cf.  ST.  BONA- 
VENTURE,  In  IV,  Dist.  I,  pars  i,  art.  I,  q.  4. 

38  Summae  Theol.,  IV,  quaest.  V,  membr.  4:  Sacramenta  sunt 
causae  alicujus  effectus  in  anima;  non  dico  solum  disponendo 
sed  efficiendo :  efficiunt  enim  simpliciter  characterizando  et  or- 
nando.  Unde  dico  quod  singula  sacramenta  aliquo  modo  ornant 
animam  vel  imprimendo  characterem  vel  alio  modo  signando. 
Et  hujusmodi  ornatus  sive  signationis  sunt  sacramenta  causa 
efficiens. —  As  to  grace,  it  is  God  Himself  who  pours  it  into 
the  soul  adorned  with  the  character  or  ornatus  and  properly 
disposed  for  the  sacrament. 


SYSTEMS  OF  CAUSALITY  171 

tury.  However,  this  system  became  perfectly  con 
sistent  only  after  St.  Thomas  had  expressed  it  with 
accuracy  by  means  of  his  theory  of  instrumental 
cause.  Alexander  explained  quite  satisfactorily  in 
deed  how  grace  is  produced  in  the  soul;  it  is  God 
Himself  who  directly  infuses  it.  The  sacramental 
rite  does  not  reach  its  physical  entity ;  it  produces  sim 
ply  the  ornament  which  calls  for  grace.  But  how  can 
this  ornament,  in  its  turn,  be  produced  by  the  sac 
rament?  How  can  this  spiritual  effect  have  a  phys 
ical  rite  for  its  efficient  cause?  The  whole  problem 
of  sacramental  causality  still  remained  to  be  solved. 

This  St.  Thomas  fully  realized.  With  a  view  to 
solve  the  antinomy,  he  distinguished  two  kinds  of 
causes :  the  principal  and  the  instrumental  cause. 

The  principal  cause  is  that  which  produces  its  effect 
by  the  power  special  and  inherent  to  its  very  nature, 
whilst  the  instrumental  cause  does  not  act  by  its  own 
power,  but  by  the  power  it  receives  from  the  principal 
cause.  Now,  the  effect  produced  is  always  similar  to 
the  productive  power  of  the  agent;  hence  the  effect 
of  the  instrumental  cause  is  similar,  not  to  the  nature 
of  the  instrument,  but  to  that  of  the  principal  cause ; 
for  it  is  the  principal  cause  that  communicates  to  the 
instrument  the  power  of  producing  its  effect.  Ac 
cording  to  the  comparison  used  by  St.  Thomas,  a  bed 
stead  made  by  a  joiner  is  not  like  the  axe  that  carved 
it,  but  like  the  idea  that  was  in  the  joiner's  mind  and 
imparted  to  the  instrument  the  power  of  producing  an 
artistic  piece  of  work : 

"Virtus  agendi  proportionate  agenti.  Unde  alio  modo 
oportet  ponere  virtutem  agendi  in  agente  principal!,  alio 
modo  in  agente  instrumental!.  Agens  enim  principale  agit 


i;2      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

secundum  exigentiam  suae  formae;  et  ideo  virtus  activa  in 
ipso  est  aliqua  forma  vel  qualitas  habens  completum  esse  in 
natura.  Instrumentum  autem  agit  ut  motum  ab  alio,  et 
ideo  competit  sibi  virtus  proportionata  motui."  39 

The  Sacraments  are  instrumental  causes  which  hold 
the  power  of  producing  their  effects  from  God,  the 
principal  cause  of  the  justification  of  the  soul.  These 
effects,  then,  will  be  similar  to  the  power  imparted  by 
God  to  the  Sacraments :  that  power  is  spiritual ;  so 
also  the  effects  of  the  Sacraments  will  be  spiritual. 
Hence,  although  corporeal,  the  Sacraments  may  be 
the  instrumental  efficient  causes  of  that  disposition 
which  calls  for  grace: 

"  [Sacramenta  materialia]  in  quantum  sunt  instrumenta 
divinae  misericordiae  justificantis,  pertingunt  instrumentali- 
ter  ad  aliquem  effectum  in  ipsa  anima,  qui  primo  correspon- 
det  sacramentis,  sicut  est  character  vel  aliquid  hujusmodi. 
Ad  ultimum  autem  effectum,  qui  est  gratia,  non  pertingunt 
etiam  instrumentaliter  nisi  dispositive,  in  quantum  hoc,  ad 
quod  instrumentaliter  effective  pertingunt,  est  dispositio, 
quae  est  necessitas,  quantum  in  se  est,  ad  gratiae  suscep- 
tionem."  40 

Such  is  the  system  of  dispositive  instrumental  causal- 
ity. 

This  system  enjoyed  a  great  success  in  the  Thomistic 
school41  until  the  i6th.  century  when  it  fell  into  dis- 

39  In  IV,  D.  I,  q.  I,  art.  4.     Cf.  Sum.  TheoL,  62,  art.  i. 

4°  Ibid. 

41  Its  defenders  were  PIERRE  OF  LA  PALU,  In  IV,  D.  I,  q.  I ; 
CAPREOLUS,  q.  I,  Art.  i,  conclusione  3;  DESA  D'  ESPAGNE,  q.  3, 
art.  3,  notat.  4 ;  FERRARE,  4,  con'tr.  gent.,  cap.  57.  The  main  reason 
which  prompted  these  theologians  to  uphold  the  dispositive  cau 
sality  "  est  quod  existimaverint  gratiam  esse  formam,  quae  non 
educitur  de  potentia  animae,  sed  creatur."  Grace  being  a  created 


SYSTEMS  OF  CAUSALITY  173 

credit  owing  to  the  sharp  criticisms  of  Cardinal  Caje- 
tan.42  Nowadays  Father  Billot,  S.  J.,43  has  brought 
it  again  into  honor  at  the  Roman  College,  and  has 
shown  what  profitable  use  theologians  might  make 
of  it  for  explaining  the  doctrine  of  the  reviviscence 
of  the  Sacraments.  When  the  sacrament  is  valid,  the 
disposition  that  calls  for  grace  is  always  produced; 
however,  if  the  subject  is  not  properly  disposed,  grace 
is  not  given.  Because  of  the  disposition  which  is  per 
manent  in  the  soul,  it  will  be  given  when  the  subject 
repents  and  thus  removes  the  obstacle  to  the  reception 
of  grace. 

But  the  weak  point  of  this  system  is  its  altogether 
unsatisfactory  explanation  of  the  nature  of  that  dis 
position  exigent  of  grace.  This  disposition,  we  are 
told,  must  not  be  identified  with  the  moral  dis 
positions  of  faith,  repentance,  charity,  and  others 
necessary  in  order  that  the  subject  may  place  no  ob 
stacle  to  grace.  We  are  told  also,  that,  as  to  the  Sac 
raments  that  produce  a  character,  the  disposition  is  the 
character  itself.  This  we  understand.  But,  for  the 
other  Sacraments,  what  is  it?  An  aliqids  ornatus 
anlmae  which  mediaeval  theologians  were  unable  to 
explain  satisfactorily.44  Besides,  is  not  this  disposi 
tion  useless?  If  the  sacrament  can  be  the  effective  in- 

gift,  and  since  God  cannot  use  an  instrument  to  create,  grace 
then  must  be  produced  in  the  soul  directly  by  God.  But  how 
could  the  sacrament  be  an  instrumental  cause  of  the  disposi 
tion?  The  latter  "  educitur  de  potentia  animae,"  and  conse 
quently  the  sacrament  can  produce  it  "  instrumentaliter." 

42  in  3am  part,  quaest.  62. 

43  De  Ecclesiae  sacramentis,  Romae,  1896,  t.  i,  pp.  95  et  sq., 
106  et  sq. 

44  Cf.   ST.  BONAVENTURE,  In  IV,  D.  I,  pars  I,  art,  q.  4. — FR. 
BILLOT,  Ibid.,  endeavors  to  explain   what  might  be  in  the  case 
of  each  sacrament  that  disposition  exigent  of  grace. 


174     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

strumental  cause  of  that  disposition,  why  could  it  not 
produce  in  a  similar  way  grace  itself?  These  diffi 
culties  explain  why,  after  some  centuries  of  success, 
this  system  finally  fell  into  oblivion. 

Besides,  St.  Thomas  himself,  after  teaching  most 
plainly  dispositive  instrumental  causality,  gave  it  up 
towards  the  end  of  his  life,  as  is  proved  by  his  Sum 
ma  Theological5  and  took  up,  instead,  the  system  of 
efficient  Instrumental  causality,  which  after  Cajetan's 
explanations,  has  become  what  is  termed  the  system 
of  physical  causality. 

The  difference  between  this  system  and  the  previous 
one,  is  the  suppression  of  the  disposition  exigent  of 
grace,  a  disposition  which  is  deemed  useless.  The 
Sacraments  are  effective  instrumental  causes  of  grace 
itself. 

How  a  spiritual  power,  productive  of  grace,  can 
dwell  in  a  physical  rite,  St.  Thomas  shows  by  a  rea 
soning  similar  to  that  mentioned  above,  and  based 
on  the  concepts  of  principal  and  instrumental  cause. 
God  alone  can  be  the  principal  cause  of  grace,  for 
grace  is  a  kind  of  participation  in  the  Divine  likeness, 
and  God  alone,  by  His  own  power,  can  make  us  share 
in  the  likeness  of  His  nature.  But  the  sacrament  (as 
an  instrument)  can  produce  grace  in  us;  for  the  in- 

45  3  P->  quaest.  62,  art.  I,  4.  Many  authors  refuse  to  admit 
that  St.  Thomas  gave  up  the  system  of  dispositive  causality. 
Capreolus  thought  that  in  his  Summa  Theologica  Aquinas 
teaches  that  the  Sacraments  are  instrumental  causes  not  of 
habitual  grace  (gratum  faciens)  but  of  sacramental  grace,  viz., 
the  disposition  exigent  of  grace.  Others  —  Father  Billot,  op. 
cit.,  p.  74,  is  one  of  them  —  would  discover  the  true  mind  of 
the  Angelic  Doctor  in  interpreting  the  obscure  passage  of  the 
Summa  by  the  Commentaries  on  the  Sentences.  It  seems  better 
to  admit  that  on  this  point  as  on  some  others  St.  Thomas  modi 
fied  his  early  teaching. 


SYSTEMS  OF  CAUSALITY  175 

strument,  acting  by  the  efficacy  it  receives  from  the 
chief  agent,  is  able  to  produce  an  effect  which  does 
not  resemble  it.  In  virtue  of  the  impulse  the  sacra 
ment  receives  from  God,  it  can  produce  an  effect  of  the 
spiritual  order,  an  effect  in  keeping  with  the  impulse 
by  which  it  is  moved. 

"  Causa  .  .  .  instrumentalis  non  agit  per  virtutem 
suae  formae,  sed  solum  per  motum  quo  movetur  a  principal! 
agente;  unde  effectus  non  assimilatur  instrumento,  sed  prin- 
cipali  agenti,  sicut  lectus  non  assimilatur  securi,  sed  arti 
quae  est  in  mente  artificis.  Et  hoc  modo  sacramenta  novae 
legis  gratiam  causant ;  adhibentur  enim  ex  divina  ordinatione 
hominibus  ad  .gratiam  in  eis  causandam."  46 

This  instrumental  power,  which  has  for  its  pur 
pose  to  confer  grace,  does  not  remain  in  the  sacra 
ment,  but  is  transitory.  For  the  instrument  acts  only 
in  so  far  as  it  receives  an  impulse  from  the  princi 
pal  agent;  and  this  impulse  is  essentially  transitory. 
The  sacramental  rite,  then,  possesses  this  causative 
virtue  only  at  the  moment  God  uses  it  to  pour  His 
grace  into  the  soul.47  Moreover,  this  sacramental 
causality  is  due  to  the  passion  and  merits  of  Jesus 
Christ.  The  sanctifying  power  of  the  Sacraments 
flows  from  the  divinity  of  Christ  through  His  hu 
manity.48  Let  us  add  that  theologians,  divided  as 
they  were  regarding  sacramental  causality,  agreed  on 
deriving  from  the  merits  of  the  Savior  the  whole 
efficacy  of  the  Christian  Sacraments. 

As  our  readers  may  realize,  the  system  of  efficient 
instrumental  causality  contains  the  principles  that  will 

4(5  Q.  62,  art.  i. 

47  Art.  4. 

48  Art.  5. 


176     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

lead  logically  the  theologians  of  subsequent  ages  to 
the  modern  system  of  physical  causality.  However, 
from  St.  Thomas  to  Cajetan  there  is  a  great  distance. 
In  vain  should  we  look,  in  the  Sumina,  for  expres 
sions  as  precise  as  those  we  find  in  the  commentaries 
on  the  Summa,  by  the  illustrious  Cardinal:  for  in 
stance,  that  the  Sacraments  are  physical  instrumental 
causes  which  reach  grace  in  its  very  being  and  infuse 
it  into  the  soul.  The  teaching  of  the  Angelic  Doctor 
is  more  meagre. 

The  three  systems  just  exposed  had  their  respective 
followers  in  the  theological  schools,  not  only  during 
the  1 3th.  century,  but  also  during  the  following  cen 
turies  until  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  Franciscan 
school  made  its  own  the  system  of  occasional  causali 
ty,  after  it  had  been  adopted  by  Duns  Scotus,  the 
formidable  adversary  of  the  Thomistic  opinion  re 
garding  instrumental  efficient  causality.49  The  Tho 
mistic  school  remained  faithful  to  the  systems  exposed 
by  the  Angelic  Doctor:  this  does  not  mean  that  no 
other  more  or  less  composite  system  originated  within 
its  precincts.  Suarez  50  mentions  all  those  that  were 
still  spoken  of  in  his  time  and  reckons  six  of  them: 
their  exposition  would  be  rather  uninteresting. 

The    various    theological    schools    disputed    among 

49  in  iy  Sent.,  Dist.   I,  art.   4,   et  5.    "  Susceptio  sacramenti 
est  dispositio   necessitans   ad   effectum   signatum  per   sacramen- 
tum,   non   quidem   per  aliquam   formam   intrinsecam,   per  quam 
necessario   causaret  terminum,  vel   aliquam   dispositionem   prae- 
viam;  sect  tantum  per  asslstentiam  Dei  causantis  ilium  effectum, 
non    necessario    absolute,    sed    necessitate    respiciente    potentiam 
ordinatam:    disposuit    enim    univcrsaliter    et    de    hoc    Ecclesiam 
certificavit    quod    suscipienti    tale    sacramentum,    ipse    conferret 
effectum  signatum." 

50  In  3am  P.  quaest.  Ixii,  art.  4,  disp.  9,  sect.  2. 


PROTESTANT  SACRAMENTAL  SYSTEM    177 

themselves  regarding  the  causality  of  the  Sacraments, 
if  not  always  peaceably,  at  least  without  any  inter 
ference  on  the  part  of  the  Church.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  latter  had  not  to  decide  for  this  or  that  sys 
tem,  since  the  dogma  of  the  objective  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments  was  not  in  question.  Hardly  does  she 
manifest,  in  the  Decretum  ad  Armenos,  her  preference 
for  the  Thomistic  systems.  But  the  Protestant  errors 
are  soon  to  rise,  and,  in  order  to  condemn  them,  the 
Church  will  formulate  definitions  which  will  tell,  as  a 
consequence,  on  the  destinies  of  the  theological  sys 
tems. 

§  VII.     The  Protestant  Sacramental  System  and  the  Defini 
tions  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

One  of  the  advantages  of  historical  theology  is  to 
set  off  most  strongly  the  eccentric  character  of  her 
esies.  Whilst  Catholic  tradition,  of  which  we  have 
followed  the  majestic  development,  placed  always  the 
efficacy  of  a  sacrament  in  the  rite  itself,  Protestantism 
pretends  to  find  it  exclusively  in  the  subject;  so  that 
its  conception  manifestly  deviates  from  Christian  prin 
ciples.  This  conception  was  framed,  indeed,  so  as  to 
harmonize  the  sacramental  doctrine  with  a  likewise 
antitraditional  theory  of  justification. 


The  sacramental  system  of  Protestants  is  wholly 
conditioned  by  their  doctrine  of  justification.  Ac 
cording  to  the  Reformers,  justification  does  not  con 
sist  —  as  the  Catholic  Church  teaches  it  does  —  in 
the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  in  the  internal  sanctifica- 
tion  of  the  soul,  wrought  by  the  Sacraments  or  by 


178      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

perfect  contrition.  It  consists  only  in  a  merely  ex 
trinsic  application  of  the  merits  and  holiness  of  Jesus 
Christ.  God  beholds  the  sinner  through  the  merits  of 
His  Son,  and  thus  the  sinner  appears  just  to  the  eyes 
of  God.  No  interior  change  is  produced  in  the  soul: 
sins  remain  in  it.  The  change  is  wholly  external: 
the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ  cover  the  sinner  and  hide 
his  wickedness  from  the  sight  of  God. 

The  only  means  at  man's  disposal,  by  which  he  may 
obtain  thus  to  be  clothed  with  the  merits  of  Jesus 
Christ,  is  faith,  that  is  to  say,  the  trust  that  he  is 
justified.  Good  works,  such  as  repentance,  are  com 
pletely  useless;  besides,  they  are  impossible,  since  hu 
man  nature,  which  has  been  substantially  vitiated  by 
original  sin,  cannot  bring  a  cooperation  properly  so 
called  to  the  work  of  its  salvation. 

If  faith  alone  justifies  and  can  justify,  the  Sacra 
ments  have  no  objective  efficacy  to  bring  about  justifi 
cation;  they  are  not  efficacious  ex  opere  operate. 

"  [Sacramenta]  sunt  signa,  seu  sacramenta  justificationis, 
quia  sunt  sacramenta  justificantis  fidei  et  non  opens:  unde 
tota  eorum  efficacia  est  ipsa  fides,  non  operatio.  Qui  enim 
iis  credit,  is  implet  ea,  etiamsi  nihil  operetur."  51 

On  the  denial  of  the  objective  efficacy  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  all  Protestants  agreed :  dissensions  began  when 
the  value  of  the  Sacraments  and  the  reason  of  their 
existence  had  to  be  explained,  for  all  admitted  the  di 
vine  institution  of  Baptism  and  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
Why  did  Christ  establish  these  two  Sacraments? 

According  to  the  view  advanced,  at  the  outset  of  the 

51  LUTHER,  De  Captivitate  babylonica,  cap.  de  Baptismo,  t.  ii, 
p.  287. 


PROTESTANT  SACRAMENTAL  SYSTEM    179 

Reformation,  by  Luther  and  Melanchthon,  the  Sacra 
ments  were  intended  solely  as  tokens  of  the  truthful 
ness  of  the  Divine  promise  that  sins  were  to  be  for 
given  by  faith,  and  thus  they  were,  for  the  faithful, 
guarantees  of  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins.52  The 
Sacraments  remind  the  faithful  of  the  Divine  promise, 
as  a  picture  reminds  us  of  him  whom  it  represents.53 
They  are  messengers,  announcing  to  men  God's  deeds 
of  kindness,  pledges  that  make  us  sure  of  these  deeds, 
nothing  more.54 

The  Sacraments,  then,  have  no  intrinsic  power :  they 
serve  only  to  strengthen  and  confirm  faith;  all  their 
efficacy  comes  from  faith  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 
It  is  because  a  sacrament  has  no  other  purpose  than 
that  of  exciting  faith,  that,  according  to  Protestants, 
sacramental  formulas  are  exhortatory,  not  consecra- 
tory.  The  sacred  ceremony  consists  chiefly  in  an  ex 
hortation:  a  sacrament  is  a  kind  of  acted  sermon 
which  keeps  up  the  faith  of  the  subject. 

Since  the  Sacraments  are  intended  only  to  stimulate 
faith,  they  are  not  necessary  for  salvation.  Any  one 
who  abides  steadfastly  in  the  faith  to  the  Divine  prom 
ises  is  free  to  use  them  or  not,  without  compromising 
in  the  least  the  interests  of  his  soul.  At  bottom,  the 
Sacraments  are  superfluous  institutions;  we  may  ob- 

52  LUTHER,  Ibid.  MELANCHTHON,  Loci  theologici,  cap.  de  Sacra- 
mentis,  Basileae,  1561,  p.  379:  Quanquam  multi  sunt  fines  sacra- 
mentorum  ordinati,  tamen  longe   omnibus  anteferendus   est  hie 
principalis  finis,  quod  sint  signa  voluntatis  Dei  erga  nos,  videlicet 
testimonia  addita  promissioni  gratiae. 

53  MELANCHTHON,  Apologia  Confessionis  august.,  ad  art.  13. 

54  CALVIN,  Inst.  chrct.,  iv,   14-17:     The   sacraments  are  given 
to  us  by   God,   as  bearers   of   good   tidings   are   sent   by  men ; 
namely  they  do  not  at  all  bestow  any  good,  but  only  announce 
and   declare  the   gifts   we   owe   to   the   liberality   of   God,  or   at 
most  are  pledges  that  make  us  sure  of  these  gifts. 

13 


i8o     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

tain  grace,  even  though  we  do  not  receive  them,  nor 
even  wish  to  receive  them.55 

As  regards  efficacy,  there  is,  then,  no  difference  be 
tween  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law,  and  those  of 
the  New.  They  differ  between  themselves  only  by 
the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  which  they  are  respectively 
made  up.  The  Mosaic  Sacraments  consisted  of  ac 
tions  without  words,  the  Christian  Sacraments  con 
sist  of  actions  and  of  words:  these  words  recalling  the 
Divine  promises  to  grant  pardon  to  faith.56 

In  short,  the  sacramental  rite  has  no  efficacy  by  it 
self  in  the  work  of  justification:  its  whole  function  is 
to  keep  up  the  faith  in  the  Divine  promise : 

"  Baptismus  neminem  justificat,  nee  ulli  prodest,  sed  fides 
in  verbum  promissionis,  cui  additur  baptismus,  haec  enim 
justificat  et  implet  id  quod  baptismus  significat.  Fides  enim 
est  submersio  veteris  hominis  et  emersio  novi  hominis."  57 

However,  after  1535,  Luther  came  back  to  more 
Catholic  views  concerning  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  particularly  of  Baptism.  The  baptismal  rite, 
he  said,  "  gives  "  holiness  and  life  everlasting,  "  works 
the  regeneration  and  the  renewal  "of  man.58  Yet 
faith  always  remains  for  Luther  the  cause  of  the  ef 
ficacy  of  Baptism.  It  was  owing  to  a  most  incom 
prehensible  self-contradiction  that  he  held  infant  Bap 
tism. 

But  the  most  radical  rejection  of  sacramental  effi- 

55  MOEHLER,  Symbolism   (London,  1906),  pp.  205-207.     Cf.  A. 
THEINER,  Acta  Genuma  Concilii  Tridentini,  I,  p.  383. 

56  LUTHER,  De  Captivit.  babylon.,  cap.  de  Bapt.  Ibid. 

57  LUTHER,  Ibid. 

58  Predigt  von  d.  heilig.     Taufe,  1535,  n-   IT>  28,  edit.  Walch, 
Halle,  1740-1753,  t.  X. 


COUNCIL  OF  TRENT  181 

cacy  is  found  in  Zwingli's  writings.  According  to  the 
Swiss  Reformer,  the  Sacraments  are  not  even  tokens 
of  the  Divine  promises  and  heavenly  friendship,  des 
tined  to  nourish  faith;  they  are  mere  signs  of  Chris 
tian  profession,  by  which  the  faithful  testify  that  they 
belong  to  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  and  separate 
themselves  from  the  heathen.59  It  would  be  rather 
difficult  to  go  any  further  and  to  lower  still  more  the 
value  of  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law. 


In  its  seventh  session60  (1547),  the  Council  of 
Trent  condemned  all  the  errors  set  forth  by  Protes 
tants  regarding  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments.  The 
seventh  decree  is  aimed  at  the  fifth  article  of  the  Augs 
burg  Confession  (1530),  which  declared  that  the  Sac 
raments  do  not  always  give  grace  to  the  subjects  prop 
erly  disposed,  but  only  now  and  then,  and  according 
to  God's  good  pleasure.61  Besides,  in  the  twelfth  de 
cree,  the  Council  proscribed  the  doctrine  of  the  Ana 
baptists,  who,  like  the  Donatists  of  old,  made  errone 
ously  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  depend  on  the 
minister's  sanctity.62  The  Fathers  of  Trent  solemnly 
proclaimed  the  necessity  for  salvation  of  the  Christian 
Sacraments,  or  at  least  of  the  desire  to  receive  them, 
their  efficacy  ex  opere  operato,  their  power  of  pro 
ducing  the  grace  they  "  contain,"  in  all  those  who  do 
not  place  any  obstacle  to  it,  finally  their  superiority 
over  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law. 

59  ZWINGLI,  DC  vera  et  falsa  religione,  Zurich,  1828-1842,  t.  iii, 
pp.  229,  231  et  ss. 

60  Can.  2-8. 

61  A.  THEINER,  op.  cit.,  I,  p.  384. 
«2  A.  THEINER,  Ibid^ 


182      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  Fathers  —  and  this  must  be  noticed  —  did  not 
make  use  of  the  concept  of  cause  to  express  their  defi 
nitions,  for  one  of  their  rules  was  not  to  touch  on  the 
controversies  existing  among  Catholic  theologians. 
Their  method  consisted  in  extracting  from  the  heretic 
al  books  the  propositions  that  seemed  to  be  against 
the  Catholic  doctrine,  in.  submitting  for  study  these 
propositions  to  a  committee  of  theologians  entrusted 
with  the  drawing  up  of  definitions,  and  finally  in  dis 
cussing  among  themselves  the  work  of  the  theologians, 
until  they  had  come  to  the  definitive  formula  of  the 
decrees.  They  were  told  to  abstain  from  any  "  use 
less  and  superfluous  questions."  63 

Thus  we  understand  why  the  Council  left  aside  the 
notion  of  cause  which,  had  it  been  used,  would  have 
obliged  the  Fathers  to  decide  more  or  less  for  this 
or  that  system,  and  why  also  it  expressed  the  dogma 
of  the  objective  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  without 
pronouncing  upon  the  intimate  nature  of  that  efficacy. 

However,  although  it  did  not  decide  upon  the  ex 
isting  controversies,  the  Council  of  Trent  gave  a  defi 
nite  orientation  to  theological  speculation  properly  so 
called:  so  true  it  is  that  the  authority  of  the  Church 
alone  can  lead  us  to  the  progressive  knowledge  of  re 
vealed  truth.  The  tenor  of  the  definitions  of  Trent 

63  A.  THEINER,  op.  cit.,  t.  i,  p.  9 :  Mos  fuit  in  sacro  concilio 
Tridentino  .  .  .  ut  cum  de  dogmatibus  fidei  agendum  esset, 
primum  articuli  inter  catholicos  et  haereticos  controversi  ex 
eorum  libris  colligerentur :  qui  antequam  patribus  proponerentur, 
exhibebantur  disputandi  ac  discutiendi  theologicis  minoribus,  id 
est  non  praelatis.  .  .  .  Sententiae  per  theologos  dicendae  de- 
ducantur  ex  sacra  scriptura,  traditionibus  apostolorum,  sacris  et 
approbatis  conciliis,  summorum  pontificum  et  sanctorum  patrum 
constitutionibus  et  auctoritatibus,  ac  consensu  ecclesiae  catholicae : 
sint  breves,  nee  vagentur  per  inutiles  et  superfluas  quaestiones: 
abstineantque  a  protervis  contentionibus.  Cf.  pp.  533,  603. 


COUNCIL  OF  TRENT  183 

is  rather  unfavorable  to  the  system  of  occasional  cau 
sality.  Unless  the  Sacraments  are  causes  properly  so 
called,  they  cannot,  apparently,  "  contain  the  grace 
they  signify,"  nor  "  confer  "  it  ex  opere  operate.  The 
Decretum  ad  Armenos,  which  contains  similar  formu 
las,  had  already  thrown  some  discredit  upon  the  sys 
tems  that  did  not  ascribe  true  causality  to  the  Sacra 
ments.  No  doubt,  the  system  of  instrumental  causali 
ty,  proposed  by  St.  Thomas,  best  agreed  with  the  de 
crees  of  the  Council.  But  this  system  was  a  puzzle 
to  the  mind,  especially  after  it  had  been  stated  with 
greater  precision  by  Cardinal  Cajetan.  Hence,  al 
though  the  majority  favored  it,  many  could  not  make 
up  their  minds  to  adopt  it.  As  for  the  system  of  dis 
positive  causality,  it  was  deemed  antiquated.64 

Then  it  was  that  Melchior  Cano  framed  a  new  sys 
tem  in  which  the  Sacraments  are  true  causes  of  grace, 
as  is  implied  by  the  definitions  of  the  Church,  but 
moral  causes  which  entreat  God  efficaciously  to  pour 
His  grace  into  the  soul  of  the  properly  disposed  sub 
ject.  Thus,  whilst  remaining  in  perfect  agreement 
with  the  definitions  of  Trent,  the  new  opinion  was  do 
ing  away  with  all  those  difficulties  from  reason,  which 
were  raised  against  the  system  of  St.  Thomas.  Mel 
chior  Cano  was  contributing  a  truly  fresh  idea  to  the 
solution  of  the  problem,  and  of  this  he  was  fully 
conscious.  The  concept  of  moral  cause  is  distinct 

64  We  describe  the  state  of  mind  of  the  theologians  at  the  time 
of  the  council  of  Trent  from  MELCHIOR  GANG'S  Relectio  de 
Sacramentis,  pars.  iva,  Matritii,  1764,  I,  II,  pp.  425-434.  Melchior 
Cano  was  sent  to  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  the  capacity  of  theo 
logian  by  Charles  the  Fifth.  The  first  edition  of  the  Relectio 
de  Sacramentis  was  published  at  Salamanca  in  1550,  three  years 
after  the  seventh  session  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  which  the 
definitions  concerning  the  Sacraments  were  promulgated. 


1 84      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

from  the  concept  of  occasional  cause  and  condition 
sine  qua  non,  vised  by  the  Scotists.  For  Cano  as  for 
Duns  Scotus,  it  is  God  Himself  who  deposits  grace  in 
the  soul;  but  whilst  Scotus  affirmed  this  was  done  in 
virtue  of  a  covenant  concluded  between  God  and  the 
Church  and  recalled  by  the  sacrament,  Melchior  Cano 
teaches  that  this  is  done  because  of  the  intrinsic  moral 
value  of  the  sacrament,  a  value  which  is  due  to  the 
merits  of  Jesus  Christ.65  The  sacrament  is  a  true 
moral  instrumental  cause.  A  moral  cause  it  is,  since 
it  entreats  God  efficaciously  to  impart  His  grace;  a 
moral  instrumental  cause  it  is  also,  because  it  holds 
this  power  of  entreating  from  the  merits  of  Christ.66 
Thus  modified  and  brought  into  perfect  agreement 
with  the  definitions  of  the  Church,  the  system  of  Duns 
Scotus  had  many  titles  to  success.  It  did  actually 
spread  rapidly  in  theological  schools,  especially  after 
Vasquez,  who  lived  toward  the  end  of  the  i6th.  cen 
tury,  had  made  it  famous,  by  the  brilliancy  of  his 
talent. 

§  VIII.     The  Actual  Controversy  about  the  Causality  of  the 
Sacraments. 

Since  the  Council  of  Trent,  there  have  been,  in  the 
theological  schools,  only  two  systems  about  the  cau 
sality  of  the  Sacraments.  The  theologians  of  the  end 
of  the  1 6th.  century  and  of  the  beginning  of  the  I7th. 
still  mention  the  old  systems  of  occasional  causality 

65  Melchior  Cano  does  not  consider  his  own  system  as  related 
to  that  of  Duns  Scotus.  Vasquez,  whilst  attributing  the  author 
ship  of  the  system  of  moral  causality  to  a  Spanish  theologian, 
Martin  Ledesma,  had  this  to  say  about  Cano :  "  Uberius  quam 
ullus  alius  nobis  explicavit." 

60  MELCHIOR  CANO,  Ibid. 


CONTROVERSY  ABOUT  CAUSALITY     185 

and  of  dispositive  causality:  but  it  is  only  to  dismiss 
them  once  for  all.67 

As  regards  the  system  of  occasional  causality,  theo 
logians  said  merely  this: 

"  Concedere  sacramentis  solum  illud  genus  causae  sine 
qua  non,  perinde  est  ac  dicere  solum  esse  causas  per  acci- 
dens  .  .  .  non  satis  est  concedere  sacramentis  genus 
causae  per  accidens  respectu  gratiae."  68 

After  the  Council  of  Trent,  no  Catholic  scholar  was 
bold  enough  to  teach  that  the  Sacraments  were  not 
true  causes  (causae  per  se)  of  grace. 

As  to  the  system  of  dispositive  causality,  it  was 
deemed  quite  insufficient.  For  it  merely  pushes  the 
problem  further  back  and  does  not  solve  it  at  all.  If 
it  denies  to  the  Sacraments  the  power  of  producing  in- 
strumentally  grace  itself,  no  more  can  it  grant  to  them 
the  power  of  producing  the  disposition,  which  is  also 
of  a  supernatural  order.  And  it  does  not  suffice  to 
answer  that  the  disposition,  the  ornatus  aniniae 
"  educitur  de  potentia  subjecti,"  and  that,  consequently, 
the  sacrament  may  be  its  instrumental  cause ;  for,  since 
this  disposition  belongs  to  the  same  order  as  grace, 
it  can  be,  no  more  than  grace,  "  educta  de  potentia 
subjecti." 69  Supposing  an  instrumental  physical 
power  is  granted  to  the  Sacraments,  it  can  be  only  in 
order  to  produce  immediately  grace  in  the  soul. 

Besides,  the  well  known  controversy  which  took 
place,  towards  the  end  of  the  i6th.  century,  between 
Suarez,  who  upheld  physical  causality,  and  Vasquez, 

67  Cf.  SUAREZ,  In  3*™  Part,  quaest.  62,  art.  4,  disp.  9,  and  VAS 
QUEZ,  In  3ai»  Part,  quaest.  62,  art.  4,  disp.  132. 

68  VASQUEZ,  Ibid.,  cap.  i,  n.  9-10 ;  cf .  SUAREZ,  sect.  2. 

69  VASQUEZ,  Ibid.,  cap.  ii,  n.  30;  SUAREZ,  Ibid.,  sect.  2. 


186     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

who  defended  moral  causality,  brought  these  two  sys 
tems  so  much  into  notice,70  that  all  the  others  were 
forgotten.  These  two  systems  we  shall  now  expose, 
according  to  these  two  theologians. 


A  physical  cause  has  a  direct  and  immediate  influ 
ence  on  the  production  of  its  effect,  and  reaches  the 
very  being  of  its  effect.  An  axe  and  a  saw  are  physic 
al  causes  of  the  cutting  of  the  wood. 

A  physical  cause  may  be  principal  or  instrumental, 
according  as  it  acts  by  its  own  motion  or  by  the  im 
pulse  it  receives  from  the  principal  agent.  The  work 
man  who  cuts  the  wood  is  the  principal  physical  cause 
of  his  work,  the  saw  which  he  uses  is  the  instrumental 
physical  cause  of  the  same.  These  notions  of  princi 
pal  and  of  instrumental  cause  are  at  the  bottom  of  the 
two  systems,  for  the  Sacraments  can  be  but  instru 
mental  causes  of  grace,  God  alone,  its  principal  cause.71 

Now,  according  to  Suarez  and  the  theologians  who, 
like  him,  follow  St.  Thomas,  the  Sacraments  are 
physical  instrumental  causes  of  grace.  They  are  in 
struments  of  which  God  makes  use,  to  produce  phys 
ically  grace  in  the  soul;  their  action  brings  about 
grace  in  the  soul  of  the  subject  directly  and  imme 
diately  : 

"  Dicendum  est  non  esse  impossibile,  neque  implicare  con- 
tradictionem,  ut  sacramenta  sint  propria  ac  physica  instru- 
menta  ad  gratiam  in  anima  efficiendam,  attingendo  immedi 
ate  ac  proxime  ipsam  gratiae  productionem."  T2 

70  DE  LUGO,  De  sacramentis,  disp.  IV,  sect.  4 :     Quaestio  Celebris 
est  [de  causalitate  physica  vel  morali],  et  quam  sua  contentione 
et  disputatione  celebriorem  reddiderunt  P.  Suarez  et  P.  Vasquez. 

71  SUAREZ,  quaest.  62,  art,  4,  disp.  9. 

72  SUAREZ,  Ibid,,  sect,  i. 


PHYSICAL  CAUSALITY  187 

Suarez  justifies  this  doctrine  by  Biblical  and  Patris 
tic  testimonies,73  the  wording  of  which  apparently  fa 
vors,  quite  often,  the  physical  causality  of  the  Sacra 
ments.  He  appeals  also  to  several  analogies,  in  order 
to  show  that  God  can  impart  to  a  material  being  the 
power  of  producing  physically  an  effect  of  the  super 
natural  order.  Was  not  Christ's  humanity  a  physical 
instrument  of  grace,  since  the  contact  of  Jesus  or  even 
merely  His  word  actually  conferred  it?  Do  not  the 
minds  of  the  elect  receive  the  physical  ability  of  elicit 
ing  acts  of  beatific  vision? 

But,  besides  that  they  are  not  beyond  dispute,  the 
proofs  from  authority  do  not  suffice  to  establish  so 
mysterious  a  system;  it  must  be  proved  that  physical 
causality  "  implies  no  contradiction."  For  reason 
finds  it  very  difficult  to  conceive  that  efficacy  which  the 
sacrament  is  said  to  possess,  and  which  would  make 
it  capable  of  producing  physically  a  transcendent  ef 
fect,  grace. 

Cardinal  Cajetan74  declared  that  this  efficacy  was 
nothing  else  than  the  supernatural  impulse,  communi 
cated  by  God  to  the  sacrament,  at  the  moment  when 
He  uses  it  to  sanctify  man. 

On  the  other  hand,  Suarez  believes  this  efficacy  is 
no  special  power  added  to  the  sacrament.  It  is  de 
rived  merely  from  the  "  active  obediential  power,"  by 
which  all  created  beings  can  be  raised,  owing  to  a  spe 
cial  Divine  cooperation,  to  a  mode  of  action  superior, 

73  Ibid.,  sect.  2. 

74  In  3am  Part.  q.  62,  art.  i  et  4.     Cf .  q.  13,  art.  2 :  Ex  hoc  ipso 
qnod  Deus  utitur  aliqua  re  ut  instrumento  ad  opus  miraculosum, 
elevatur  res  ilia  in  ordinem  causae  instrumentalis,  et  ipse  pas- 
sivus  usus  quo  Deus  ilia  utitur  ad  hoc  opus,  est  motus  quo  a 
principali  agente  instrumentum  movetur. 


i88     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

but  not  contradictory,  to  themselves.  Any  being  pos 
sesses  latent  energies,  capacities  of  tending  gradually 
towards  more  perfect  activities,  which,  at  the  God- 
appointed  time,  pass  from  the  potential  to  the  actual 
order.  Thus  the  whole  creation  may  serve  as  an  in 
strument  by  means  of  which  God  may  work  miracles, 
and  by  this  very  fact  the  Sacraments  are  capable  of 
being  physical  instrumental  causes  of  grace: 

"  Diximus  [virtutem  sacramentorum]  non  esse  rem  ali 
quant  superadditam,  sed  ipsammet  entitatem  rei,  quae  hoc 
ipso,  quo  creata  est  et  subordinata  primo  agenti,  est  in  po- 
tentia  obedientiali  active  ut  efficiat  quidquid  non  implicat 
contradictionem  respectu  illius.  Haec  enim  ratio  obedien- 
tialis  potentiae  communis  est  sacramentis,  quorum  elevatio 
divina  solum  in  hoc  consistit,  quod  Deus  altiori  modo  con- 
currit  dando  auxilium  sufficiens,  ut  res  operetur  secundum 
hanc  potentiam.  .  .  .  Hie  concursus  non  fundatur  in 
naturali  eorum  [sacramentorum]  perfectione,  sed  in  prae- 
dicta  virtute  obedientiali  et  infinita  Dei  virtute,  cui  omnia 
subordinantur."  75 

The  explanation  of  Suarez  is,  perhaps,  almost  as  ab 
struse  as  that  of  Cajetan.  But  is  not  dogma  always 
bound  to  be  abstruse,  since  it  is  supernatural  truth? 
To  some,  also,  the  teaching  of  Suarez  may  seem  to 
savor  of  evolutionism;  besides,  it  is  connected,  as  we 
shall  see  presently,  with  a  peculiar  view  of  grace. 

If  the  Sacraments  are  physical  instrumental  causes 
of  grace,  it  was  objected  to  Suarez,  we  must  of  neces 
sity  admit  that  they  are  instruments  which  create 
grace:  for  the  latter  is  a  created  gift.  Now,  the  Sac 
raments  cannot  receive  a  creative  efficacy,  since  God 
cannot  communicate  to  a  creature  the  power  of  creat 
ing. 

75  SUAREZ,  Ibid.,  sect.  i. 


PHYSICAL  CAUSALITY  189 

Grace,  he  answers  unhesitatingly,  is  not  created, 
but  it  is  "  drawn  from  the  potential  energies  of  the 
soul."  Hence  the  sacrament  can  be  the  physical  in 
strumental  cause  of  the  action  by  which  grace  is  pro 
duced  : 

"  Ad  secundam  difficultatem  facilius  respondetur,  quid- 
quid  sit  an  possit  creatura  esse  instrumentum  creationis, 
gratiam  tamen  non  creari.  Et  ideo  ex  hoc  capite  nihil  ob- 
stare  quominus  sacramenta  esse  possint  instrumenta  gratiae. 
Quia  gratia  non  fit  sine  concursu  materiali  animae,  a  qua 
pendet  in  fieri  et  conservari.  Et  ideo  non  creatur,  sed  edu- 
citur  de  potentia  obedientiali  ipsius  animae.  ...  In 
productione  autem  gratiae,  quae  fit  per  sacramenta,  nullius 
rei  creatio  intercedit,  sed  fit  solum  quaedam  veluti  spiritualis 
alteratio  seu  mutatio  perfectiva,  qua  per  se  primo  fit  ani 
mus,  vel  homo  gratus  Deo,  ipsa  vero  gratia  comproducitur, 
seu  de  potentia  animae  educitur."  76 

If  grace  itself  is  drawn  "  de  potentia  obedientiali 
animae,"  we  understand  how  the  causality  of  the  sac 
rament  may  flow  from  the  "  obediential  power  "  with 
which  the  rite,  like  all  creatures,  is  supplied,  in  view 
of  a  superior  activity. 

The  explanations  of  Suarez,  closely  connected  as 
they  were  with  a  special  notion  of  grace  and  with  the 
theory  of  the  "  active  obediential  power  "  could  not 
be  admitted  by  those  theologians  who  believe  that 
grace  is  a  created  gift,  and  that  the  obediential  power 
is  "  chimerical."  So  Billuart  77  and  with  him  most 
Thomists  parted  from  Suarez  and  preferred  to  adopt 
Cajetan's  explanation.  The  system  of  Suarez  perhaps 
deserved  a  better  fate :  it  contains  interesting  data  of 

78  Ibid. 

77  De  sacramentis  in  communi,  Dissert.  3,  art.  2. 


190      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

which  some  theologians  have  endeavored  to  make  use 
in  the  actual  controversies  about  the  relation  between 
the  natural  and  the  supernatural. 

Whether  interpreted  by  Cajetan  or  by  Suarez,  the 
system  of  physical  causality  remains  a  disconcerting 
puzzle  for  the  mind.  But,  what  is  still  more  serious, 
it  goes  apparently  against  the  theological  doctrine  of 
the  reviviscence  of  the  Sacraments. 

At  the  time  of  Suarez,  the  reviviscence  of  Baptism 
was  admitted  by  all,  after  St.  Augustine,  and  held  as 
certain;  that  of  several  other  Sacraments  was  looked 
upon  as  probable.78  When  a  sacrament  is  received  in 
a  "  fictive  "  manner,  that  is  to  say,  with  the  lack  of 
the  proper  dispositions,  it  does  not  produce  grace.  It 
will  produce  it  later,  when  the  subject  repents  and  thus 
removes  from  his  soul  the  obstacle  to  grace.  Now  the 
theory  of  physical  causality  is  absolutely  unable  to 
account  for  this  fact,  for  physical  causality  demands 
absolutely  the  coexistence  of  the  cause  and  of  the  ef 
fect,  and  in  the  reviviscence,  the  sacrament,  even 
though  it  exists  no  longer,  brings  about  grace. 
Vasquez  79  exposes  triumphantly  this  objection  in  his 
forceful  criticism  of  the  Thomistic  system. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  no  theologian  was  able  to  solve 
the  difficulty.  The  scholastics  of  old  got  rid  of  it  by 
denying  reviviscence :  this  was  a  defeat.  Even  at  the 
time  of  Suarez,  others  admitted  this  reviviscence  only 
for  the  Sacraments  that  impress  a  character;  the  lat 
ter  acted  as  a  physical  cause,  in  case  of  reviviscence. 
But  why  should  reviviscence  be  limited  to  some  Sac- 

78  SUAREZ,  Ibid.,  disp.  8,  sect.  3 ;  VASQUEZ,  disp.  132,  cap.  4,  n. 
41-44. 

79  Ibid. 


MORAL  CAUSALITY  191 

raments  ?  80  The  most  sensible  among  the  Thomists 
"  owned  candidly,"  says  Vasquez,  that,  in  case  of  re- 
viviscence,  the  Sacraments  do  not  act  as  physical 
causes;  but  that,  in  view  of  the  sacrament  already 
administered,  God  Himself  pours  grace  into  the  soul.81 
This  too  was  to  confess  the  shortcoming  of  the  sys 
tem  and  to  point  out  most  plainly  its  irremediably 
weak  point.  Hence  many  theologians,  and  some  of 
no  mean  ability,  seceded  from  the  Thomistic  school, 
and  adopted  Melchior  Cano's  view,  of  which  the  suc 
cess  was  day  by  day  on  the  increase.82 


According  to  the  explanation  of  Melchior  Cano  and 
of  Vasquez,  a  moral  cause  is  that  which  entreats  ef 
fectively  the  physical  cause  to  act :  he  who  gives  an 
efficacious  advice  or  a  command  is  truly  the  moral 
cause  of  what  he  has  advised  or  commanded.  Hence 
a  moral  cause  has  a  real,  though  only  indirect,  influ 
ence,  on  the  production  of  the  effect ;  it  can  exercise  its 
action  only  on  a  free  being. 

Like  a  physical  cause,  a  moral  cause  may  be  princi 
pal  or  instrumental,  according  as  his  power  of  entreat 
ing  is  due  to  its  own  merits  or  to  merits  borrowed 
from  another :  he  who  supplies  the  money  intended  for 
the  ransom  of  a  prisoner,  is  the  principal  moral  cause 
of  the  purchase,  the  servant  whose  mission  it  is  to 

8(>  Cf .  VASQUEZ,  Ibid. 

81  SUAREZ  holds  this  view.     Ibid. 

52  We  do  not  insist  on  the  really  too  subtle  objection  presented 
by  Vasquez  and  others  against  physical  causality,  viz.,  the  ad 
ministering  of  the  sacrament  being  a  transitory  act,  a  rite  made 
up  of  successive  acts  and  words,  how  can  it  be  at  all,  and  at 
what  moment  is  it,  a  physical  cause?  Suarez  answers:  The  rite 
produces  grace  when  it  is  completed.  (Disput.  7,  sect.  2). 


192      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

deliver  the  money  to  the  jail-keeper  is  its  instrumental 
moral  cause. 

Now,  the  principal  moral  cause  of  grace  is  the  Pas 
sion  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  Savior  is  the  only  one 
who,  because  of  His  own  merits  obtained  by  the  shed 
ding  of  His  blood,  entreats  God  efficaciously  to  im 
part  His  grace  to  men.  Differently  from  the 
Thomists,  Vasquez  and  the  upholders  of  moral  cau 
sality,  refuse  to  admit  that  Christ's  humanity  is  a 
physical  cause  of  our  salvation  and  of  grace.  As  re 
gards  our  salvation,  the  causality  of  the  humanity  of 
Jesus  is  of  the  same  kind  as  the  causality  of  the  Sacra 
ments  :  it  is  moral,83  with  this  difference,  however,  that 
the  Savior  is  the  principal  moral  cause,  whilst  the  Sac 
raments  are  simply  instrumental  causes. 

The  Sacraments  are  instruments  which  entreat  God 
effectively  and  infallibly  to  give  His  grace  to  those 
who  receive  them  with  the  requisite  dispositions. 
Vasquez  compares  this  power  of  entreating  to  that  of 
a  prayer,  objectively  efficacious:  the  sacrament  is  like 
a  prayer  infallibly  efficacious  by  itself  and  indepen 
dently  of  the  merits  of  the  minister  and  of  the  sub 
ject.  Just  as  the  Savior's  humanity,  owing  to  His 
own  merits,  and  just  as  the  Apostles,  owing  to  their 
credit  in  the  sight  of  God,  obtained,  through  their 
prayers,  the  miracles  they  performed,  so  also  the  Sac 
raments,  in  virtue  of  the  Divine  promise,  entreat  God 
efficaciously  to  bring  about  the  sacramental  effects.84 

83  VASQUEZ,  Ibid.,  disput.  133,  cap.  i  et  2. 

84  Disput.   152,  cap.  5,  n.  80-83 :  Dicimus  Christi  humanitatem 
mediis    suis   meritis    fuisse   causam   miraculorum :    et    Apostolos 
media  invocatione  et  oratione  fuisse  instrumenta  Dei  ad  sanitates 
et    alia    hujusmodi    facienda,    nempe    per    modum    impetrationis. 
.     .     .     Apostoli    et   humanitas    Christi   meritorie    impetrabant   a 
Deo  miracula,  et  virtutes  quas  operabantur.     .     .     .     Eadem  igitur 


MORAL  CAUSALITY  193 

Melchior  Cano  expressed  himself  perhaps  still  bet 
ter,  when  he  said:  The  Sacraments  entreat  God  to 
grant  His  grace,  because  the  "  price  of  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ  is  communicated  to  them."  And  this 
communication  is  accounted  for  quite  easily,  if,  as 
Melchior  Cano  suggests,  the  Sacraments  are  to  be  con 
sidered  as  being  morally  acts  of  the  Redeemer,  by 
which  He  sanctifies  us.  These  acts,  then,  partake  of 
the  merits  the  Savior  acquired  by  the  shedding  of  His 
blood. 

"  Fides  sana  atque  catholica  docet  duo.  Alterum  est, 
Deum  per  Christi  humanitatem  redemisse  genus  humanum, 
.  .  .  Ecce  Agnus  Dei,  qui  tollit  peccata  mundi.  Et,  hie 
est  qui  baptizat  in  Spiritu  Sancto.  Quo  testimonio  ad  id 
probandum  utitur  Augustinus  libro  contra  Petilianum  3,  cap. 
45.  Et  ad  Ephesios  5  dicitur  Christum  sanctificasse  eccle- 
siam  suam,  atque  mundasse.  Alterum  (quod  fides  quoque 
sana  docet)  sacramenta  novae  legis  instrumenta  esse  Christi 
ad  hanc  redemptionem  complendam."  85 

Thus  understood,  the  Sacraments,  Cano  adds,  con 
tain  grace  morally,  since  they  contain  its  price :  does 
not  a  purse  filled  with  gold  morally  contain  a  prison 
er's  deliverance,  since  there  is  in  it  the  price  of  his 
ransom  ? 

Besides,  neither  Melchior  Cano  nor  Vasquez  was 
embarrassed  by  the  definitions  of  Councils  and  by  the 
Biblical  or  Patristic  testimonies.  They  wrere  aware 
that  they  did  not  disagree  with  tradition,  since  the  lat 
ter  has  no  definite  teaching  about  sacramental  cau 
sality.  They  realized  above  all  that  the  system  they 

ratione  et  minister  sacramenti,  et  sacramentum  ipsum,  per  quod 
impetrat,  dicitur  habere  potestatem    .     .     .     gratiam  producendi 
et  earn  in  se  continere. 
85  Relect,  de  Sacramentis,  p.  VIa,  p.  431. 


I94      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

proposed  was  far  less  disconcerting  to  the  mind,  than 
that  of  physical  causality.  Hence  they  were  followed 
by  a  whole  school,86  which  was  improperly  called  the 
Scotistic  school.  In  our  days,  the  theory  of  moral 
causality  has  a  remarkable  success.87  Moreover,  it 
has  undergone  a  few  changes  which  it  may  be  profita 
ble  to  expose. 

Developing  the  idea  which  Melchior  Cano  had  im 
perfectly  realized,  Cardinal  Franzelin  looks  upon  the 
sacrament  as  being  morally  an  act  of  Christ.  In  his 
works,  the  system  of  moral  causality  assumes  a  less 
metaphysical,  a  more  pragmatic  and  concrete  charac 
ter;  the  sacrament  is  examined  directly  in  its  relations 
to  Christ. 

To  unfold  his  thought,  the  author  appeals  to  the 
teaching  of  St.  Augustine.  The  minister  of  the  sac 
rament  is  the  representative  of  Jesus;  he  acts  in  His 
name,  since  he  celebrates,  in  keeping  with  His  com 
mands,  a  rite  which  He  instituted.  Hence  the  action 
of  the  minister  is,  morally,  an  action  of  Christ  Him 
self.88  Now  the  sacrament,  an  action  of  the  Re- 

86  DE  LUGO,  De  Sacramentis  in  gen.,  disp.  4,  sect.  4,  and  TOUR- 
NELY,  De  Sacr.  in  gen.,  quaest.  3,  art.  2,  belong  to  that  school. 

87  FRANZELIN,  HURTER,  Chr.  PESCH  uphold  the  system  of  moral 
causality.     Father  Billot  sets  forth  an  intermediary  system.     A 
disposition   exigent  of  grace  would  be  produced  by  the  sacra 
ment,    neither    physically    nor    morally,    but    imperatively.     Sac 
raments  are  signs  of  an  intentional  order,  which  manifest  God's 
intention  to  give  such  or  such  spiritual  fruit  to  the  recipients. 
This  manifestation  of  the  Divine  intention  is  a  disposition  exigent 
of  grace.     [Fr.  Billot's  system  has  been  advocated  by  FR.  CRONIN 
in  the  American  Ecclesiastical  Review,  1901,  pp.  35,  403,  449.     Tr.] 

88  De  Sacramentis  in  gen.,  th.  X. :     In  omnibus  ritibus  sancti- 
ficantibus  cujusmodi  sunt  sacramenta,  Ecclesia  et  quivis  Ecclesiae 
minister  gerit  moraliter  personam  Christi  ex  ipsius  institutione  ac 
mandate  pro  Christo  legatione  fungens. —  Franzelin  refers  to  the 
de  Baptismo,  lib.  v,  14,  16,  of  St.  Augustine. 


MORAL  CAUSALITY  195 

deemer,  partakes  of  the  merits  of  the  Passion  and  pos 
sesses  an  intrinsic  value  which  prompts  God  infallibly 
to  grant  His  grace. 

"  Sacramentum  nomine  Christi  administratum  ipsa  sua 
dignitate  derivata  ex  Christi  meritis  exigit,  constant!  lege 
praesentis  ordinis  reparati,  collationem  gratiae,  ad  quam  est 
institutum."  89 

What  determines  God  to  impart  His  grace,  is  the 
value  of  the  sacrament,  which  is  thus  a  true  moral 
cause;  and  the  sacrament  has  this  value,  because  it  is 
an  act  of  Christ. 

Thus,  we  are  brought  back,  in  a  roundabout  way,  to 
the  Augustinian  concept  of  a  sacrament :  a  conception 
which  the 'Middle  Ages,  in  their  fondness  for  meta 
physics,  had  forgotten. 

This  conception  of  a  sacrament  leaves  room  for  the 
teaching  of  the  necessity  of  the  minister's  intention: 
if  the  minister  is  a  mere  proxy  of  Christ,  in  order  that 
his  action  may  be  morally  that  of  Christ,  he  must 
bring  his  intention  into  harmony  with  that  of  the 
Institutor  of  the  Sacraments.  Moreover,  in  keeping 
with  the  views  of  the  Fathers,  this  theory  ascribes  to 
the  Church  a  fairly  abundant  share  in  the  bestowal  of 
grace  through  the  Sacraments.  Christ  acts  through 
His  Church,  represented  by  the  minister.  Hence  it 
is  essential,  in  order  that  the  latter  may  validly  con 
fer  the  sacramental  rite,  that  he  should  act  as  minister 
of  the  Church.  He  may  be  a  heretic,  a  schismatic,  an 
unworthy  person,  and  yet  he  does  not  impair  the  valid 
ity  of  the  Sacraments.  Nevertheless,  he  must  have 
the  intention  to  act  in  the  name  of  the  Church.  The 

89  Ibid. 

14 


196     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

latter  is  the  necessary  intermediary  between  Christ  and 
us,  for  Christ  accomplishes  His  sacramental  actions 
through  His  Church.  In  fine,  the  system  of  moral 
causality,  as  interpreted  by  Cardinal  Franzelin,  offers 
to  the  mind  a  more  living  conception  of  the  sacra 
ment.  It  sets  before  our  eyes  Jesus  continuing, 
through  His  Church,  to  sanctify  men  and  to  bestow 
the  merits  of  His  Passion.  This  is  why  men  of  this 
age,  who  are  inclined  more  than  ever  to  look  upon 
Christianity  as  a  life,  will  feel  drawn  rather  to  the 
system  of  moral  causality. 

Wonderful  is  indeed  the  richness  of  dogmatic  life, 
which  history  shows  us  in  the  Church.  The  Catholic 
doctrine  concerning  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  has 
sturdily  grown,  whilst  remaining  always  identical  with 
itself.  At  the  beginning,  the  Sacraments  were  looked 
upon  as  special  means  of  sanctification.  Their  effi 
cacy,  independent  of  the  minister's  dispositions,  was 
fully  brought  out  in  the  Baptismal  controversy  and  in 
the  discussions  with  the  Donatists.  Then,  during  the 
Middle  Ages,  an  attempt  was  made  at  stating  with 
accuracy  the  relation  of  causality,  which  exists  be 
tween  the  rite  and  grace.  With  these  facts  before  us, 
we  can  hardly  imagine  on  what  grounds  any  one  could 
say  that  thought  is  enchained  in  the  Catholic  Church. 

§  IX.     Grace  Produced  by  the  Sacraments. 

An  exposition  of  the  teaching  relative  to  the  grace 
produced  by  the  Sacraments 90  is  a  necessary  com 
plement  of  the  history  of  the  dogma  of  efficacy.  For 
this  doctrine  is  a  consequence  of  the  dogma,  a  more 
complete  explanation  of  sacramental  efficacy.  It  grew 

90  A  special  chapter  is  devoted  to  the  character. 


GRACE  PRODUCED  BY  SACRAMENTS     197 

after  the  Middle  Ages,  especially  at  the  time  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  We  will  set  forth  its  essential 
points,  according  to  Suarez,91  "  in  whom  " —  in  the 
words  of  Bossuet, — "  the  whole  modern  school  is 
heard." 


The  Sacraments  produce  two  kinds  of  graces,  the 
ordinary  habitual  grace,  common  to  all;  and  the  sac 
ramental  grace,  special  to  each  one  of  them. 

The  formal  distinction  between  "  sacramental 
grace  "  and  "  the  grace  of  virtues  and  gifts,"  that  is 
to  say,  ordinary  habitual  grace,  dates  from  the  I3th. 
century,92  when  the  theology  of  grace  was  completely 
elaborated. 

Habitual  grace  is  Divine  life  communicated  to  the 
soul.  Since  the  Middle  Ages,  it  is  conceived  depen- 
clently  on  the  scholastic  psychology  which  admits  a  dis 
tinction  between  the  substance  of  the  soul  and  its 
faculties.  Inasmuch  as  it  adheres  to  the  substance  of 
the  soul  in  order  to  deify  it,  grace  is  called  sanctifying 
grace ;  and  inasmuch  as  it  clings  to  the  faculties  of  the 
soul  in  order  to  make  them  capable  of  acting  super- 
naturally,  it  is  identical  with  the  infused  virtues.  The 
gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost  are  connected  with  the  infused 
virtues.93  Sanctifying  grace,  the  virtues  and  the  gifts, 
all  this  makes  up  habitual  grace,  or  the  state  of  grace ; 
absolutely  all  the  Sacraments  produce  it. 

Moreover,  the  traditional  teaching  informs  us  that 
each  one  of  the  seven  Sacraments  has  special  effects, 

91  jn  ^am  Part.,  qu.  62,  art.  4,  disp.  7,  sect.  2-5. 

92  ALEXANDER  OF  HALES,  Sum.   Theol.,  IV,  qu.  8,   membr.  4 ; 
ST.  THOMAS,  5\   Theol,  3  p.,  qu.  62,  art.  2;  ST.  BONAVENTURE, 
IV  Sent.,  D.  i,  p.  i,  qu.  6. 

93  Cf.  ST.  THOMAS,  S.  Theol.  ia  2ae,  qu.  no,  art.  3  et  4. 


198      EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

in  keeping  with  the  end  for  which  it  was  instituted. 
Nay,  as  we  have  seen,  it  was  the  effects  proper 
to  each  sacrament  that  the  Fathers  preferred  to 
study.  Scholastic  Theology  calls  these  special  ef 
fects  of  the  Sacraments  "  sacramental  grace,"  and  en 
deavors  to  determine  its  nature. 

The  theologians  of  the  I3th.  century  taught  gener 
ally  that  sacramental  grace  is  a  habitus  distinct  from 
ordinary  habitual  grace.94  This  habitus  has  for  its 
purpose  to  perfect  the  faculties  of  the  soul  and  to  fit 
them  to  fulfil  the  end  of  each  sacrament.  This  doc 
trine  found  its  justification  in  the  theological  teaching 
of  that  time  concerning  the  reasons  that  prompted 
Christ  to  institute  the  Sacraments.  The  Savior  in 
tended  to  provide  mankind  with  remedies,  so  as  to 
heal  the  wounds  with  which  it  had  been  afflicted  by 
sin.95  Sacramental  grace  consists  in  a  kind  of  par 
tial  restitution  of  the  gifts  of  integrity  which  man 
possessed  in  the  state  of  innocence.  Thus  it  repairs 
the  disasters  of  the  original  fall. 

Cardinal  Cajetan 96  opposed  vigorously  this  doc 
trine,  which  multiplied  useless  entities.  In  his  eyes 
sacramental  grace  consists  simply  in  a  right  to  re 
ceive,  in  due  time,  actual  graces  necessary  for  obtain 
ing  the  end  of  each  sacrament.  The  special  end  of 
each  sacrament  is  obtained  by  repeated  acts  of  Chris 
tian  life.  That  all  of  them  may  be  performed,  these 
acts  demand  many  actual  graces  placed  gradually  one 
after  the  other  in  the  life  of  the  Christian,  and  sacra- 

94  ST.   THOMAS,  IV  Sent.,  D.   i,  qu.   i,  art.  4,  qu.  5.— How 
ever,  ST.  BONAVENTURE,  IV  Sent.,  D.  I,  p.  i,  art.  i,  qu.  6,  teaches 
the  identity  of  sacramental  and  habitual  grace. 

95  ST.  THOMAS,  S.  Theol,  3  p.,  qu.  65,  art.  i ;  ST.  BONAVENTURE, 
Brezril.,  pars  6,  cap.  iii. 

96  in  3am  Part.,  qu.  62,  art.  2. 


SACRAMENTAL  GRACE  199 

mental  grace  confers  precisely  the  right  to  receive,  in 
due  time,  these  necessary  graces. 

Suarez  aims  at  reconciling  the  scholastics  of  old 
with  Cajetan.  He  admits  that  sacramental  grace  is 
ordinary  habitual  grace,  possessing,  however,  a  spe 
cial  efficacy  which  is  in  keeping  with  the  end  of  each 
sacrament  and  which  secures  special  helps  for  the 
future.  Baptism  is  intended  to  regenerate  the  soul: 
hence  it  imparts  habitual  grace  producing  the  super 
natural  regeneration  of  the  baptized  Christian,  to 
whom  graces  of  Christian  life  are  secured  for  the 
future.  Confirmation  strengthens  the  soul,  the  Eu 
charist  feeds  it.  The  sacrament  of  Penance  has  for 
its  purpose  to  give  new  life  to  the  sinner:  its  sacra 
mental  grace  is,  then,  habitual  grace  bringing  about 
the  resurrection  and  the  healing  of  the  sinner,  and 
strengthening  him  beforehand  against  any  relapse.97 
Extreme  Unction  refreshes  the  sick  in  view  of  the 
final  struggle.  Orders  impart  the  graces  necessary 
for  the  worthy  exercise  of  priestly  functions;  Matri 
mony  gives  to  husband  and  wife  the  helps  they  need 
to  fulfil  all  the  duties  proper  to  their  state.  Modern 
theologians  are  divided  between  the  view  of  Suarez 
and  that  of  Cajetan.98 


The  most  interesting  part  of  the  teaching  of  Suarez 
refers  to  the  way  and  to  the  measure  in  which  these 
two  kinds  of  graces  are  produced  by  the  Sacraments. 
It  shows  us  most  manifestly  in  what  way  the  Church 
knows  how  to  live  her  sacramental  dogmas. 

97  SUAREZ,  Ibid.,  sect.  3. 

98  FRANZELIN,  op  cit.,  th.  XI,  schol.  3,  adopts  the  doctrine  of 
Suarez ;  CH.  PESCH,  Prael  dogmat.,  t.  vi,  p.  52,  that  of  Cajetan. 


200     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  Council  of  Trent  defined  that  the  Sacraments 
of  the  New  Law  confer  grace  to  all  those  who  do  not 
place  any  obstacle  to  it  through  lack  of  proper  disposi 
tions.  Hence  the  Sacraments  of  the  living  produce 
an  increase  of  grace,  since  their  reception  demands 
the  state  of  grace ;  the  Sacraments  of  the  dead  produce 
the  first  grace,  since  they  are  intended  to  bring  the 
subject  from  the  state  of  sin  to  that  of  holiness. 
Suarez  removes  some  doubts  still  entertained  in  his 
time,  as  to  the  production  of  the  first  grace  by  the 
Sacraments  of  the  dead." 

However,  the  Sacraments  of  the  dead  may  produce 
an  increase  of  grace  in  those  who  receive  them,  with 
a  conscience  free  from  mortal  sin.  For  he  who  ap 
proaches  a  sacrament  of  the  dead  with  a  pure  con 
science,  far  from  placing  any  obstacle  to  the  produc 
tion  of  grace,  brings  to  it,  on  the  contrary,  excellent 
dispositions.1  If  the  Sacraments  of  the  dead  produce 
an  increase  of  grace  in  the  subject  who  is  already  in 
the  state  of  grace,  can  we  say  also  that  the  Sacraments 
of  the  living  confer  the  first  grace  in  some  cases? 

In  the  time  of  Suarez,  this  question  was  much  dis 
puted.  Some  answered  it  peremptorily  in  the  nega 
tive:  the  Sacraments  of  the  living  were  not  instituted 
to  forgive  sins  and  impart  the  first  grace;  moreover 
any  one  that  approaches  a  sacrament  of  the  living  in 
a  state  of  grievous  sin  places  certainly  an  obstacle  to 
the  production  of  grace.  In  spite  of  the  strength  of 
these  reasons,  Suarez  adopts  the  contrary  view,  which 

99  Suarez  alludes  to  the  opinion  of  the  ancient  scholastics  ac 
cording  to  whom  perfect  contrition  was  necessary  to  the  adult, 
in  order  to  receive  Baptism  and  Penance.  Ibid.,  sect.  2. 

1  SUAREZ,  Ibid. —  Hence  the  practice  of  frequent  confession  is 
fully  justified. 


AMOUNT  OF  GRACE  IMPARTED      201 

he  calls  "  magis  pia  et  probabilior,"  and  which  many 
theologians  followed,  after  St.  Thomas.  The  Sacra 
ments  of  the  living  produce  the  first  grace,  when  the 
subject,  guilty  of  a  grievous  fault,  approaches  the  sac 
rament  in  good  faith,  that  is  to  say,  with  the  invincible 
ignorance  of  his  fault,  and  with  attrition.  Suarez  and 
his  followers  think  that,  in  these  conditions,  there  is 
no  obstacle  to  the  production  of  grace.2  This  view 
has  been  generally  adopted,  and  it  is  now  regarded  as 
a  well-grounded  opinion  and  as  one  that  may  be  fol 
lowed  in  practice. 

Another  consequence  of  the  dogma  of  the  efficacy 
pertains  to  the  amount  of  grace  produced  by  the  Sacra 
ments.  As  regards  the  production  of  grace,  the  dis 
positions  of  the  subject  are  conditions  sine  quibus  non, 
as  it  were;  they  aim  at  removing  the  obstacles  that 
might  oppose  the  action  of  the  sacrament.  It  seems, 
then,  that  the  amount  of  grace  imparted  by  the  same 
sacrament  must  be  in  proportion  to  the  perfection  of 
the  dispositions  of  the  subject  who  receives  that  sac 
rament.  When  Christians  equally  disposed  receive 
the  same  sacrament,  they  will  receive  also  the  same 
amount  of  grace;  that  amount  will  not  be  the  same, 
when  the  dispositions  also  are  unequal.  This  is  the 
teaching  of  Suarez  and  of  most  theologians  of  his 
epoch.3 

Although  the  system  adopted  by  Suarez  regarding 
sacramental  causality  hardly  agrees  with  the  revivis- 
cence  of  the  Sacraments,  the  learned  theologian  does 
not  hesitate  to  defend  the  reviviscence.  The  strength 
of  tradition  challenges  all  theological  theories,  it  al- 

2  SUAREZ,  Ibid. 

3  SUAREZ,  Ibid.,  sect.  5. 


202     EFFICACY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ways  triumphs,  sometimes  in  spite  of  system!  Like 
St.  Augustine,  Suarez  teaches 4  the  reviviscence  of 
Baptism,  and  also  of  the  other  two  Sacraments  which 
produce  a  character.  In  fact,  these  Sacraments  can 
not  be  repeated,  and  the  grace  they  confer  is  necessary 
that  their  end  may  be  obtained.  For  a  similar  reason, 
Matrimony  and  Extreme  Unction  must  revive,  as  to 
grace,  if  they  have  been  received  without  the  proper 
dispositions ;  Matrimony  cannot  be  repeated  in  the  life 
time  of  husband  and  wife,  nor  Extreme  Unction  in  the 
same  sickness  and  in  the  same  danger  of  death. 
Suarez  acknowledges  that  even  Penance  may  re 
vive,  supposing  —  what  is  improbable  —  that  this 
sacrament  may  be  valid  without  producing  grace. 
There  is  no  obligation,  he  says,  to  confess  twice  one's 
sins;  should  it  happen  that  these  are  not  forgiven  by 
a  valid,  but  unfruitful  absolution,  they  will  be  for 
given  when  the  penitent  places  himself  in  the  requisite 
dispositions.  As  to  the  Eucharistic  Communion, 
Suarez  declared  that  its  reviviscence  is  more  than 
doubtful.5 

But,  in  order  that  a  sacrament,  which  was  received 
with  insufficient  dispositions,  may  revive,  some  condi 
tions  are  required.  With  a  view  to  determine  them, 
Suarez  proposes  two  hypotheses :  the  sacrament  was 
valid  and  unfruitful,  because  the  subject  approached  it 
either  with  the  consciousness  of  being  insufficiently 
prepared  —  in  which  case  he  commits  a  sacrilege  —  or 
without  being  aware  of  the  insufficiency  of  his  disposi 
tions.  In  the  former  hypothesis,  the  condition  of  re 
viviscence  is  perfect  contrition,  or  attrition  with  sacra- 

4  SUAREZ,  In  3am  Part,  quaest.  69,  art.  10,  disput.  28,  sect.  4. 
*Ibid.,  sect.  6. 


REVIVISCENCE  203 

mental  absolution:  because  reviviscence  cannot  take 
place  as  long  as  the  sacrilege  is  not  forgiven.  In  the 
latter,  attrition  suffices :  in  fact,  the  dispositions  neces 
sary  for  reviviscence  are  the  same  as  those  that  were 
necessary,  at  the  time  when  the  sacrament  was  re 
ceived,  to  make  this  reception  fruitful;  now,  accord 
ing  to  a  well  founded  opinion,  attrition  and  good 
faith  suffice,  in  order  that  even  a  sacrament  of  the 
living  may  produce  the  first  grace. 

Such  are,  according  to  Suarez,  the  conditions  of  the 
reviviscence  of  Baptism.6  He  insinuates  that  these 
conditions  are  the  same  for  the  other  Sacraments.7 
Besides  resting  on  plausible  reasons  this  doctrine  is 
also  confirmed  by  the  authority  of  St.  Thomas,8  who 
holds  the  reviviscence  of  Baptism  and  of  the  other 
Sacraments  that  produce  a  character.  During  the 
I4th.  and  I5th.  centuries,  the  teaching  of  the  Angelic 
Doctor  was  applied  to  most  of  the  Sacraments. 

The  Christian  finds,  then,  in  the  Sacraments,  in 
exhaustible  sources  of  Divine  life,  wonderfully  effi 
cacious  means  of  salvation,  which  unbelievers,  in  their 
moments  of  anguish,  rightly  envy  the  followers  of 
Jesus. 

His  heinous  crime  to  priest  confessed, 
Peace  reigns  within  the  murderer's  breast; 
Far  lesser  deeds  to  God  I  tell, 
Yet  cannot  feel  that  all  is  well.9 

6  Disput.  28,  sect.  4. 

7  Ibid.,  sect.  6. 

8  ST.  THOMAS,  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  4,  qu.  3,  art.  2. 

9  SULLY- PRUDHOMME,  La  Confession. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE    SACRAMENTAL    CHARACTER 

Although  the  character  is  not  an  effect  common  to 
all  the  Sacraments,  it  is  customary,  however,  to  treat 
of  it  in  a  general  study  on  the  theology  of  the  Sacra 
ments.  The  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  char 
acter  is  besides  intimately  connected  with  the  rest  of 
the  doctrine  on  the  Sacraments.  But,  above  all,  one 
could  hardly  have  a  sufficiently  complete  idea  of  the 
history  of  sacramental  efficacy,  if  he  did  not  realize 
the  place  which  the  character  occupies  in  it. 

§  I.     The  Teaching  of  the  Church. 

According  to  the  definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent, 
Baptism,  Confirmation  and  Holy  Orders  impress  upon 
the  soul  a  character,  that  is  to  say  a  spiritual  and  in 
delible  sign  which  renders  a  second  reception  of  any 
one  of  these  three  Sacraments  impossible.1  The 
character  produced  by  the  sacrament  of  Holy  Orders 
constitutes  irrevocably  those  who  receive  it  in  the  sa 
cerdotal  state;  priests  of  the  New  Testament  validly 
ordained  cannot  then,  in  any  case,  return  to  the  lay 
state,  as  it  was  held  by  the  Protestants  condemned  in 
the  23d.  session.2 

1  Sess.  VII,  De  sacramentis  in  gen.,  can.  9 :  Si  quis  dixerit,  in 
tribus   Sacramentis,   Baptismo  scilicet,   Confirmatione  et   Ordine, 
non  imprimi   characterem   in   anima,  hoc   est,   signum  quoddam 
spirituale  et  indelibile,  unde  ea  iterari  non  possunt,  A.  S. 

2  Can.  4,  cap.  iv.    Cf .  A.  THEINER,  op.  tit.,  t.  ii,  p.  133.—  The 

204 


TEACHING  OF  THE  CHURCH         205 

The  Council  does  not  give  more  explanation;  we 
shall  study  later  the  attempts  made  by  theologians  to 
determine  the  nature  of  this  character. 

For  the  time  being,  it  is  important  to  distinguish  it 
carefully  from  grace.  The  latter  may  be  lost;  the 
character,  on  the  contrary,  is  indelible :  it  adheres  to 
the  soul  all  through  the  present  life,  and  although  the 
Church  has  not  defined  it,  nothing  shows  that  it  disap 
pears  at  the  threshold  of  the  future  life. 

The  character  imparts  some  aptitudes.  The  bap 
tismal  character  makes  one  fit  to  receive  the  other 
Sacraments:  as  a  matter  of  fact,  any  one  who  is  not 
baptized  cannot  receive  them  validly.  The  Eucha 
rist  alone  might  exist  in  a  soul  not  adorned  with  the 
character  of  a  Christian,  for  the  consecration  and  the 
real  presence  are  independent  of  the  reception  of  this 
sacrament;  however,  it  would  produce  in  that  soul 
no  grace,  no  supernatural  effect.  The  priestly  charac 
ter  gives  the  active  power  of  administering  the  Sacra 
ments  to  others;  it  invests  the  priest  with  a  real 
spiritual  might  and  with  a  real  supernatural  fecun 
dity.  Grace,  on  the  contrary,  confers  no  sacra 
mental  power;  it  merely  sanctifies  the  soul,  makes  it 
pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God  and  capable  of  enjoying, 
after  death,  the  happiness  of  the  elect.  As  long  as 
it  is  not  lost,  grace  is  a  sure  token  of  salvation. 
Taken  by  itself,  the  character  offers  no  guarantee  of 

doctrine  condemned  by  the  above  canon  is  that  of  LUTHER,  De 
capt.  babyl,  De  sacr.  ordinis,  t.  ii,  p.  299:  Quantum  ergo  e  Scrip- 
turis  docemur,  cum  ministerium  sit,  id  quod  nos  sacerdotium 
vocamus,  prorsus  non  video,  qua  ratione  rursus  nequeat  laicus 
fieri  semel  sacerdos  factus,  cum  a  laico  nihil  differat,  nisi  minis- 
terio.  .  .  .  Nam  commentum  illud  caracteris  indelebilis,  jam 
olim  irrisum  est.  Concede  ut  caracterem  hunc  Papa  imprimat 
ignorante  Christo 


206     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

this  kind ;  unless  it  is  accompanied  with  grace,  it  can 
not  open  for  us  the  gates  of  Heaven. 

Moreover,  grace  may  be  obtained  even  though  the 
sacrament  is  not  received,  for  instance  as  when  a  man 
is  justified  by  perfect  contrition;  whilst,  in  order  to  re 
ceive  the  character,  one  must  have  recourse  to  the 
sacramental  rite.  The  catechumen  who  would  have 
been  justified  by  charity,  must  nevertheless  be  baptized 
in  order  to*  be  able  to  receive  the  other  Sacraments  of 
the  Church. 

The  Reformers  denied  altogether  the  doctrine  of 
the  character,  under  pretence  that  it  was  foreign  to 
the  teaching  of  the  Bible  and  of  the  Fathers : 

"  Quod  de  charactere  indelebili  fabulantur,  ex  eadem  [in- 
doctorum  monachorum]  prodiit  officina:  nam  veteribus  hoc 
ignotum  fuit,  et  magis  consentaneum  est  incantationibus 
magicis,  quam  sanae  Evangelii  doctrinae.  Eadem  ergo  fa 
cilitate  repudiabitur,  qua  excogitatum  fuit."  3 

Thus,  the  dogma  of  the  production  of  the  character 
is  a  mere  human  invention,  a  mistake  due  to  eccle 
siastical  ignorance.  According  to  the  Protestant 
theologian,  Martin  Chemnitz4  (fi586),  the  first  au 
thor  who  spoke  of  it  was  Pope  Innocent  III.  In 
fact,  the  mistake  was  on  the  side  of  the  Reformers ; 
for,  some  eight  centuries  before  Innocent  III,  St.  Au 
gustine  had  exposed  quite  clearly  'the  theology  of  the 
sacramental  character  in  his  discussions  with  the  Dona- 
tists.  On  this  point  the  representatives  of  Liberal 
Protestantism  do  justice  to  St.  Augustine.  How 
ever,  far  from  looking  upon  his  teaching  as  an  exposi 
tion  of  the  traditional  practice  of  the  Church,  they  see 

3  CALVIN,  Antidotum  concilii  Tridentini,  ad  sess.  VII,  can.  9. 
Cf.  LUTHER,  De  Captivitate  babyl.,  De  sacr.  ordinis,  Ibid. 
*Examen  concilii  Tridentini,  P.  2,  in  can.  9,  sess.  VII. 


TEACHING  OF  THE  CHURCH        207 

in  it  a  merely  polemical  device,  by  which  the  holy 
Doctor  strove  to  solve  the  contradictions  found  in  his 
sacramental  system.5 

These  Protestant  errors  are  easily  accounted  for  by 
the  fact  that  neither  in  Scripture  nor  in  ancient  au 
thors  do  we  find  a  formal  teaching  about  the  doctrine 
of  the  character.  It  is  to  the  life  of  the  early  Church 
and  to  her  practices  that  we  must  apply  to  find  the 
principles  which  contain  that  doctrine  and  which, 
by  growing,  will  manifest  it  to  the  Catholic  conscious 
ness.  Now,  positive  theology  alone,  based  as  it  is  on 
the  doctrine  of  the  development  of  dogma,  is  able  to 
accomplish  this  task.  Protestant  theologians  who  op 
pose  a  priori  any  dogmatic  progress,  can  only  be  mis 
taken  and  considered  "  inventors  "  of  dogma,  authors 
who,  like  St.  Augustine,  simply  draw  from  the  practice 
of  the  Church  the  dogmatic  explanation  which  it  im 
plies. 

The  custom,  as  old  as  Christianity  itself,  of  not  re 
peating  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  Order,  at  least 
when  they  had  been  conferred  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
as  well  as  the  use  of  the  term  Sphragis  (S^/aayk,  seal) 
to  designate  Baptism  and  Confirmation,  implied  on 
the  part  of  Christians,  the  belief  that  something 
definitive  was  produced  by  these  three  Sacraments. 
This  implicit  faith  of  the  early  ages  was  brought 
out  by  St.  Augustine  who  claims,  as  we  shall  see 
later  on,  merely  to  explain  the  custom  of  the  non- 
repetition,  by  means  of  his  doctrine  of  the  character. 
Finally,  after  setting  forth  again  in  its  full  light  the 
dogma  which  the  warm  discussions  concerning  the 
value  of  the  ordination  of  intruders  and  simoniacs 
during  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages  had  ob- 

6  A.  HARNACK,  History  of  Dogma,  vol.  5,  pp.  157  ff. 


208     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

scured,  the  theologians  of  the  I3th.  century  endeavored 
to  define  the  nature  of  the  sacramental  character  by 
means  of  Aristotelian  philosophy  and  of  the  doctrine 
of  Christ's  priesthood. 

Such  is,  in  its  outlines,  the  development  of  the 
dogma  on  which  we  are  now  engaged. 

§  II.  From  the  Beginning  of  the  Church  to  St.  Augustine 
—  Three  Sacraments  Not  Repeated  —  The  Doctrine  of  the 
Sphragis. 

The  non-repetition,  in  the  primitive  Church,  of  Bap 
tism  and  of  its  complement,  Confirmation,  when  they 
were  deemed  validly  conferred,  is  an  indisputable  his 
torical  fact,  which  was  illustrated  most  clearly  by  the 
Baptismal  controversy.  Both  rebaptizers  and  anti- 
rebaptizers  agreed  that,  when  validly  administered, 
Baptism  cannot  be  repeated.  The  dispute  bore  ex 
clusively  on  the  conditions  required  for  the  validity 
of  Baptism ;  some  demanding,  on  the  part  of  the  minis 
ter,  orthodoxy  of  faith;  others  declaring  it  unneces 
sary.  Hence  St.  Cyprian  and  his  followers  indig 
nantly  protested  against  the  charge  of  rebaptism  which 
was  flung  at  them.  They  did  not  n?baptize  the  con 
verts  from  heresy,  they  baptized  them,  since,  in  their 
eyes,  the  sacrament  received  in  heresy  was  void. 

"  Nos  autem  dicimus  eos  qui  inde  [ab  haeresi]  veniunt 
non  rebaptizari  apud  nos  sed  baptizari.  Neque  enim  acci- 
piunt  illic  aliquid  ubi  nihil  est,  sed  veniunt  ad  nos  ut  hie 
accipiant  ubi  et  gratia  et  veritas  omnis  est,  quia  et  gratia  et 
veritas  una  est."  6 

Any  valid  Baptism  must  not  be  repeated:  this  is  the 
6  ST.  CYPRIAN,  Ep.  Ixxi,  i. 


GERMINAL  STATE  OF  DOCTRINE      209 

steady  teaching  of  the  Church  during  the  first  cen 
turies. 

Nor  was  the  rite  that  conferred  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  completed  Baptism  repeated,  when  it  was  looked 
upon  as  valid;  but  in  the  time  of  St.  Cyprian,  and 
even  for  several  centuries  after,  it  was  considered 
such,  only  when  it  had  been  administered  by  the 
Catholic  Church.  For  even  the  churches  which  ac 
knowledged  the  value  of  the  Baptism  of  heretics,  re 
jected,  nevertheless,  the  rite  of  Confirmation  con 
ferred  by  them.7  As  our  readers  remember,  St. 
Cyprian  and  his  friends  availed  themselves  of  this  fact 
to  charge  the  anti-rebaptizers  with  inconsistency.8  It 
seemed  to  them  that  there  was  no  more  reason  for 
holding  the  value  of  the  Baptism  of  heretics  than  for 
holding  the  value  of  the  rest  of  their  initiation. 

Even  as  late  as  the  5th.  century,  we  find  the  custom 
of  repeating  the  rite  of  Confirmation  that  had  been 
performed  by  heretics.  The  seventh  Canon  of  Con 
stantinople  prescribes  to  reconcile  the  heretics  whose 
Baptism  is  accepted,  by  marking  them  and  consecrating 
them  "  with  Holy  Chrism  on  the  face,  the  eyes,  the 
nose,  the  mouth  and  the  ears,"  whilst  this  formula 
was  recited :  The  seal  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.9 
In  Gaul,  the  second  synod  of  Aries,  held  in  443  or  452, 
commands  to  reconcile  the  Bonosians  by  the  unction 
with  chrism  and  the  laying-on  of  hands.10  The 
eighth  Canon  of  the  first  synod,  held  in  that  town  in 
314,  had  previously  decided  that  hands  should  be  im- 

7  DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  1904,  p.  340. 

8  Epist.  Ixxiii,  6. 

9  HEFELE,  Hist,  of  Councils,  vol.  II,  p.  367.    This  is  the  very 
rite  of  confirmation  in  use  among  the  Greeks. 

10  HEFELE,  vol.  Ill,  p.  169.     See  MORIN,  De  administ.  Sacram. 
Paenit,  lib.  IX,  cap.  9-13. 


210     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

posed  on  the  converts  from  heresy,  that  they  might  re 
ceive  the  Holy  Ghost.11  Gennadius  of  Marseilles12 
who  lived  towards  the  end  of  the  5th.  century  and  the 
Benedictine  Walafrid  Strabo 13  (1849)  testify  the 
same  practice.  Hefele  14  thinks  that  the  famous  letter 
of  Pope  St.  Stephen  to  St.  Cyprian  contains  an  allusion 
to  the  repetition  of  the  rite  which  imparted  the  Holy 
Ghost,  when  conferred  by  heretics.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  this  was  the  meaning  in  which  the  letter  was 
taken  by  St.  Cyprian  and  his  followers. 

However,  in  the  countries  where  the  Roman  rite 
was  followed,  the  reconciliation  of  heretics  was  made, 
at  an  early  period,  without  the  unction  of  chrism,  by 
the  imposition  of  hands  alone,  or  even  by  a  mere  pro 
fession  of  faith.  This  Pope  St.  Gregory  the  Great 
states  expressly  in  his  letter  to  Quirinus,15  and  that 
Roman  custom,  he  declares,  is  ancient  (ab  antiqua 
patrum  institutione  didicimus).  Hence  it  was  not  in 
all  churches  that  the  rite  of  the  Confirmation  of  here 
tics  was  looked  upon  as  null  and  therefore  repeated. 

Nevertheless,  the  cases  in  which  this  rite  was  ac 
tually  repeated  are  so  many,  that  their  number  can  but 
impress  a  theologian  and  command  his  attention.  It 
seems  now  certain  that  an  heretical  minister  can  validly 
give  Confirmation;  on  the  other  hand,  the  ancient 
practice  of  the  Church  seems  contrary  to  this  belief. 
How  are  we  to  reconcile  the  doctrine  with  the  facts? 

The  celebrated  Jesuit  Maldonatus  (11583)  solved 
the  antinomy  by  declaring  that,  differently  from  Bag- 

11  HEFELE,  vol.  I,  p.  188. 

12  De  Ecclesiasticis  dogmatibus,  52. 

13  De  rebus  eccleslasticis,  26. 
14O/>.  cit.,  vol.  I,  p.  112. 
™Epist.  xi,  67. 


THREE  SACRAMENTS  NOT  REPEATED    211 

tism,  Confirmation  conferred  by  an  heretical  minister, 
is  null:  for  Confirmation  is  intended  to  impart  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and,  according  to  the  teaching  of  the 
whole  Christian  antiquity,  the  Holy  Spirit  cannot  be 
given  outside  the  Catholic  Church.16  John  Morin 
records  this  view  and  does  not  condemn  it.  "  Quid 
in  hac  assertione  sit  periculi  perspicue  non  video."  17 
The  Dictionnaire  de  theologie  of  Goschler 18  also 
speaks  of  it  with  indulgence.  True,  it  is  not  opposed 
to  the  formal  definitions  of  the  Church,  since  the 
Council  of  Trent 19  decided  only  on  the  validity  of 
Baptism  conferred  by  heretics;  but  it  disagrees  with 
the  common  teaching  of  the  Schools  concerning  the 
conditions  of  validity  required  in  the  minister  of  the 
Sacraments. 

Hence  Chardon  chose  rather  to  say  that,  by  using 
the  rite  of  Confirmation  for  the  reconciliation  of  here 
tics,  the  Church  did  not  intend  to  give  them  again 
this  sacrament,  but  merely  to  impart  to  them  the  Holy 
Spirit:  "  If  I  am  allowed  to  express  my  views  on  so 
intricate  a  subject,  I  may  say  plainly  that  in  most 
churches  some  heretics  were  received  into  the  Catholic 
unity  with  the  same  rites  as  those  of  the  sacrament 
of  Confirmation;  this  also  I  say  that  it  was  not  this 

16  Disputationes  de  sacramentis ,  De  confirmatione,  quaest.  I  et 
2.     Opera  theologica,  Paris,  1677,  t.  i,  pp.  76,  79:  Proprius  autem 
effectus  confirmationis  est  dare  Spiritual  Sanctum,  quod  omnes 
antiqui  contenderunt  fieri  non  posse  apud  haereticos   .    .   .    quod 
ea  confirmatio  quae  a  catholicis  episcopis  data  fuit,  non  debeat 
repeti,  semper  fuit  certum    .    .    .     :  tamen  an  confirmatio  data 
ab  episcopis  haereticis  repeti  debeat  in  Ecclesia  catholica  non  ita 
fuit  certum ;  imo  existimo  in  tota  veteri  Ecclesia  fuisse  repetitam, 
quia  non  existimabatur  esse  vera  confirmatio. 

17  MORIN,  op.  cit.,  lib.  IX,  cap.  xi,  6. 

18  Article  "  Sacrement." 

19  Sess.  VII,  De  baptismo,  can.  4. 

IS 


212     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

sacrament  which  was  administered  to  them,  for  when 
using  those  rites  for  the  reconciliation  of  heretics,  the 
Church  authorities  did  not  intend  to  confirm  them  a 
second  time,  but  merely  to  obtain  for  them  the  grace 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  they  might  be  united  interiorly 
and  profitably  to  the  body  of  the  Church."  20 

This  solution  seems  arbitrary,  for  the  intention  is 
determined  by  the  end  the  ministers  of  the  Church 
had  in  view,  in  repeating  the  rite  of  Confirmation,  and 
this  end  was  the  same  as  in  the  administration  of  the 
sacrament  of  Confirmation  to  Catholics,  namely,  to 
impart  the  Holy  Spirit. 

In  truth  the  problem  becomes  far  more  simple,  if  we 
bear  in  mind  that  at  that  time  the  sacramental  nature 
of  Confirmation  was  not  yet  sufficiently  brought  out 
and  that,  owing  to  the  still  imperfect  state  of  sacra- 
mentary  theology,  the  conditions  of  the  validity  of  the 
Sacraments  had  not  been  determined  as  accurately  as 
might  have  been  desired.  The  several  instances  in 
which  the  rite  of  Confirmation  was  repeated  interest 
the  history  of  the  dogma  of  efficacy,  as  well  as  the 
history  of  the  dogma  of  the  sacramental  character. 
They  belong  to  the  same  category  as  the  repetitions  <  f 
the  Ordination  that  had  been  conferred  by  intruders 
and  simoniacs  during  the  early  part  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  they  also  are  accounted  for  by  the  un 
defined  state  of  the  sacramental  doctrine  at  the  time. 
Here  it  may  suffice  to  remark  that  Confirmation  was 
not  repeated,  when  considered  valid,  that  is  to  say 
when  conferred  in  the  Catholic  Church.  Now  on  this 
point,  all  agree. 

Strong  and  many  indeed  are  the  motives  why  Bap- 

• 20  Histoire  de  la  Confirmation,  chap.  v. 


THREE  SACRAMENTS  NOT  REPEATED    213 

tism  and  Confirmation,  once  validly  administered, 
should  not  be  repeated.  They  are  the  Sacraments  of 
Christian  initiation,  and  no  initiation  is  ever  repeated. 
He  who  is  baptized  and  confirmed  is  incorporated  into 
Christ,  shares  in  His  redemption,  lives  with  His  life,  is 
a  member  of  the  Christian  society  of  which  he  has 
become  a  subject.  This  initiatory  consecration  pro 
duces  something  definitive.  This  is  why  those  among 
the  faithful  that  had  lost  the  grace  of  their  Baptism  by 
grievous  sins  and  consequently  had  been  temporarily 
excluded  from  the  Christian  society,  were  reinstated 
in  it,  not  by  another  initiation,  but  by  penitential  ex 
ercises  followed  by  a  solemn  reconciliation.  Hence, 
in  the  eyes  of  the  Church  of  the  early  ages,  the  Sacra 
ments  of  the  initiation  produced  something  that  is  not 
to  be  repeated. 

Later  on,  St.  Augustine  will  merely  develop  this 
view  still  confused  at  the  time  which  we  are  now  con 
sidering,  when  he  explains  the  traditional  practice  of 
the  non-repetition  of  Baptism  and  of  Order  by  the 
"  consecration  "  they  impart  to  man : 

"  Utrumque  enim  [baptismus  et  ordinatio]  sacramentum 
est;  et  quadam  consecratione  utrumque  homini  datur;  illud 
cum  baptizatur;  istud  cum  ordinatur;  ideoque  in  Catholica 
utrumque  non  licet  iterari."  21 

For  Ordination,  when  looked  upon  as  valid,  was  re 
peated  in  the  primitive  Church  no  more  than  Baptism 
and  Confirmation.  It  placed  forever  anyone  wrho  re 
ceived  it  among  the  ministers  of  the  Church;  on  this 
account  it  had  a  permanent  effect. 

On  this  point  a  few  explanations  are  needed  that 

21  Contra  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  28. 


214     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

we  may  not  overestimate  the  bearing  of  this  fact  on 
the  development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  sacramental 
character.  When  a  cleric,  owing  to  his  unworthiness, 
deserved  to  be  deprived  of  his  functions,  certainly  he 
was  not  reordained,  if  later  on  the  ecclesiastical  au 
thorities  deemed  it  advisable  to  restore  him  to  his 
former  charge.  But,  according  to  John  Morin,22 
until  the  year  350  this  restoration  occurred  very  sel 
dom  for  the  members  of  the  clergy  who,  after  their 
ordination,  had  passed  over  to  heresy  and  had  come 
back  afterwards  to  the  Catholic  Church.  They  were 
received  among  the  laity.  This  measure  was  merely 
disciplinary ;  nothing  shows  that  we  should  look  upon 
it  as  an  expression  of  the  belief  that  a  minister  who 
becomes  a  heretic  loses  the  powers  of  his  ordination. 
Besides,  St.  Augustine  testifies  that,  in  his  time,  the 
bishops  that  had  been  converted  from  heresy  were 
sometimes  reinstated  in  the  functions  they  had  exer 
cised  before  their  apostasy,  and  yet  were  never  reor 
dained.23 

Hence  we  may  affirm  without  fear  of  contradiction 
that  the  ordination  conferred  in  the  Catholic  Church 
was  never  repeated  legitimately  during  the  early  cen 
turies.  Bishops,  priests  and  deacons  who  had  them 
selves  reordained,  were  deposed,  as  well  as  the  minister 
who  had  consented  to  repeat  the  laying-on  of  hands.24 

Was  the  same  practice  observed  regarding  the  or 
dinations  conferred  in  the  heretical  sects?  Did  the 
Church,  in  the  beginning,  consider  valid  all  these  or 
dinations?  Most  authors  think  that  during  the  first 

22  De  sacr.  Eccles.  ordinal.,  pars  III3,  exercit.,  V,  cap.  x. 

23  Contra  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  28. 

^Apostolic    Canons,    can.    68;    FUNK,    Didascalia    et   Constit. 
ApostoL,  vol.  I,  p.  585. 


THREE  SACRAMENTS  NOT  REPEATED    215 

five  centuries,  any  ordination  performed  according  to 
the  ritual  of  the  Church  by  heretics,  schismatics,  in 
truders  or  those  that  had  been  excommunicated,  was 
deemed  valid  and  was  not  repeated.25  However,  John 
Morin  is  less  positive :  he  quotes  several  texts  which 
might  lead  one  to  infer  that  in  several  Churches  the 
ordination  of  heretics  was  not  accepted.26  At  all 
events,  supposing  that  heretical  ordinations  were  at 
times  repeated  during  the  early  ages,  this  repetition, 
like  that  of  the  heretical  Baptism,  can  be  accounted  for 
by  the  imperfect  state  of  the  sacramental  doctrine; 
it  proves  that  the  ideas  about  the  conditions  of  the 
validity  of  the  Sacraments  were  still  rather  confused. 
It  would  be  a  mistake,  however,  to  think  that,  because 
of  these  instances  of  repetition,  theologians  are  not 
justified  in  looking  to  the  practice  of  the  Church  for 
the  basis  of  the  doctrine  of  character.  For  if  some 
ordinations  were  repeated  —  and  this  must  be  said 
also  of  Baptism  and  of  Confirmation  —  it  was  be 
cause  they  were  looked  upon  as  null.  Had  not  this 
been  the  case,  nobody  would  have  ever  thought  of  re 
peating  these  Sacraments;  it  was  always  understood 
that,  when  they  were  considered  valid,  nothing  was  to 
be  done  over  again.  Out  of  this  practice,  as  much  as 
out  of  the  teaching  concerning  the  Sphragis,  the  doc 
trine  of  the  character  will  be  developed. 


The  use  of  the  word  cr<£payi'£eu>  to  signify  certain 
operations  of  God  in  the  soul,  is  of  Apostolic  origin. 
St.  Paul  uses  this  term  in  the  Second  Epistle  to  the 

28  MANY,  De  sacra  ordinatione,  p.  57. 
26  Op.  cit.,  ibid.,  cap.  vii. 


216     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

Corinthians  2T  when  speaking  of  the  Apostolic  calling 
with  which,  as  with  a  seal,  he  wras  marked  by  God, 
together  with  Sylvanus  and  Timothy.  In  a  similar 
sense,  the  Savior  declares  in  the  sixth  chapter  28  of 
St.  John's  Gospel,  that  He  was  marked  with  a  seal  by 
God  the  Father. 

It  is  most  probable,  also,  that  St.  Paul  designates, 
under  the  symbol  of  a  seal,  the  action  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  baptized  Christian.29  When  reminding 
the  Ephesians  of  their  altogether  gratuitous  calling  to 
faith  and  to  the  participation  in  the  blessings  of 
Christ's  redemption,  he  tells  them  that  they  received  a 
pledge  of  the  future  heavenly  inheritance  in  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  stamped  them  with  its  seal 
when  they  believed  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  Dur 
ing  the  Apostolic  age,  all  those  that  heard  the  word  of 
truth  and  believed  in  it,  were  immediately  baptized 
and  received  the  Holy  Ghost  through  the  laying-on  of 
hands.  Thus  they  were  "  marked  with  the  seal  "  of 
the  Divine  Spirit  "  unto  the  day  of  [final]  redemp 
tion."  30  Those  that  receive  this  seal,  then,  have  a 
right  to  salvation ;  and  since,  as  St.  Paul  declares  quite 
often,  it  is  Baptism  that  imparts  salvation,  we  may 
think  that,  in  the  Apostle's  mind,  this  spiritual  seal  'is 
in  close  relation  with  Baptism  and  with  the  rite  which 
conferred  the  Holy  Spirit. 

This  inference,  which  remains  more  or  less  prob 
lematic,  is  confirmed  by  the  writings  of  the  Apostolic 
Fathers,  in  which  the  term  sphragis  is  currently  ap 
plied  to  designate  Baptism  and  its  effects.  No  doubt, 

27 II  Cor.,  i,  22. 
28  vi,  27. 
29£M,i,  13. 
30  Id.,  iv,  3Q, 


THE  SPHRAGIS  IN  2ND.  CENTURY     217 

these  early  authors  do  not  ascribe  the  origin  of  this 
application  to  the  Pauline  Epistles  —  this  will  be  done 
only  in  the  4th.  century.31  But  the  almost  universal 
mention  of  the  baptismal  sphragis  in  the  2d.  century 
can  scarcely  be  accounted  for,  had  it  been  altogether 
unknown  to  the  Apostolic  Age. 

Hernias  calls  sphragis  sometimes  the  baptismal  ab 
lution,32  sometimes  too  its  effects.33  The  Secunda 
dementis  exhorts  the  faithful  to  preserve  immaculate 
the  sphragis,  that  is  to  say,  not  to  sin  any  more  after 
Baptism:  for  those  who  will  preserve  it  intact  will 
obtain  life  everlasting,34  whilst  those  who  will  violate 
it  will  be  lost.35  We  must  probably  see  an  allusion  to 
the  state  of  the  baptized  Christian  in  the  "  gleaming 
seal "  worn  by  the  people  of  Rome  whom  Abercius 
visited.36  The  same  terminology  is  found  in  the 
apocryphal  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Following  on  the 
footsteps  of  his  predecessors,  Clement  of  Alexandria 
applies  the  name  sphragis  of  the  Lord  to  the  Baptism  37 
conferred  on  the  young  man  who  had  been  converted 
by  St.  John,  and  that  of  sphragis  to  the  rite  which  im 
parted  the  Holy  Ghost.38 

The  Latin  Fathers  of  the  first  half  of  the  3d.  century 

31  St.  John  Chrysostom  thinks  that  //  Cor.  i,  32  and  Ephes. 
i,   13,  mention  the  baptismal  Sphragis.     So  also  does   St.   Am 
brose,  De  Spirit,  i,  78. 

32  Shepherd,  Sim.  ix,  16. 

33  Sim.  viii,  63. 

34  //  Clem.,  viii,  6. 

35  Id.,  vii,  6. 

36  Inscription  of  Abercius,  verse  9.     [For  an  English  transla 
tion  of  this  inscription,   Cf.  LOWRIE,  Monuments  of  the  Early 
Church,   pp.   235-236;   cf.    Catholic  Encyclopedia,   art.   Abercius. 
Tr.] 

37  Quis  dives  salvetur,  42. 
SBStromat.,  ii,  3. 


218     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

designate  also  the  two  Sacraments  of  the  Christian 
initiation  by  equivalent  expressions.  According  to 
Tertullian,  Baptism  is  the  signaculum  of  faith,39  the 
seal  with  which  it  is  marked  (obsignata)  by  the  Di 
vine  Trinity.40  For  in  Baptism,  the  Christian  seems 
to  renounce  the  pomps  of  Satan;  in  case  he  is  un 
faithful,  he  violates  the  signaculum  of  his  faith: 

"  Hoc  [quidquid  Deo  displicet]  erit  pompa  diaboli,  adver- 
sus  quam  in  signaculo  fidei  ejeramus.  Caeterum  nonne  eje- 
ramus  et  rescindimus  signaculum,  rescindendo  testationem 
ejus?"41 

In  Confirmation,  the  body  of  the  Christian  is 
"  signed  "  with  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  order  to  be 
strengthened.42  Likewise  St.  Cyprian  declares  that, 
after  their  Baptism,  the  neophytes  receive  the  Holy 
Ghost  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  Bishop, 
accompanied  with  a  prayer,  and  that  they  are  after 
wards  fully  initiated  by  the  signaculum  of  the  Lord, 
(signaculo  dominico  consummentur.)43 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  see  in  these  various  terms 
a  teaching  properly  so  called  about  the  sacramental 
character.  The  writers  of  that  remote  epoch  make  no 
distinction  between  the  effects  of  Baptism.  By  the 
same  word,  sphragis,  they  designate  both  what  is  in 
delible  in  these  effects  and  what  may  be  lost  through 
sin;  for  they  consider  all  of  them  together  and  do  not 

39  De  spectaculis,  xxiv,  4.     Cf.  De  pudic.,  g. 

40  De  bapt.,  vi,  13.     Cf.  De  paen.,  6.     According  to  Tertullian, 
Baptism  is  the  signaculum  of  the  troth  of  the  new  Christian : 
it  seals  the  covenant  between  him  and  God. 

41  De  speciac.,  24. 

42  De  resurrect,  carnis,  8. 

Ixxiii,  9. 


THE  SPHRAGIS  IN  4TH.  CENTURY     219 

think  of  making  an  analysis  of  them.  The  sphragis 
signifies  the  state  of  sanctity  in  which  Baptism  and 
Confirmation  place  the  Christian;  and  as  his  sanctity 
may  be  destroyed  by  faults  committed  after  Baptism, 
the  sphragis  also  may  be  lost.  Hence  Hernias  and  the 
IP  dementis  entreat  earnestly  the  Christian  not  to 
violate  their  sphragis,  and  Tertullian,  not  to  "  rescind  " 
the  signaculum  of  their  faith.  Nay,  according  to 
Hermas,  the  baptismal  sphragis  is  restored  by  pen 
ance  in  those  who  had  broken  it  through  their  sins.44 
The  formal  distinction  between  grace  and  the  char 
acter  then,  is  unknown  at  that  time ;  St.  Augustine  will 
be  the  first  who  states  it  clearly.  Yet  it  is  found,  al 
though  hidden,  in  the  texts  pertaining  to  the  sphragis 
and  out  of  these  it  will  be  developed  more  and  more 
distinctly  in  the  progress  of  doctrine:  this  we  are 
going  to  see  in  the  history  of  the  4th.  century. 


When  explaining  to  the  faithful  the  effects  of  Bap 
tism  and  of  Confirmation,  the  Fathers  of  the  4th. 
century  describe  the  sphragis  and  the  signaculum,  in 
terms  and  by  means  of  comparisons  which  express  a 
doctrine  of  the  character,  to  which  St.  Augustine  will 
have  but  little  to  add.  We  may  begin  with  the  Greek 
Fathers. 

St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (f386)  may  be  looked  upon 
as  the  representative  of  the  Greek  theology  of  the 
sphragis  during  the  4th.  century.  We  shall  expose  his 
views  and  complete  them,  when  need  be,  by  those  of 
St.  Basil,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  Gregory  of 
Nyssa  and  St.  John  Chrysostom,  who  hold  a  similar 
doctrine  about  the  sphragis. 

4*  Sim.  viii,  6. 


220     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

According  to  the  custom  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers, 
Baptism  is  designated,  in  the  4th.  century,  by  the  term 
sphragis.45  Yet  this  word  is  used  chiefly  to  signify 
that  which  is  produced  in  the  soul  by  the  sacrament. 

The  baptismal  sphragis  is  the  seal  with  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  marks  the  soul,  whilst  Baptism  is  being 

administered  (TO  Kal  vvv  Kara  rov  Kaipov  rov  /3a7TTicrfJLaTO<s 
<r</>payi£ov  [TO  IIv€i5/>ta]  aou  TTJV  i/a^y)  .  46  The  Spirit 

which  foretold  Christ  by  the  Prophets  and  wrought 
wonders  in  the  Apostles,  even  now  seals  souls  in  Bap 

tism     («>    ftaTrriafJiaTL    ox/>payi£ei     Tas    i/ar^as).47      Like    the 

sheep  of  a  flock,  the  Jews  of  old  were  marked 
with  circumcision;  whilst  the  Christians  are  stamped 
with  the  Spirit,  as  it  behooves  children  of 
God.48 

The  properties  of  the  baptismal  sphragis  are  de 
scribed.  It  is  spiritual  (  Trveu/xaTi/o;  )  ,  beneficial  to 
the  soul  (  crMTrjpwSyj  )  ,  and  simply  wonderful  (flav/xcuna).49 
It  is  holy  and  cannot  be  destroyed  (ayia,  d/caraAvTo?)  ;  49a 
nor  can  it  be  erased  from  the  soul,  it  is  indelible 


We  can  get  a  glimpse  of  the  idea  the  Greek  Fa 
thers  had  of  the  intimate  nature  of  the  baptismal 
sphragis,  from  the  study  of  the  comparisons  they  give 
of  it  :  comparisons  which  St.  Augustine  will  take  up 
later  on. 

The  sphragis  is  a  seal  that  protects  us,  it  is  a  Divine 
pledge.  God  marks  us  with  His  seal,  to  show  that  we 

45  ST.  CYRIL,  Procat.,  16;  ST.  GREG.  NAZ.,  Oral,  xl,  4,  15. 

46  ST.  CYRIL,  Cat.,  iv,  16. 

47  Cat.  xvi,  24.     Cf.  Cat.  in,  4  ;  xvii,  35. 

48  ST.  JOHN  CHRYS.,  In  Ephes.,  horn,  ii,  2. 

49  ST.  CYRIL,  Cat.,  i,  3. 
w&Procatech.,  16. 
^Procatech.,  17. 


THE  SPHRAGIS  IN  4TH.  CENTURY     221 

belong  to  Him,  and  thus  to  guard  us  from  the  inroads 
of  our  enemies.  A  sealed  treasure  is  perfectly  safe, 
it  cannot  be  easily  stolen  by  thieves ;  51  a  sheep  that 
bears  the  mark  of  its  master's  property,  will  be  left 
alone ;  nobody  will  dare  seize  it.52  The  formidable 
dragon  will  not  swallow  up  the  soul  stamped  with  the 
seal  of  God,  but  will  flee  away  from  it.53  Even  as 
the  exterminating  Angel  spared  formerly  those  whose 
houses  bore  the  sign  agreed  upon,  whilst  he  struck 
the  others,54  so  also  the  soul,  bearing  the  seal,  the 
mark  of  Divine  property,  will  be  protected,  whilst  that 
which  is  deprived  of  it  cannot  escape  perdition. 

The  sphragis  is  also  a  distinctive  sign  of  the  Chris 
tian.  It  is  the  mystical  impress  (^VO-TLKYJ  o-^payts),  with 
which  Christ  marks  the  sheep  that  make  up  His  flock, 
just  as  shepherds  mark  with  a  sign  the  sheep  that  be 
long  to  them.  If  we  wish  to  be  placed  at  the  right 
of  the  Supreme  Pastor  and  be  acknowledged  by  Him, 
on  the  day  of  judgment,  we  ought  to  have  recourse  to 
the  sphragis.55  Those  that  bear  the  mark  of  Christ 
the  Angels  and  the  demons  acknowledge  as  belong 
ing  to  the  Christian  family ;  whilst,  at  the  sight  of  this 
sign,  the  devils  tremble,  drop  their  arms,  and  take  to 
flight,  the  Angels,  on  the  contrary,  hasten  to  the  Chris 
tian,  as  to  a  familiar  friend  (oiKetov).56  Military 
commanders  give  a  distinctive  mark  to  their  re 
spective  soldiers,  in  order  that  the  latter  may  recog 
nize  one  another  and  not  be  exposed  to  most  disas- 

51  ST.    BASIL,    Horn.    XIII.    in    Baptisma,    4;    ST.    GREGORY 
NAZ.,  Or.  xl,  4. 

52  ST.  GREG.  NAZ.,  Ibid.,  15. 

53  ST.  CYRIL,  Cat.,  iii,  12. 

54  ST.  BASIL,  Ibid.    ST.  GREG.  NAZ.,  /.  c. 

55  ST.  CYRIL,  Cat.,  i,  3. 

56  ST.  CYRIL.,  Cat.,  i,  3. 


222     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

trous  mistakes  in  the  heat  of  the  fight.  Likewise  the 
sphragis  serves  to  distinguish,  in  the  fight  against  the 
passions,  those  that  are  on  the  side  of  God,  and  those 
that  are  on  the  side  of  the  evil  spirit;  it  points  out  to 
the  Angels  those  whom  they  ought  to  assist ; 5T  and  if, 
whilst  the  battle  is  going  on,  there  are  deserters,  the 
sphragis  manifests  their  shame  to  the  sight  of  all 
men.58 

The  sphragis  is  then  a  spiritual,  beneficial  and  in 
delible  seal,  with  which  the  Holy  Spirit  marks  the 
souls  of  Christians,  in  order  to  protect  them  and  to 
show  that  the  faithful  are  a  part  of  the  flock  and  of 
the  army  of  Christ.  Such  is  the  teaching  of  the 
Greek  Fathers  about  the  sphragis. 

This  teaching  concerns  not  only  the  sphragis  of 
Baptism,  but  also  that  of  Confirmation.  For  when 
they  set  forth  their  teaching,  the  Fathers  have  in  view 
the  Christian,  that  is  to  say,  him  who  is  baptized  and 
confirmed;  and  their  remarks  concerning  the  two 
sphragis  mingle  together  in  such  a  way  that  at  times  it 
becomes  impossible  to  distinguish  them. 

But  when  the  writers  of  the  4th.  century  speak  of 
the  unction  with  chrism,  which  follows  Baptism,  they 
mention  expressly  the  sphragis  of  Confirmation. 
Whilst  the  chrism  flows  on  the  forehead  of  the  neo 
phyte,  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  declares,  the  sphragis  of 
the  communication  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  produced  in 
him.59  The  sacramental  formula  of  Confirmation: 

57  ST.  BASIL,  /.  c. 

58  ST.  JOHN  CHRYSOSTOM,  In  II  ad  Cor.,  horn,  iii,  7. 

59  ST.    CYRIL,    Cat.    myst.,    iv,    7 ;    Cat.,    xviii,    33 ;    ST.    GREG. 
NAZ.,    Or.    xl,    15 ;    DIDYMUS,    De    Trinitate,   ii,    i :     'H    (rwr^pios 
crfipayis,  /ecu  TO  Beiov  XptV^a :     Cf.    ii,    14;     ST.    ATHANAS.,    Epist. 
I  ad  Serapionem,  23 :   XpiV/ua   X^yercu   TO   irvev/jia   /ecu   een 


THE  SPHRAGIS  IN  4TH.  CENTURY     223 


Swpcas   TOV   Hi'ev/uaTOS  dyiov,    which   has  been  USed 

among  the  Greeks  since  the  4th.  century  at  the  lat 
est,60  contains  an  allusion  to  the  sphragis  of  this  sacra 
ment.  The  prayers  for  the  blessing  of  chrism,  found 
in  the  liturgical  documents  of  the  4th.  century,  speak 
also  of  the  sphragis.  In  the  formula  of  the  Eucholo- 
gium  of  Serapion*1  the  celebrant  asks  God  that  the 
baptized  neophytes,  who  are  about  to  receive  the  unc 
tion  of  chrism,  "  may  become  partakers  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  that,  being  confirmed  by  that  seal 
(o-</>pay65i)"  they  may  remain  immovable  and  strong 
in  the  faith.  The  Apostolic  Constitutions  62  calls 
chrism  the  seal  of  the  promises  of  a  Christian  (TO  Bt 

(Jivpov  cr<j>payl<s   r<av   avvOrjKMV  )  . 

Hence  the  distinction  between  the  sphragis  of  Bap 
tism  and  that  of  Confirmation  is  strongly  emphasized 
in  the  documents  of  the  4th.  century. 

When  studying  this  lofty  doctrine,  we  may  be 
tempted  to  believe  that  the  Greek  Fathers  set  forth  a 
fully  explicit  teaching  concerning  the  character.  Yet 
they  fail  to  present  a  clear-cut  distinction  between 
grace  and  the  sphragis.  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  ex 
posing  to  the  catechumens  the  dispositions  necessary 
to  receive  Baptism,  tells  them  that  the  sphragis  is  given 
only  to  those  that  are  sincerely  converted.  Only  they 
whose  physical  qualities  enable  them  to  be  good  sol 
diers,  are  enlisted  in  the  army.  So  also  God  makes  a 
choice,  when  he  recruits  the  soldiers  of  His  army  :  any 
one  who  is  unworthy,  who  is  insincere,  is  rejected  ; 
only  they  that  are  honest  and  sincere  are  incorporated 

00  ST.  CYRIL  OF  JER.,  Cat.,  xviii,  33  ;  Euchologium  of  Serapion, 
xxv,  2  (ed.  Funk). 
81  xxv,  2. 
62vii,  22,  2  (ed.  Funk).     Cf.  iii,  17,  2. 


224     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

and  receive  the  beneficial  and  wonderful  sphragis.™ 
Hence,  if  Baptism  is  received  unworthily,  the  sphragis 
is  conferred  no  more  than  grace.  St.  Cyril  did  not 
draw  a  sharp  distinction  between  the  sphragis  and 
grace  :  a  distinction  which  St.  Augustine  will  strongly 
emphasize  so  as  to  show  that  Baptism  received  in  an 
unworthy  manner,  always  produces  the  character,  and 
yet  does  not  impart  sanctity.  But  although  St.  Cyril 
did  not  clearly  state  this  distinction,  are  we  not  justi 
fied  in  saying  that  he  had  a  certain  notion  of  it,  and 
that  if  he  did  not  formulate  it  explicitly,  it  was  simply 
because  no  favorable  opportunity  offered  itself? 

The  Greek  Fathers,  whose  doctrine  about  the  bap 
tismal  sphragis  is  so  abundant,  have  much  less  to  say 
concerning  the  priestly  character.  The  most  striking- 
teaching  is  set  forth  by  St.  Gregory  of  Nyssa.64  The 
holy  Doctor  compares  the  priestly  consecration  to  the 
blessing  of  baptismal  water,  to  the  consecration  of  al 
tars  on  which  the  Eucharist  is  celebrated,  and  to  the 
consecration  of  the  Eucharist  itself.  These  various 
consecrations  modify,  set  apart  from  profane  use  and 
sanctify  the  objects  which  they  reach.  Ordination 
does  something  similar.  It  segregates  the  chosen  one 
from  the  laity,  places  him  among  the  ecclesiastical 
leaders  and  renders  him  capable  of  celebrating  the 
Christian  mysteries.  An  unseen  transformation  takes 
place  in  his  soul  through  the  Divine  power;  henceforth 
he  will  perform  wonders,  superior  even  to  those  related 
of  Moses  and  of  the  Prophets. 

This  description  of  the  effects  of  the  priestly  conse- 


63  Cat.  i,  3.     00  dlduffi  [6  Kupios]  ra  ayia  rots  Kvaiv,  d\X' 

TTJV  dyadrjv  ffweidyo'iv,   e/cet   rrjv  (rcorrjptwSr?   didwffi  fffipaylda  TTJV  0av/j.a- 
fftav. 

64  In  baptismum  Christi  (P.G.,  xlvi,  581). 


THE  SPHRAGIS  IN  4TH.  CENTURY     225 

cration  fits  quite  well  the  "  character  "of  Ordination. 
It  is,  so  to  speak,  the  traditional  link  joining  together 
the  whole  ancient  belief  summed  up  by  the  Bishop  of 
Nyssa  and  the  Augustinian  doctrine.  Yet  our  readers 
will  not  fail  to  realize  that  the  comparisons  Gregory 
uses  to  define  the  effects  of  Ordination,  imply  that  his 
ideas  regarding  the  priestly  "  character "  were  still 
confused. 

In  the  West,  the  teaching  of  the  Latin  writers  of 
the  4th.  century  about  the  spiritale  signaculum  is  not  so 
abundant  as  that  of  the  Greek  Fathers  concerning  the 
sphragis.  St.  Ambrose  65  and  the  author  of  the  De 
SacramentisGQ  allude  to  it  in  connection  with  the  rite 
of  Confirmation,  especially  with  the  sign  of  the  cross, 
traced  by  the  Bishop  with  chrism  on  the  forehead  of 
the  newly  baptized  Christian. 

However,  it  is  in  his  treatise  De  Spirltii  Sancto  Q1 
that  we  must  look  for  the  mind  of  the  Bishop  of 
Milan  regarding  this  signaculum.  Whilst  the  body 
of  the  neophyte  is  marked  externally,  his  heart  is 
stamped  internally  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  Hence  it 
is  by  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost  that  we  are  marked  with 
this  spiritual  sign.  This  sign  is  produced  in  us,  in 
order  that  we  may  preserve  the  brightness,  the  image 
and  the  grace  of  the  Spirit  (ut  splendorem  atque  ima- 
ginem  ejus  et  gratiam  tenere  possimus :  quod  est 
utique  spiritale  signaculum),  that  our  souls  may  bear 
the  Divine  image  and  likeness  (ut  Spiritus  sanctus  ex-- 
primat  in  nobis  imaginis  caelestis  effigiem)  and,  that, 
in  the  words  of  St.  Peter  (//  Pet.,  I,  4)  we  may  par 
take  of  the  Divine  nature.  The  Prophet  teaches  us 

65  De  my  St.,  42. 

60  in,  8. 

67  Lib.  I,  cap.  vi. 


226     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

that  this  signaculum  is  spiritual  and  interior,  when  he 
says :  Signatum  est  in  nobis  lumen  vultus  tui,  Domine; 
dcdisti  laetitiam  in  corde  meo  (Ps.  IV ,  /). 

The  distinction  between  the  "  character  "  and  grace 
is  not  yet  quite  distinct.  The  honor  of  having  exposed 
it  in  its  fulness  belongs  decidedly  to  St.  Augustine. 
Yet  how  pregnant  with  meaning  is  the  doctrine  of  St. 
Ambrose  and  of  the  Greek  Fathers!  It  will  be  easy 
for  the  Bishop  of  Hippo  to  draw  from  their  teaching  a 
real  theology  of  the  sacramental  character. 


§  III.     The  Augustinian  Doctrine. 

The  texts  of  St.  Augustine  that  speak  of  the  charac 
ter  have  been  placed  before  the  reader,  or  rather 
pointed  out  in  the  previous  chapter;  for  the  doctrine 
of  the  character  is  an  essential  part  of  Augustine's 
sacramental  system.  Here  we  shall  merely  draw  from 
his  works  and  expose  in  a  synthetic  manner,  the  views 
of  the  holy  Doctor  regarding  the  character  of  Baptism 
and  of  Ordination. 

St.  Augustine  was  firmly  convinced  that  according 
to  the  practice  of  the  Church,  Baptism,  even  when  con 
ferred  by  heretics  and  schismatics,  must  not  be  re 
newed  since  to  rebaptize  any  one,  especially  a  Catholic, 
was  to  commit  a  most  heinous  crime : 

"  Rebaptizare  igitur  haereticum  hominem,  qui  haec  sanc- 
titatis  signa  perceperit  quae  Christiana  tradidit  disciplina, 
omnino  peccatum  est:  rebaptizare  autem  catholicum,  im- 
manissimum  scelus  est."  °8 

It  is  far  better  to  die  at  the  hands  of  the  Donatists 
es  Ep.  xxii,  2. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE       227 

than  to  let  oneself  be  rebaptized.69  On  the  other  hand, 
St.  Augustine  was  equally  convinced  that  Baptism, 
when  received  outside  the  Catholic  Church,  does  not 
remit  sins  nor  impart  grace:  it  obtains  these  results, 
only  when  the  culprit  repents,  enters  the  Catholic  unity 
and  receives  the  rite  of  reconciliation. 

Thus  the  opportunity  to  distinguish  the  two  effects 
of  Baptism  offered  itself  providentially  to  the  Bishop 
of  Hippo.  The  ecclesiastical  practice  of  not  repeating 
Baptism  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  Baptism,  adminis 
tered  according  to  the  essential  rite,  produces  always 
and  everywhere  the  indelible  character.  Hence  the 
Church  looks  upon  the  convert  from  heresy  or  schism, 
as  validly  baptized  and  as  incapable  of  being  rebap 
tized,  although,  in  her  eyes,  he  has  not  obtained  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  nor  grace.  Thus  the  sharp  dis 
tinction  between  the  character  of  Baptism  and  grace 
manifested  itself  to  the  Christian  consciousness,  and 
was  set  forth  as  an  explanation  of  the  practice  of  "  no 
rebaptism."  Once  more,  dogma  arose  from  the  sac 
ramental  life  of  the  Church. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  when  St.  Augustine  exposes 
his  doctrine  of  the  character,  he  claims  only  to  justify 
the  traditional  practice.  His  teaching  about  the  cha 
racter  tallies  perfectly  with  that  of  the  Greek  Fathers 
regarding  the  sphragis,  since  in  the  exposition  of  his 
doctrine  he  uses  the  same  comparisons  as  they  did.70 

69  Contra  litt.  Petil,  ii,  191. 

70  St.   Augustine   was   probably  acquainted,   through    St.   Am 
brose,  with  St.  Basil's  writings,  from  the  time  of  his  conversion. 
It  is  certain,  at  any  rate,  he  had  read  some  writings  of  St.  Basil 
and  of  St.  John  Chrysostom  when  he  opposed  the  Pelagians  to 
wards  the  end  of  his  life. 


16 


228     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

The  convert  from  heresy  is  not  rebaptized,  since  he 
received  in  the  Sacrament  the  character  of  the  Lord,71 
which  cannot  be  destroyed.  He  is  a  sheep  of  Christ, 
astray  from  the  fold.  He  must  be  brought  back  to 
the  sheep  fold,  but  his  character  must  not  be  touched: 
even  as  the  shepherd  brings  back  to  the  fold  the  wan 
dering  sheep,  and  does  not  impress  on  it  the  "  cha 
racter  dominicus  "  with  which  it  had  been  marked : 

"  Sic  enim  error  corrigendus  est  ovis,  ut  non  in  ea  cor- 
rumpatur  signaculum  Redemptoris."  72 

The  sacrament  adheres  just  as  closely  to  the  bap 
tized  Christian  as  the  military  "  character  "  to  the  sol 
dier's  body.  After  the  stigma  has  been  unlawfully 
imprinted  on  a  man  that  does  not  belong  to  the  army, 
it  is  valid,  nor  could  it  be  repeated  in  case  this  out 
sider  should  take  up  the  military  career.73  So  also 
the  baptismal  character  impressed  by  the  heretical  de 
serter  must  not  be  repeated,  for  it  is  the  character, 
not  of  heresy,  but  of  our  leader,  the  Lord  Jesus : 

"  Nam  si  Donatus  quando  schisma  fecit,  in  nomine  Donati 
baptizaret,  desertoris  characterem  infigeret  .  .  .  nunc 
vero  ipse  desertor  characterem  fixit  imperatoris  sui.  Deus 
et  Dominus  noster  Jesus  Christus  quaerit  desertorem,  delet 
erroris  crimen,  sed  non  exterminat  characterem."  74 

Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  character  is  set  forth  by 
St.  Augustine  always  as  an  explanation  of  the  prac 
tice  of  no  rebaptism. 

71  Eplst.  clxxiii,  3 :  Et  vos  [Donatistae]  oves  Christi  estis, 
characterem  dominicum  portatis  in  sacramento  quod  accepistis: 
sed  erratis  et  peritis. 

72Epist.  clxxxv,  23. 

73  Contr.  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  29.     Cf.  Eplst.  clxxxv,  23 
ad  Caesar eensis  eccl.  plebem,  2. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE       229 

St.  Augustine  did  not  indulge  in  speculations  prop 
erly  so  called  about  the  nature  of  the  baptismal  cha 
racter;  it  is  only  from  comparisons  he  uses,  that  we 
may  judge  how  he  conceived  it.  By  its  very  nature 
the  character  cannot  be  lost.  It  adheres  to  the  bap 
tized  Christian,  like  the  bodily  sign  with  which  soldiers 
and  sheep  are  marked,  and  like  the  image  stamped  on 
coins;75  for  it  is  imprinted,  (characterem  a  Domino 
dictum  omnibus  credentibus  imprimendum),  and  en 
graved  (characterem  fixit)  on  the  neophyte.76 

The  relations  which  the  character  creates  between 
Christ  and  the  baptized  Christian  are  not  fully  ex 
posed  by  St.  Augustine.  Since  the  character  is  called 
character  dominicus,  regius,  imperatoris  nostri,  we 
may  infer  that  it  is  looked  upon  as  a  mark  of  belong 
ing  to  Christ,  the  chief  Shepherd  of  the  Christian 
flock  and  the  chief  Leader  of  the  army  of  the  faithful. 
This  affirmation  is  in  perfect  agreement  with  the  gener 
al  tone  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine:  the  baptized  [ 
Christian,  who  is  outside  the  Church,  is  like  the  sheep 
leaving  the  fold,  or  the  soldier  deserting  his  colours. 

St.  Augustine  does  not  ask  himself  whether  the  bap 
tismal  character  is  a  physical  or  only  a  moral  reality. 
At  times  he  identifies  it  with  a  consecration : 7T  this 
might  incline  us  to  think  that  he  places  it  in  the  moral 
order.  However,  the  objects  with  which  he  compared 
it  so  often : —  namely,  the  mark  imprinted  on  a  sol- 

75  Contr.  epist.  Parmen.,  ii,  29 ;  Contra  Cresc.,  i,  35. 

78  Sermo  ad  Caesarecnsis  eccl.  pleb.,  2. 

77  Epist.  xcviii,  5:  Baptismi  sacramentum  .  .  .  etiam  apud 
haereticos  valet  et  sufficit  ad  consecrationem,  quamvis  ad  vitae 
aeternae  participationem  non  sufficiat ;  quae  consecratio  reum 
quidem  facit  haereticum  extra  Domini  gregem  habentem  do- 
minicum  characterem,  corrigendum  tamen  admonet  sana  doc- 
trina,  non  iterum  similiter  consecrandum. 


23o    THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

dier's  body,  and  the  figure  stamped  on  coins  of  money, 
forbid  us  to  give  to  the  views  of  St.  Augustine  such 
an  interpretation. 

On  the  contrary,  the  character  of  Ordination  seems 
to  be  something  moral.  St.  Augustine  not  only  con 
siders  it  a  consecration,78  he  calls  it  often  "  the  right 
of  giving  Baptism."  79  This  is  the  right  of  adminis 
tering  validly  the  Sacraments:  a  right  which  is  con 
ferred  by  Ordination  and  cannot  be  lost.  It  is  the 
fact  of  being  constituted  for  ever  the  representative  of 
the  Church,  of  being  commissioned  to  act  in  the  name 
of  Christ,  and  of  being  invested,  for  life,  with  a  power 
that  comes  from  Him :  so  that,  when  he  administers 
the  Sacraments,  the  minister's  action  is,  everywhere 
and  in  all  circumstances,  the  action  of  Christ  Him 
self.80  The  priestly  character  is  a  kind  of  Divine 
proxy,  by  which  the  Savior  gives  irrevocably  to  a  man 
the  power  to  act  in  His  name;  hence  it  would  be  a 
reality  of  the  moral  order.  However,  St.  Augustine 
compared  it  also  to  the  military  mark:  the  heretical 
minister,  he  insinuates  now  and  then,  preserves  his 
character,  just  as  the  deserter  preserves  the  "  character 
imperatoris." 81  The  priestly  character  would  be, 
then,  a  physical  reality. 

We  need  not  attempt  to  impart  to  the  views  of  St. 
Augustine  a  preciseness  which  he  himself  did  not  im 
part  to  them.  We  may  rather  observe  that,  accord 
ing  to  the  holy  Doctor,  the  doctrine  of  the  character 
of  Ordination,  like  that  of  the  baptismal  character,  is 
a  most  accurate  interpretation  of  the  ecclesiastical 

78  Contr.  epist.  Farm.,  ii,  28.     Cf.  De  bapt.  cont.  Donat.,  i,  2. 

79  Ibid.  Cf.  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2. 

"*   80/n  Joan,  v,  tract.  15,  18.     Cf.  Contra  litt.  Petil.,  v.  65-67. 
81  Sermo  ad  Caesar,  eccl.  pleb.,  2.      Epist.  clxxxv,  23. 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE       231 

practice  of  repeating  neither  Baptism  nor  Ordination. 

The  Donatists  wished  to  reordain  the  bishops  con 
secrated  by  notoriously  unworthy  ministers,  just  as 
they  rebaptized  those  whom  they  themselves  had  not 
baptized.  St.  Augustine  draws  their  attention  to  the 
fact  that,  in  this,  they  set  themselves  in  opposition  to 
the  traditional  custom.  It  has  always  been  held,  he 
says,  that  bishops,  ordained  by  heretics  or  schismatics, 
that  come  back  to  the  Catholic  Church,  are  not  reor- 
dained.  These  repentant  bishops  are  not  always 
called  to  exercise  in  the  Church  the  functions  of  their 
order;  but  in  case  it  is  thought  advisable  to  have  re 
course  to  their  ministry,  they  are  not  again  ordained. 
Ordination,  like  Baptism,  remains  then  in  them  with 
all  its  fulness ;  this  is  why  neither  the  one  nor  the  other 
is  to  be  repeated :  when  the  deserter  comes  back  to  the 
camp,  is  his  indelible  "  character  "  repeated  ?  Conse 
quently,  the  heretical  minister  may  confer  the  Sacra 
ments  validly,  if  not  lawfully.82 

Hence  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  the  sacramental 
character  is  always  proposed  as  an  explanation  of  the 
traditional  practice  of  the  Church.  Thus  it  is  bound 
up  with  a  whole  past.  Contrary  to  what  Harnack 
claims,  it  is  not  an  artificial  theory,  framed  for  the 
sake  of  expediency;  it  is  rather  a  living  development 
of  the  sacramental  principles  laid  down  by  the  prac 
tice  of  the  early  Church,  a  development  quite  homo 
geneous  with  its  starting  point. 

However,  St.  Augustine's  teaching  still  contains 
some  obscurities.  Instead  of  always  considering  the 
character  as  an  effect  of  the  sacrament,  he  at  times 
calls  character  the  sacramental  rite  itself.  For  as  the 

82  Contra  epist.,  Parmen.,  ii,  28,  29;  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  i,  2. 


232     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

word  "  character "  is  used  in  the  passive  sense  to 
designate  the  impress,  the  mark  of  the  seal,  and  in  the 
•active  sense  to  designate  the  instrument  used  to  im 
print  the  mark,  the  holy  Doctor  calls  character,  some 
times  the  effect  of  the  sacrament  on  the  one  who  is 
baptized  or  ordained,  sometimes  too  the  sacrament  it 
self.  The  passages  of  his  writings,  in  which  St.  Au 
gustine  has  in  view  the  indelible  mark  left  by  Baptism 
and  Ordination,  have  already  been  quoted.  Here  are 
other  texts  where  the  term  "  character  "  is  applied  to 
the  sacramental  rite. 

The  character  with  which  Christ's  soldiers  are 
marked  is  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity,  that  accom 
panies  the  baptismal  ablution: 

"  De  illo  charactere  militibus  suis  vel  potius  comitibus  suis, 
ut  hunc  imprimerent  eis  quos  congregabant  castris  ejus, 
praecepit  dicens :  lie,  baptisate  gentes  in  nomine  Patris  et 
Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti"  83 

This  invocation  is  the  character  of  our  Leader,  Jesus : 
it  is  the  externally  visible  mark,  which  St.  Paul  recog 
nized  in  the  Corinthians  divided  among  themselves, 
and  which  each  one  of  us  may  recognize  in  his  neigh 
bor : 

"  Istum  characterem  a  Domino  dictum,  omnibus  credenti- 
bus  imprimendum,  quia  noverat  Paulus,  expavescit  ad  eos 
qui  volebant  esse  Pauli  et  dicit  eis.  .  .  .  Agnoscite,  ad- 
vertite  characterem  vestrum;  numquid  in  nomine  Pauli  bap- 
tizaii  estis?"*4* 

83  Sermo  ad  Caesareensis  eccl.  plebem,  2.     Cf.  Enarr.  in  Psalm., 
xxxix,  n.   i :     Baptismus  ille  tanquam  character  infixus  est. 
"Ibid, 


THE  AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE       233 

For  me,  says  St.  Augustine,  when  I  receive  my  broth 
er  coming  back  from  heresy  or  from  schism,  I  behold 
his  faith  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost:  for  such  is  the  effect  of  the  cha 
racter  of  my  Leader.85 

Hence  St.  Augustine  does  not  always  distinguish 
the  character  from  the  sacramental  rite,  as  we  dis 
tinguish  the  effect  from  its  cause.  His  lack  of  preci 
sion  comes  from  the  fact  that,  as  the  character  is  a 
sign,  it  must  be  external  in  some  way  or  other,  so 
as  to  be  recognized.  The  theologians  of  subsequent 
ages,  like  Alexander  of  Hales  and  St.  Thomas,  will  de 
clare  by  way  of  explanation,  that  the  character  is  a 
spiritual  sign  and  therefore  cannot  be  known  in  itself : 
it  is  known  by  means  of  its  cause,  that  is  to  say,  by 
means  of  the  sacramental  rite  which  brings  it  about. 
These  theological  explanations  are,  so  to  speak,  a  pro 
longation  of  the  views  of  St.  Augustine  which  they 
illustrate  and  complete  and  also  transcend. 

The  Bishop  of  Hippo  did  not  further  at  all  the 
growth  of  doctrine  as  regards  the  character  of  Con 
firmation.  When  he  speaks  of  this  sacrament,  he  is 
content  to  designate  it,  as  St.  Cyprian  does,  by  the 
term  signaculum,8*  without  ever  using  the  word  cha 
racter.  The  Donatist  controversies  bore  exclusively 
on  Baptism  and  Ordination,  Confirmation  remained 
in  the  back-ground,  and  the  development  pertaining  to 
its  sacramental  character  took  place  later,  that  is  to 

85  Ibid. :     Ego  quando  venio  ad  f  ratrem  meum,  et  colligo  er- 
rantem  fratrem  meum,  attendo  fidem  in  nomine  Patris  et  Filii 
et  Spiritus  Sancti.     Iste  est  character  imperatoris  mei. 

86  Contra  litter.  Petil.,  ii,  39:     In  hoc  unguento  sacramentum 
Chrismatis  vultis  interpretari :  quod  quidem  in  genere  visibilium 
signaculorum  sacrosanctum  est,  sicut  et  ipse  baptismus. 


234     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

say,  during  the  Middle  Ages :  then  we  find  Alexander 
of  Hales  affirming  that  secundum  communem  Doc- 
torwn  viam  Confirmation  imprints  a  character  in  the 
soul.87 


§  IV.  The  Silence  of  the  Early  Middle  Ages  concerning  the 
Sacramental  Character. —  The  complete  development  of 
the  Dogma  at  the  beginning  of  the  i^th.  Century. 

Although  it  was  still  lacking  somewhat  in  precision, 
the  Augustinian  doctrine  condemned  most  explicitly 
the  renewal  of  Baptism  and  Ordination.  The  his 
torian  is  surprised  to  see  how  insignificant  a  place  this 
doctrine  holds  in  the  life  of  the  Church  from  the  7th. 
to  the  1 2th.  century:  this  may  lead  us  to  observe  that, 
as  long  as  a  doctrine  has  not  been  sanctioned  by  in 
fallible  ecclesiastical  authority,  it  runs  the  risk  of  be 
ing  forgotten  or  ignored.  In  the  early  Middle  Ages, 
Baptism  conferred  by  heretical  or  unworthy  ministers, 
was  considered  valid,  when  it  had  been  rightly  admin 
istered;  such 'was  not  the  case  with  the  other  Sacra 
ments,  especially  with  that  of  Order. 

"  In  the  rivalry  between  the  British  and  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  churches  during  the  7th.  century ;  in  the  strug 
gles  of  the  Popes  against  the  Roman  aristocracy  or 
against  the  Emperors,  during  the  8th.  and  Qth.  cen 
turies;  in  the  struggle  of  the  Popes  against  Photius; 
in  the  struggle  of  the  Church  against  simoniacs  and  in 
truders,  until  the  I2th.  century,  the  chief  instrument 
of  warfare,  sometimes  of  the  enemies  of  the  Church, 
sometimes  too,  nay  most  often  of  the  best  sons  of  the 
Church  and  of  several  Popes,  was  simply  to  declare 
void  and  to  repeat  ordinations  that  were  certainly 

87  Sum.  Theolog.,  iv,  qu.  9,  membr.  5,  art.  7,  sect.  2. 


SILENCE  OF  EARLY  MIDDLE  AGES     235 

valid." 88  These  reordinations  are  quite  different 
from  those  which,  according  to  the  testimony  of  his 
tory,  occurred  during  the  first  five  centuries :  the  lat 
ter  can  be  accounted  for,  since  heretics  were  denied 
the  right  of  ordaming  validly.  In  the  early  Middle 
Ages,  ordinations  that  had  been  made  by  Catholics 
were  at  times  repeated.  In  some  provinces,  reordina- 
tion  was,  as  it  were,  a  means  of  government,  by  which 
the  authorities  promoted  the  respect  and  observance 
of  the  disciplinary  laws  of  the  Church. 

The  principles  according  to  which  the  value  of  or 
dinations  was  judged,  differed  from  those  of  St.  Au 
gustine.  Instead  of  declaring  that  ordinations  are  not 
to  be  repeated,  since  they  are  valid  in  spite  of  the  un- 
worthiness  of  him  who  confers  them,  and  since  their 
character  is  indelible,  men  of  that  age  appealed  to  far 
other  considerations. 

In  the  synod  of  Lateran,  held  in  769  by  Stephen 
III,  to  deliberate  over  the  usurpation  of  the  Papal  See 
by  his  predecessor  Constantine,  it  was  decided  that  all 
the  ordinations  made  by  the  usurper  were  null,  and 
that  all  the  Sacraments  he  had  administered,  except 
Baptism  and  Confirmation,  had  to  be  repeated.  The 
ordination  of  Constantine  himself  was  deemed  void, 
because,  contrary  to  the  ecclesiastical  canons,  being 
only  a  layman,  he  had  been  elected  Pope  by  the  people, 
and  because  he  had  received  all  the  Orders,  including 
the  episcopate,  without  observing  the  interstices.89 

88  L.  SALTET,  Bulletin  de  littcrature  ecclcsiastique,  1901,  pp.  229- 
230.     MORIN,  De  sacris  Eccl.  ordinal.,  p.  Ill,  exerc.  v,  capp.  1-7 ; 
Monumenta   germ.,   Libelli   de   lite   imperatorum    et   pontificum. 
Hanover,  1890-1897,  t.  i-iii.     Cf.  also  L.  SALTET,  Les  Reordina 
tions,  Paris,  1907. 

89  HEFELE,  History  of  the  Councils,  vol.  V,  pp.  337-338. 


236     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

Morin  remarks  judiciously, 

"  Signatum  est  in  nobis  lumen  vultus  tui,  Domine ;  dedisti 
certissimum  est  validam  esse  Constantini  ordinationem, 
et  consequenter  valide  alios  ordinasse,  licet  illicite  fuerit  or- 
dinatus."  90 

The  motives  alleged,  towards  the  end  of  the  Qth. 
century,  either  to  defend  or  to  deny  the  validity  of  the 
ordinations  made  by  Pope  Formosus,  were  also  alto 
gether  foreign  to  the  doctrine  of  the  character.  The 
defenders  of  the  validity  recalled,  without  mentioning 
the  character  at  all,  the  traditional  practice  of  not  re 
peating  the  sacrament  of  Order;  those  who  upheld 
the  nullity,  claimed  that  Formosus  had  been  guilty  of 
violating  the  laws  of  the  Church,  and  thus  had  for 
feited  the  episcopal  prerogatives.91 

During  these  times,  ignorance,  and  still  more  the 
violence  of  passions,  hindered  the  understanding  of 
things.  A  historian  of  the  nth.  century,  Sigebert, 
speaking  of  the  dialogue  I  nf  ens  or  et  De fens or,  which 
a  contemporary  of  Pope  Formosus,  Auxilius,  had  com 
posed  in  reference  to  the  controversy  regarding  ordina 
tions,  uses  these  terms  which  express  the  confusion 
of  minds  no  less  than  the  author's  irony: 

"  Auxilius  scripsit  Dialogum  sub  persona  Infensoris  et 
Defensoris  divinis  et  canonicis  exemplis  munitum  contra 
intestinam  discordiam  Romanae  Ecclesiae,  scilicet  de  or- 
dinationibus,  exordinationibus  et  superordinationibus  Ro- 
manorum  Pontificum,  et  ordinatorum  ab  eis  exordinationi 
bus  et  superordinationibus."  Q2 

90  MORIN,  op.  cit.,  p.  Ill,  exercit.  V,  cap.  v. 

91  MORIN,  op.  cit.,  Ibid.,  cap.  iii ;  HEFELE,  Histoire  des  Candles, 
vol.  VI,  p.  52.     [The  English  translation  of  Hefele's  work  does 
not  go  beyond  the   Second   Council  of  Nicaea  in  787].     MANY, 
De  Sacra   Ordinatione,  p.   71. 

92  SIGEBERT,  De  script,  eccles.,  112;  P.L.,  clx,  571. 


SILENCE  OF  EARLY  MIDDLE  AGES     237 

A  quite  similar  confusion  manifests  itself,  during 
the  nth.  and  I2th.  centuries,  in  connection  with  the 
ordinations  made  by  schismatics.  According  to  some, 
a  simoniac  Bishop  cannot  confer  Orders  validly,  since 
he  is  under  the  ban  of  ecclesiastical  censures:  hence 
the  ordinations  he  makes  are  to  be  repeated.93  Ac 
cording  to  others,  the  ordinations  performed  by  simo- 
niacs  are  valid  and  must  not  be  repeated,  for,  as  St. 
Peter  Damian  declares,  God  is  the  true  minister  of 
Ordination,  Christ  "  truly  consecrates  "  the  candidate 
for  Ordination,  whilst  the  Bishop  is  performing  the 
rite  over  him :  hence  the  minister's  unworthiness  does 
not  matter.94  The  reordinations  of  those  that  had 
been  ordained  by  simoniacs,  and  the  controversies  to 
which  these  reordinations  gave  rise,  ceased  altogether 
only  at  the  end  of  the  I2th.  century. 

These  instances  of  repeated  ordinations,  which  his 
tory  records  in  such  great  numbers  and  for  several 
centuries,  apparently  oppose  the  doctrine  of  the  sacra 
mental  character.  The  priestly  character  is  incompati 
ble  with  the  repetition  of  the  sacrament  of  Order;  it 
was  by  the  existence  of  this  character  that  St.  Augus 
tine  accounted  for  the  traditional  practice  of  not  re- 
ordaining  the  bishops  ordained  in  an  heretical  or 
schismatical  sect.  But  then,  was  the  practice  of  the 
Church  during  the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages  in 
opposition  to  dogma? 

The  serious  nature  of  the  problem  has  not  failed  to 
attract  the  attention  of  Catholic  theologians  and  his 
torians.  After  exposing  the  cases  of  reordinations 
with  a  truly  remarkable  fair-mindedness,  John  Morin 

93  Cf.  ST.  PETER  DAMIAN,  Opusc.  V,  Actus  Mediolanensis;  P.L., 
cxlv;  MORIN,  cap.  ii ;  MANY,  op.  cit.,  ibid. 
84  Opusc.  VI,  Gratissimus,  2. 


238     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

declares  they  cannot  be  accounted  for,  unless  we  ac 
knowledge  in  the  Church  the  power  to  determine  the 
conditions  in  which  ordinations  are  valid,  just  as  she 
can  establish  diriment  impediments  of  Marriage,  and 
take  away  from  a  priest,  by  withdrawing  his  jurisdic 
tion,  the  power  to  absolve  validly. 

"  Ecclesia  enim,  meo  judicio,  definire  potest  quibus  condi- 
tionibus  ordinans  episcopus  auctoritate  sua  uti  debeat;  qui- 
busve  cum  donis  et  qualibus  ordinandus  sese  ordinanti  sis- 
tere  ut  valide  et  efficaciter  ordinem  ab  eo  recipiat:  ita  ut 
si  ordinans  aut  ordinandus  definitionem  hanc  neglexerint, 
contraque  egerint,  actio  sit  nulla  et  irrita,  atque  ut  effectus 
producatur,  iteranda.  Idem  de  hoc  sacramento  analogice 
dicendum  quod  de  Matrimonio  et  Paenitentia."  95 

This  concession  being  made,  all  the  facts  are  easily 
explained,  since  as  we  know  from  the  documents,  the 
ordinations  that  were  repeated  during  the  early  Middle 
Ages  had  been  conferred  contrary  to  the  ecclesiastical 
Canons.  As  the  conditions  established  by  the  laws 
of  the  Church  had  not  been  complied  with,  these  ordi 
nations  were  null  and  they  had  necessarily  to  be  re 
peated.96 

But  it  is  rather  difficult  to  make  the  concession 
claimed  by  the  celebrated  Oratorian.  For,  whilst  the 
Church  can  determine  the  conditions  on  which  the  mar 
riage  contract  shall  be  valid,  and  by  granting  or  re 
fusing  the  jurisdiction,  control  the  valid  administra 
tion  of  sacramental  absolution,  this  is  not  the  case  with 

95  Op.  cit.,  cap.  9,  n.  i. 

96  Ibid.,  n.  2 :     Hoc  dato  quod  mihi  videtur  maxima  aequum 
.    .     .     nulla  difficultas  superest  in  ordinationibus  iteratis  eorum 
quos   ordinaverant    pontifices    Constantinus,    Formosus,    Photius, 
Ebbo  et  alii.     Nam  qui  iterum  ordinabant,  aut  ordinandos  con- 
tendebant,  judicabant  eos  secundum  canones  non  fuisse  ordinatos. 


SILENCE  OF  EARLY  MIDDLE  AGES     239 

Ordination.  The  validity  of  the  latter  depends  ex 
clusively  on  the  exercise  of  the  episcopal  power :  when 
the  Bishop  performs  all  the  ceremonies  of  Ordination, 
with  the  intention  to  do  what  the  Church  does,  he 
confers  Orders  validly  in  spite  of  all  prohibitions. 
Did  not  Catholics  look  upon  as  validly  ordained  the 
Constitutional  bishops  who  had  received  their  episcopal 
consecration  from  the  apostate  Talleyrand,  on  January 
25,  1791? 

The  solution  of  the  problem  is  apparently  to  be 
sought  in  the  fact  that  sacramentary  theology  was 
still  lacking  in  precision  and  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
character  had  been  forgotten.  In  the  early  part  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  theologians  judged  of  the  validity 
of  ordinations,  as  is  rightly  observed  by  Morin,  from 
the  observance  of  the  laws  of  the  Church,  because  they 
were  still  reluctant  to  admit  that  an  unworthy  minis 
ter  may  confer  validly  the  Sacraments,  and  because 
the  doctrine  of  the  character  had  not  as  yet  become 
fully  explicit.  But  when  the  dogma  of  efficacy  and 
that  of  the  character  were  completely  developed,  then 
all  the  dissensions  concerning  the  validity  of  simoniac 
ordinations  came  to  an  end.  Then  minds  realized 
clearly  that  if  the  ordination  conferred  by  an  unworthy 
minister  is  valid  and  produces  an  indelible  character, 
it  cannot  be  repeated.  This  result  had  been  defini 
tively  acquired  in  the  first  half  of  the  I3th.  century.97 


At  that  time,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  full  develop- 

97  The  theologians  of  the  I2th.  century,  especially  P.  Lombard 
and  Gratian,  failed  to  give  a  solution  to  the  controversy  about 
simoniacal  ordinations,  because  they  did  not  grasp  the  doctrine 
of  the  character. 


240    THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

ment  of  the  doctrine  of  the  sacramental  character  had 
already  taken  place.  Pope  Innocent  III  (fi2i6)  sets 
forth  a  well  defined  teaching  about  the  baptismal  cha 
racter;  his  second  successor,  Gregory  IX  (fi24i) 
mentions  the  character  of  Ordination,  and  Alexander 
of  Hales  (fi245)  reduces  to  a  system  the  traditional 
doctrine  of  the  three  characters,  and  thus  paves  the 
way  for  the  work  of  St.  Thomas.98 

It  was  the  development  of  the  dogma  of  sacra 
mental  efficacy  that  helped  to  bring  out  in  its 
full  light,  at  the  beginning  of  the  I3th.  century,  the 
doctrine  of  the  three  characters.  In  keeping  with 
Peter  Lombard's  teaching,  theologians  distinguished 
three  parts  in  a  sacrament:  the  external  rite,  sacra- 
mentum  or  signum  tantum;  grace,  res  tantum;  some 
thing  intermediary  between  the  external  rite  and  grace, 
sacr amentum  et  res,  which  the  upholders  of  dispositive 
causality  called  the  ornatus  animae.  This  ornament 
of  the  soul,  produced  by  Baptism,  Confirmation,  and 
Order,  is  nothing  else  than  the  character. 

In  fact,  this  is  precisely  the  manner  in  which  Alex 
ander  of  Hales  sets  forth  the  theology  of  the  charac 
ter: 

"  Dicimus  quod  in  baptismo  tria  sunt :  unum  signum  tan 
tum,  scilicet  lotio  exterior;  aliud  signatum  tantum,  scilicet 
gratia;  aliud  quod  est  signum  et  signatum,  scilicet  charac 
ter;  signatum  quidem  respectu  lotionis  exterioris,  signum 
vero  respectu  gratiae."  " 

The  character,  as  well  as  the  ornament  of  the  soul, 

98  The  doctrine  of  the  character  is  to  be  found  also  in  the 
Summa,  lib.  IV,  cap.  2,  de  Bapt.,  of  William  of  Auxerre  (f  1230) 
and  in  the  treatise  De  sacr.  bapt.,  3,  of  William  of  Paris  (t  1249). 

99  Summa  theolog.,  IV,  qu.  8,  membr.  8,  art.  i. 


DEVELOPMENT  IN  13TH.  CENTURY    241 

is  a  sign  of  grace;  it  demands  grace  and  places  it  in 
fallibly  in  the  soul,  when  the  latter  does  not  impede  in 
any  way  that  action : 

"  Character  est  signum  gratiae :  signum  dico  demonstra- 
tivum,  quia  quantum  est  de  se  ponit  gratiam  in  recipienti: 
quod  autem  aliquam  non  ponat,  hoc  non  est  ex  parte  cha- 
racteris,  sed  ex  parte  suscipientis,  qui  .  .  .  ponit  obicem 
gratiae."  * 

By  adorning  the  soul,  all  the  Sacraments  mark  it 
with  a  special  sign,  distinct  from  grace: 

"  Omnia  sacramenta  .  .  .  ornant  ipsam  animam,  et 
ornando  aliquo  modo  signant."  2 

What  constitutes  a  difference  between  the  character 
and  the  ornament,  is  that  the  latter  is  not  indelible. 
We  need  often  the  Sacraments  that  merely  adorn  the 
soul;  therefore,  in  order  that  they  may  be  renewed, 
they  impress  on  the  soul  a  transitory  sign.  This  is  not 
the  case  with  the  Sacraments  that  impress  the  cha 
racter  ;  their  effect  can  be  produced  only  once.  Thus, 
in  order  that  they  may  not  be  received  a  second  time, 
they  mark  the  soul  with  an  indelible  sign: 

"  Semel  fit  deletio  originalis  peccati,  semel  datur  cingu- 
lum  militiae  spiritualis,  sicut  in  corporali  apparet,  semel  da 
tur  potestas  ministrandi  spiritualiter  .  .  .  et  ideo  in  his 
[in  baptismo,  confirmatione  et  ordine]  datur  quaedam  im- 
pressio  perpetua,  quam  characterem  nominamus,  ut  ulterius 
sacramento  hujusmodi  per  iterationem  non  sit  injuria."  3 

1  Ibid. 

2  Qu.  5,  membr.  4,  art.  i. 

3  Ibid. 


242     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

To  demonstrate  the  existence  of  the  three  charac 
ters,  Alexander  of  Hales  appeals  to  the  common  teach 
ing  of  theologians,  to  the  authority  of  Dionysius  the 
Areopagite,4  and  to  reasons  of  fitness  deduced  both 
from  the  comparisons  used  by  the  Fathers  when  speak 
ing  of  the  character,  and  from  the  prerogatives  of 
Christ,  Lord,  King,  and  Priest,  to  which  correspond 
the  three  characters,  by  which  man  becomes  the  disci 
ple,  the  soldier  and  the  minister  of  Jesus. 

At  the  time  the  English  Franciscan  wrote,  the  doc 
trine  of  the  sacramental  character  was  universally 
taught,  as  is  inferred  from  the  full  theology  he  ex 
poses  of  it,  and  from  the  use  Innocent  III  and  Greg 
ory  IX  had  already  made  of  it. 

Like  Alexander  of  Hales,  Pope  Innocent  III  sets 
forth  his  teaching  about  the  baptismal  character,  by 
means  of  the  distinction  between  the  sac? 'amentum , 
the  res,  and  the  character. 

The  Archbishop  of  Aries  had  asked  him  whether  the 
character  was  imprinted  in  those  who  received  Bap 
tism  in  a  state  of  sleep  or  of  insanity,  and  in  those 
who  were  baptized  against  their  will.  Those  who  are 
baptized  when  they  are  asleep  or  insane,  do  not  re 
ceive  the  baptismal  character,  unless  they  previously 
manifested  the  desire  to  be  baptized: 

"  Si  prius  catechumeni  exstitissent  et  habuissent  proposi- 
tum  baptizandi  .  .  .  tune  ergo  characterem  sacramen- 
talis  imprimit  operatic,  cum  obicem  voluntatis  contrariae 
non  invenit  obsistentem." 

As  regards  those  on  whom  Baptism  is  imposed  by 

4  De  Eccles.  Hierarch.,  cap.  2.  Cf.  ST.  THOMAS,  3  p.,  qu.  63, 
art.  2. 


DEVELOPMENT  IN  13TH.  CENTURY     243 

force,  if  they  are  completely  deprived  of  their  freedom, 
they  receive  neither  the  grace  nor  the  character  of 
Baptism;  the  sacrament  is  void,  because  of  their  con 
trary  intention. 

"  Ille  vero  qui  nunquam  consentit,  sed  penitus  contradicit, 
nee  rem  nee  characterem  suscipit  sacramenti." 

If  they  go  spontaneously  to  Baptism,  for  fear  of 
threats  or  chastisements,  they  are  free  enough  that  the 
sacrament  should  be  valid,  and  the  character  pro 
duced  : 

"  Is  qui  terroribus  atque  suppliciis  violenter  attrahitur,  et 
ne  detrimentum  incurrat,  baptismi  suscipit  sacramentum, 
talis  (sicut  et  is  qui  ficte  ad  baptismum  accedit)  characterem 
suscipit  christianitatis  impressum." 5 

The  policy  of  vexation  carried  on  at  the  outset  of 
the  1 3th.  century  against  the  unbelievers  of  Southern 
France,  explains  these  receptions  of  Baptism,  caused 
by  fear.  Hence  arose  practical  difficulties,  which  the 
Pope  was  asked  to  solve:  and  the  solution  he  gave 
depends  altogether  on  the  doctrine  of  the  character: 
a  conclusive  proof  that  this  doctrine  was  then  known 
and  accepted  by  all,  in  Aries  as  well  as  in  Rome. 
Hence  how  can  its  origin  be  ascribed  to  Innocent  III  ? 

It  is  also  by  resting  on  the  doctrine  of  the  character 
that  Gregory  IX  answers  the  consultation  of  the  Arch 
bishop  of  Barium  in  Apulia :  the  ordinations,  made  un 
lawfully  outside  the  epochs  determined  by  the  Church, 
are  valid  and  confer  the  character:  the  members  of 

5  Decretal.,  lib.  Ill,  tit.  42,  cap.  iii,  Mafores.  Corpus  juris  can., 
t.   ii,  p.   621,  ed.   RICHTER.     Cf.   DENZ.,  Enchirid.,  n.  342    (new 
ed.,  n.  411). 
17 


244     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

the  clergy  thus  ordained  shall  be  submitted  to  penance 
and  then  fulfil  the  functions  of  their  Orders.6 

The  important  place  which  the  theology  of  the  cha 
racter  occupies  in  the  minds  of  Christians  at  the  be 
ginning  of  the  I3th.  century  warns  us  not  to  overesti 
mate  the  bearing  of  the  silence  we  have  noticed  during 
the  early  part  of  the  Middle  Ages.  This  silence  shows 
that  the  doctrine  of  the  character  was  forgotten  for 
a  while,  in  the  midst  of  the  violent  strifes  which  raged 
in  the  Church  from  the  7th.  to  the  I2th.  century.  As 
soon  as  calm  was  restored,  the  doctrine  appeared  again, 
this  time  never  to  be  obscured. 

This  is  what  the  theologians  subsequent  to  the  I3th. 
century  realized  but  imperfectly.  As  they  did  not 
find  the  doctrine  of  the  character  in  the  Sentences  of 
Peter  Lombard,  which  all  of  them  commented  upon, 
and  moreover  as  they  were  not  familiar  enough  with 
historical  studies  to  be  able  to  find  it  in  the  works 
of  St.  Augustine  and  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  they  did 
hold  it ;  but  at  the  same  time  they  would  observe  that 
the  doctrine  was  recent  in  the  Church,  and  in  proof  of 
their  remark,  they  would  appeal  to  the  famous  decretal 
of  Pope  Innocent  III.  Duns  Scotus  finds  for  estab 
lishing  it,  no  other  argument  than  the  authority  of 
the  Church.7  Durandus  of  St.  Pourgain  writes  that 
it  is  founded  only  on  the  testimony  of  the  theologians 

6  Decretal.,  lib.  I,  tit.  XT,  cap.  xvi.    Ibid.,  t.  II,  p.  119;  Consul 
tation!   tuae   taliter   respondents,   quod    eos   qui    extra   tempora 
statuta  sacros  ordines  receperunt,  characterem  non  est  dubium 
recepisse:   quos  pro  transgressione  hujusmodi  primo  eis  paeni- 
tentia  imposita  competent!  sustinere  poteris  in  susceptis  ordinibus 
ministrare. 

7  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  6,  qu.  9,  n.  14:  Propter  ergo  solam  auc- 
toritatem  Ecclesiae,  quantum  occurrit  ad  praesens,  est  ponendum 
characterem  imprimi. 


NATURE  OF  THE  CHARACTER        245 

of  his  time.8  At  the  beginning  of  the  i6th.  century, 
Cardinal  Cajetan  still  declared  that  the  teaching  of 
the  Church  about  the  sacramental  character  was  not 
ancient : 

"  Sacramenta  imprimere  characterem  ex  S.  Scriptura  non 
habetur,  sed  ab  Ecclesiae  auctoritate  et  non  multum  an- 
tiqua."  9 

Nay,  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  some  theologians 
wished  that  the  Council  should  declare  solidly  probable 
the  doctrine  of  the  character,  without  *  making  it  an 
article  of  faith.10 

Decidedly,  in  order  to  be  a  good  theologian,  one 
has  to  be  somewhat  of  an  historian!  We  are  not 
much  disturbed  by  the  mistake  of  the  authors  just 
mentioned,  now  that  a  more  attentive  study  of  docu 
ments,  based  on  the  doctrine  of  the  development  of 
dogma,  enables  us  to  establish  rather  easily  the  thesis 
on  which  we  are  engaged. 


§  V.  The  Nature  of  the  Sacramental  Character. —  Alexan 
der  of  Hales  and  St.  Thomas. —  Duns  Scotus  and  Duran- 
dus  of  St.  Pourgain. 

When,  in  the  I3th.  century,  the  doctrine  of  the  three 
characters  was  fully  developed,  theologians  attempted 
to  define  what  the  sacramental  character  was  in  itself. 

8  In   IV   Sent.,   Disk   4,    qu.    i:     Omnes    moderni    profitentur 
imprimi  characterem  in  aliquibus  sacramentis,  et  nos  loquentes 
ut  plures  dicamus  cum  eis  characterem  non  nihil  esse. 

9  In  3am  part.,  qu.  63,  art.  i. 

10  A.  THEINER,  Acta  concilii  Tndentmi,  t.  i,  pp.  394,  397,  402, 
403.     Protestants  have  exaggerated  the  bearing  of  these  hesita 
tions  in  the  writers  of  the  I4th.  and  I5th.  centuries.     Cf.   PAL- 
LAVICINI,  Hist,  du  cone,  de  Tr.,  1.  IX,  chap.  v. 


246     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

To  what  category  of  being  should  it  be  ascribed,  and 
what  are  the  exact  relations  which  it  establishes  be 
tween  Christ  and  the  faithful?  These  two  questions 
theologians  had  to  answer  so  as  to  be  able  to  get  some 
idea  of  the  notion  of  the  character. 


Alexander  of  Hales  taught  that  the  character  was 
an  ontological  reality,  adhering  intrinsically  to  the 
soul,  and  not  a  mere  logical  relation.  He  thus  in 
augurated  the  teaching  from  which  Durandus  of  St. 
Pourgain  alone  was  to  depart.  This  reality  is  a  habi 
tus,  that  is  to  say,  a  quality  which  perfects  the  soul 
intrinsically  and  fits  it  to  receive  grace.  The  baptis 
mal  character  is  not  intended  for  any  special  act,  it  is 
not  conferred  to  man  precisely  in  view  of  the  acts  of 
public  worship.  Its  purpose  is  to  mark  for  ever  those 
who  belong  to  the  flock  of  Christ  and  to  dispose  them 
for  the  reception  of  grace: 

"  Character  est  aliquis  habitus  relucens,  in  anima  im- 
pressus  perpetuo,  quo  discernatur  fuisse  sanctificatio  bap- 
tismi.  Nee  est  habitus  ad  agendum  simpliciter,  sed  est  ad 
disponendum  ad  gratiam  quantum  est  in  se  dum  homo  est 
viator,  et  ad  discernendum  ovem  dominicam  a  lupis."  u 

This  view  of  the  character,  which  is  in  dependence 
on  the  system  of  dispositive  causality,  was  adopted  by 
St.  Bonaventure,12  and  later,  with  important  modifica 
tions,  by  Suarez,13  and  Bellarmine.14 

11  Sum.  theol,  IV,  qu.  8,  membr.  8,  art.   i.    The  seat  of  the 
character  is  the  intellect. 

12  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  6,  art.  i,  qu.  i  et  2. 

13  In  3am  part.,  qu.  63,  art.  4,  disp.  n,  sect.  3. 

14  De  Sacram.  in  gen.,  lib.  II,  cap.  19. 


ST.  THOMAS  ON  THE  CHARACTER     247 

As  for  the  relations  established  by  the  character  be 
tween  Christ  and  the  faithful,  Alexander  says  without 
much  precision  that  they  consist  in  the  assimilation  of 
the  soul  to  Jesus  Christ.  The  character  is  a  mark  of 
Christ's  property,  which  renders  the  faithful  similar 
to  Him :  the  baptismal  character  makes  one  similar  to 
Christ,  the  Leader  of  His  Church;  that  of  Confirma 
tion,  to  Christ,  King  of  the  sacred  hosts;  and  that  of 
Order,  to  Jesus,  Sovereign  Priest.15 


The  best  known  of  all  systems,  however,  is  that  of 
St.  Thomas.16  The  Angelic  Doctor  grants  to  Alex 
ander  that  the  character  belongs  to  the  category  of 
quality;  but  he  refuses  to  admit  that  it  belongs  to  that 
kind  of  quality,  which  is  called  habitus.  The  kind  of 
quality  to  which  the  character  is  to  be  assigned,  is 
potentia;  for,  according  to  St.  Thomas,  the  essential 
end  of  the  character  is  not  to  fit  the  soul  for  grace,  but 
to  make  man  capable  of  performing  the  acts  of  Divine 
worship.  The  Sacraments  were  instituted,  not  only  to 
heal  man  of  sin,  but  also  to  consecrate  him  to  the 
worship,  as  established  in  the  Christian  religion.  This 
consecration  is  effected  by  the  character,  which  is  both 
the  badge  of  sacred  functions  and  the  power  to  ac 
complish  them. 

Now,  Christian  worship  consists  principally  in  the 
celebration  of  the  Sacraments.  This  celebration  re 
quires  ministers  that  are  capable  of  performing  law 
fully  the  sacramental  action,  and  faithful  that  are  also 
capable  of  participating  in  them  effectively.  Hence 
the  character  is  a  power:  that  of  accomplishing  the 

15  Sum.  theol,  IV,  qu.  8,  membr.  8,  art.  I. 
1QSum.  theol.,  3  p.,  qu.  63,  art.  1-6. 


248     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

acts  of  Christian  worship  or  of  participating  in  them. 

Attractive  as  this  systematic  exposition  may  be,  yet 
it  does  not  escape  being  arbitrary,  for  the  administra 
tion  of  Baptism  does  not  require  in  the  minister  the 
priestly  character,  since  any  person  may  validly  bap 
tize.  Besides,  the  character  of  Confirmation  is  not 
accounted  for,  inasmuch  as  it  grants  no  active  or  pas 
sive  power  regarding  the  other  Sacraments :  according 
to  St.  Thomas  himself,  it  imparts  only  the  power  to 
confess  ex  officio  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ.17 

Moreover  how  conceive  the  exercise  of  that  physical 
power  which  man  possesses,  we  are  told,  through  his 
character?  For  instance,  when  the  priest  consecrates 
the  Eucharist,  all  that  he  does,  is  simply  to  pronounce 
the  words  of  consecration.  We  can  easily  understand 
that,  as  he  is  officially  commissioned,  because  of  his 
character,  for  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Sacrifice, 
God,  at  his  words,  produces  transubstantiation ;  but 
we  can  hardly  see  in  this  act  the  exercise  of  a  power 
effecting  physically  the  Eucharistic  change.  True,  St. 
Thomas  observes  that  this  power  is  ministerial,  in 
strumental;  that  the  minister  performs  the  function 
of  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  God,  and  that  the 
exercise  of  this  physical  power  must  be  understood 
just  as  the  instrumental  causality  of  the  Sacraments. 
Yet,  this  explanation  is  far  from  removing  the  diffi 
culties. 

This  is  why  most  authors  do  not  look  upon  the  sac 
ramental  character  as  a  power.  Some  hold  it  to  be  a 
habitus,18  others19  whose  opinion  seems  now  to  pre- 

17  Qu.  72,  art.  5. 

18  Suarez  and  Bellarmine  among  others. 

19FRANZELiN,  De  Sacr.  in  gen.,  th.   xiii ;  CHR.    PESCH,  Prae- 
lectioncs  dogm.,  torn.   VI,  n.   189  sq. :     Character   sacramentalis 


ST.  THOMAS  ON  THE  CHARACTER     249 

vail,  a  mere  supernatural  quality,  which  adheres  to 
the  soul  and  places  it  in  special  relations  to  Christ,  to 
the  functions  of  Christian  worship  and  to  grace.  The 
character  is  Christ's  likeness  impressed  on  the  soul,  by 
which  man  is  officially  appointed  to  the  functions  of 
worship,  and  requires  a  special  right  to  receive  grace. 


If  the  system  of  St.  Thomas  seems  rather  weak  as 
regards  the  determination  of  the  category  of  being  to 
which  the  character  belongs,  it  is  better  grounded,  on 
the  other  hand,  in  its  exposition  of  the  relations  which 
the  character  establishes  between  Christ  and  the  faith 
ful. 

Since  the  sacramental  character  is  intended  to  make 
man  capable  of  administering  or  of  receiving  the  Sac 
raments,  it  is  an  effective  participation  in  the  priest 
hood  of  Jesus  Christ.  For  the  sacramental  power  is  a 
priestly  power,  which  can  flow  only  from  the  priest 
hood  of  Christ,  the  High  Priest  of  the  whole  creation. 
Hence,  by  the  character,  the  faithful  are  clad  with  a 
priesthood  like  that  of  Jesus;  and,  as  this  derived 
priesthood  is  necessarily  after  the  image  of  the  chief 
priesthood,  it  follows  that,  by  the  character,  the  Chris 
tian  acquires  a  likeness  to  Christ,  Sovereign  Priest. 

The  character  affects  the  soul  intrinsically.  The 
latter  is,  as  it  were,  fashioned,  "  conformed  "  by  the 
former  to  the  resemblance  of  Jesus,  High  Priest,  as  a 
coin  is  marked  with  the  legal  stamp.  Thus  the  cha- 

est  supernaturalis  qualitas  animae,  qua  homo  special!  modo 
Christo  sacerdoti  conformatur  et  ad  divinum  cultum  deputatur 
simulque  specialem  relationem  ad  gratiam  accipit.  BILLOT,  De 
Eccl.  sacr.,  I,  pp.  138  sq.,  adopts  the  doctrine  of  ST.  THOMAS: 
Character  .  .  .  est  quaedam  potentia  ministerialis. 


250     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

racter  is,  as  it  were,  a  reflection  in  the  soul  of  the 
priestly  countenance  of  Christ.  All  Christians  share 
in  the  priesthood  of  Jesus:  but  the  ordinary  faithful 
share  in  it  so  as  to  be  able  to  receive  the  Sacraments : 
priests  alone  share  in  it  actively.  It  goes  without 
saying  that  "  as  a  necessary  consequence,  the  Divine 
goodness  grants  to  those  who  are  invested  with  the 
character  the  graces  they  need  for  the  worthy  exercise 
of  their  functions."  20 

This  conception  of  the  character  is  indeed  quite 
lofty.  Piety  feels  a  thrill  of  joy  and  of  wonder,  at 
the  thought  that  our  souls  bear  the  physical  likeness 
of  Christ,  Sovereign  Priest.  Grace  makes  us  partak 
ers  of  the  Divine  nature,  and  gives  us  a  resemblance 
of  nature  with  the  Word  Incarnate ;  the  character  con 
secrates  us  to  the  service  of  God,  and  renders  us  simi 
lar  to  Jesus,  High  Priest,  by  making  us  sharers  of 
His  Priesthood.  All  the  theologians  that  came  after 
the  Angelic  Doctor  readily  accepted  this  doctrine, 
which  is  quite  in  harmony  with  the  traditional  teach 
ing  that  the  character  renders  us  like  unto  God  and 
consecrates  us  to  His  service. 


During  the  whole  I3th.  century,  theologians  look 
upon  the  character  as  an  ontological  reality,  clinging 
to  the  soul.  In  the  I4th.  century,  a  different  teach 
ing  arises,  which,  later  on,  will  not  cease  to  appeal  to 
many:  the  teaching  of  the  Dominican  Friar,  Duran- 
dus  of  St.  Pourgain,  the  Doctor  resolutissimus 
(fi333)- 

20  Art.  4,  ad   i^m.     Saint  Thomas  after  Alexander  of  Hales 
places  the  character  in  the  intellect. 


DURANDUS  AND  DUNS  SCOTUS      251 

The  theory  of  Durandus  had  been  proposed,  during 
the  1 3th.  century,  by  a  school  which  rivalled  that  of  St. 
Thomas,  and  made  the  character  consist  in  a  real  rela 
tion.  According  to  Duns  Scotus,  there  is  no  reason 
why  the  character  should  not  be  a  mere  relation,  ex- 
trinsically  created  by  God,  on  account  of  the  sacra 
ment,  between  the  soul,  on  one  hand,  and  the  family 
of  Christ,  His  spiritual  army,  and  the  college  of  His 
ministers  on  the  other : 

"  Potest  dici  characterem  esse  tantummodo  quemdam  res- 
pectum  extrinsecus  advenientem  ipsi  animae,  causatum  a 
Deo  immediate  in  susceptione  sacramenti  initerabilis ;  quia 
sic  ponendo  saltern  omnes  conditiones  salvantur,  quae  com- 
muniter  attribuuntur  character!. "  21 

This  is  the  doctrine  Durandus  will  uphold. 

But  Scotus  is  not  content  with  this  doctrine  which 
describes  the  character  as  a  mere  logical  relation. 
The  character  is  a  real  relation,22  which  must  have  for 
its  basis  an  ontological  reality,  just  as  fatherhood  is  a 
real  relation,  which  has  generation  for  its  basis.  What 
is  this  reality?  In  his  answer  Scotus  is  not  self-con 
sistent  :  it  is  either  "  the  soul  wholly  naked,"  that 
is  to  say,  without  any  additional  supernatural  quali 
ty,23 —  a  view  which  had  been  opposed  by  St. 
Thomas;24  or  the  soul  modified  by  the  sacrament.25 
But  then,  this  modification  is  the  character  itself, 
rather  than  its  foundation.  At  any  rate  the  opinion 

21  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  6,  qu.  10,  n.  9.     Cf.  n.  12. 

22  Vasquez,  In  3am  p.,  qu.  63,  disp.  134,  cap.  2,  and  some  others 
wrongly  identify  the  idea  of  Duns  Scotus  with  that  of  Durandus. 

^Ibid.,  n.  ii. 

24  Qu.  63,  art  6,  ad  33™. 

25  SCOTUS,  Ibid.,  n.  13. 


252     THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

of  Duns  Scotus  has  for  us  no  other  interest  than  that 
of  exhibiting  the  tendency  with  which  the  altogether 
Nominalistic  view  of  Durandus  is  connected.26  The 
latter  refuses  to  see  in  the  character  an  ontological 
reality,  adhering  to  the  soul.  He  makes  it  consist  in 
a  mere  relation  of  reason  (relatio  rationis),  wholly 
extrinsic  to  the  soul,  established  forever,  in  virtue  of 
the  Divine  institution,  by  the  sacrament,  between  man 
and  the  functions  of  worship,  to  which  he  is  appointed. 
As  an  ideal  relation  is  created  by  human  convention 
between  a  piece  of  money  and  a  determined  value,  and 
between  a  counter  and  any  meaning  whatever,  so  is  a 
like  relation  established  by  Divine  institution  between 
man  and  the  sacred  ministry : 

"  Character  non  est  aliqua  natura  absoluta,  sed  est  sola  re 
latio  rationis,  per  qnam  ex  institutione  vel  pactione  divina 
deputatur  aliquis  ad  sacras  actiones.  Quod  declaratur  sic, 
sicut  nummus  sortitur  rationem  pretii  et  merellus  rationem 
signi  ex  humana  institutione,  sic  res  naturales  sortiuntur  ra 
tionem  sacramenti  et  homo  rationem  ministri  ex  divina  in 
stitutione,  sed  nummus  efficitur  pretium  et  merellus  signum 
per  solam  relationem  rationis  humanae  sic  instituentis,  ergo 
res  sacramentales  sortiuntur  rationem  sacramenti  et  homo 
rationem  ministri  per  solam  rationem  relationis  divinae  sic 
instituentis.  Cum  igitur  character  sit  id  quo  homo  efficitur 
minister  sacramentorum,  vel  susceptivus  eorum,  patet  quod 
character  non  sit  nisi  relatio  rationis  ex  ordinatione  vel  pac 
tione  divina."  21 

To  the  character  corresponds,  in  the  civil  order,  the 
appointment  for  life,  of  a  personage  to  some  public 
trust.  This  appointment  modifies  in  no  way  the  soul 
of  him  who  receives  it ;  it  establishes  simply  a  moral 

26  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  4,  qu.  I. 

27  DURANDUS,  Ibid. 


DURANDUS  ON  CHARACTER         253 

relation  between  him  and  the  employment  with  which 
he  is  entrusted.  So  also,  the  baptismal  character, 
whilst  modifying,  not  even  in  the  least  degree,  the  soul 
of  the  neophyte,  establishes  between  him  and  the 
Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  an  indissoluble  moral  bond, 
by  which  he  becomes  a  member  of  the  Christian  fam 
ily  and  is  made  capable  of  receiving  the  Sacraments. 
A  similar  bond  is  created  by  Confirmation  between  him 
who  is  confirmed  and  the  army  of  Christ,  in  which  he 
is  irrevocably  enrolled.  By  Ordination,  man  becomes 
forever  the  minister  of  the  priestly  functions,  and  the 
representative  of  Christ  in  the  administration  of  the 
Sacraments. 

Were  Catholic  dogma  a  merely  human  teaching,  this 
simple  conception,  which  removes  skilfully  all  the  dif 
ficulties  of  the  rational  order,  would  not  have  failed 
to  score  a  great  success.  However,  in  spite  of  this 
feature  so  attractive  to  the  mind,  it  has  always  been 
held  in  suspicion  by  theologians,  as  being  opposed  to 
tradition,  and  it  has  never  been  viewed  with  favor  by 
the  Church.  The  Decretum  ad  Armenos  2S  shows  a 
decided  preference  for  the  contrary  view,  and  de 
clares  that  Baptism,  Confirmation,  and  Orders  "  im 
press  in  the  soul  "  a  character,  that  is  to  say,  a  spiritual 
and  indelible  sign,  which  forbids  the  repetition  of  these 
Sacraments.  If  the  character  is  a  spiritual  sign  im 
pressed  in  the  soul,  it  is  then  a  reality  intrinsic  to  the 
soul,  and  not  merely  a  fictitious  and  ideal  being. 

Yet,  it  is  chiefly  since  the  Council  of  Trent  that  the 

28DENZiNG.,  Enchirid.,  n.  590  (new  ed.,  n.  695):  Inter  haec 
sacramenta  tria  sunt :  baptismus,  confirmatio  et  ordo,  quae 
characterem,  id  est,  spirituale  quoddam  signum  a  caeteris  dis- 
tinctivum,  imprimunt  in  anima  indelebile.  Unde  in  eadem  per 
sona  non  reiterantur. 


254    .THE  SACRAMENTAL  CHARACTER 

system  of  Durandus  has  fallen  into  discredit.  The 
decree  which  defines  the  doctrine  of  the  character  is 
formulated  in  the  same  terms  as  the  Decretum  ad 
Armenos:  the  character  is  "  impressed  in  the  soul." 
Hence  the  authors  subsequent  to  the  i6th.  century 
criticize  quite  severely  the  teaching  of  Durandus: 
some  have  even  gone  so  far  as  to  declare  it  heretical.29 
In  reality,  the  Council  of  Trent  did  not  concern  itself 
with  the  teaching  of  Durandus,  for  the  purpose  of  the 
Fathers  was  to  define,  not  the  nature  of  the  character, 
but  its  existence  which  was  denied  by  the  Reformers. 
This  is  expressly  remarked  by  Pallavicini,30  and  proved 
also  by  the  acts  of  the  Council.31  The  Church,  then, 
has  never  decided  on  the  value  of  the  conception  of 
this  character  proposed  by  Durandus,  and  a  certain 
reserve  is  incumbent  on  the  theologian  who  judges 
this  theory,  as  was  well  realized  by  Vasquez.32 

Thus  we  explain  why  the  Cartesian  theologians  of 
the  1 7th.  and  i8th.  centuries  33  showed  their  liking  for 
it;  they  found  in  that  view  of  the  sacramental  cha 
racter  a  doctrine  which  was  not  condemned  by  the 
Church,  and  which  could  be  reconciled  more  easily 
than  that  of  St.  Thomas  with  the  psychology  of 
Descartes. 

It  is  well  for  us  not  to  condemn  what  the  Church  has 
not  condemned.  Both  the  love  of  truth  and  con 
cern  for  exactness  demand  such  reserve.  On  the 

29  Among  others,  SUAREZ,  In  3am  part.,  qu.  63,  art.  4,  disp.  n, 
sect.  2. 

30  Hist  du  concile  de  Trente,  liv.  IX,  chap,  v,  n.  2. 

31  A.  THEINER,  op.  cit.,  I,  p.  398. 

32  jn  gam  part.,  disput.   134,  cap.  2,  n.  27 :     Hae  rationes,  me 
quidem  judice,  non  probant  opinionem  Durandi     .     .     .     damna- 
tam  esse,  ut  recentiores  theologi  contendunt. 

33  Cf.  FRANZELIN,  De  Sacr.  in  gen.,  th.  XIII. 


DURANDUS  ON  CHARACTER         255 

other  hand,  prudence  advises  us,  in  questions  as  deli 
cate  as  dogmatic  questions,  in  which  the  part  of  author 
ity  is  absolutely  preponderant,  to  side  with  the  ma 
jority  and  to  embrace  the  view  which,  according  to 
authoritative  voices,  is  in  keeping  with  Tradition.  If 
we  follow  the  advice  of  prudence,  we  can  hardly  ab 
stain  from  preferring  the  doctrine  of  St.  Thomas  to 
that  of  Durandus  of  St.  Pourqain. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

We  have  so  far  examined  the  internal  constitution 
of  a  sacrament :  its  elements,  matter  and  form,  its 
efficacy  ex  o.pere  operate  and  its  effects.  We  have 
now  to  take  up  the  other  aspects  of  the  Sacraments :  to 
determine  their  number,  to  prove  their  Divine  institu 
tion  and  to  show  the  intention  necessary  in  minister 
and  in  recipient,  that  they  may  be  validly  conferred 
and  received. 

§  I.     The  Teaching  of  the  Church. 

The  number  of  the  Sacraments  was  defined  against 
the  Protestants  by  the  Council  of  Trent : 

"  Si  quis  dixerit  sacramenta  novae  legis  .  .  .  esse 
plura  vel  pauciora  quam  septem,  videlicet  Baptisnrim,  Con- 
firmationem,  Eucharistiam,  Paenitentiam,  Extremam  Unc- 
tionem,  Ordinem  et  Matrimonium,  aut  etiam  aliquod  horum 
septem  non  esse  vere  et  proprie  sacramentum ;  anathema 
sit."  i 

Here  we  have  the  dogma  of  the  septenary  number 
of  the  Sacraments:  there  are  seven  Sacraments  in  the 
New  Law,  neither  more  nor  less.  The  Reformers 
of  the  i6th.  century  all  agreed  in  rejecting  this 

lSess.  VII,  De  sacram.  in  gen.,  can.  I. 

256 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  CHURCH     257 

teaching  of  the  Church,  some  acknowledging  three 
Sacraments,  others  two,  and  others  four.2 

Those  rites  which  they  refused  to  admit  as  Sacra 
ments  they  styled  "  Sacraments  improperly  so  called," 
or  rather  "  sacramentals,"  like  prayer  and  almsgiving. 
These,  they  remarked,  are  sometimes,  though  im 
properly,  termed  "  Sacraments."  3  Against  these  er 
rors,  the  Council  defined  that  not  only  Baptism  and  the 
Eucharist,  but  all  the  rites  which  it  enumerates  are 
Sacraments  properly  so  called ;  all  were  instituted  by 
Christ,  all  produce  grace  ex  opere  operato.  They  are 
on  quite  a  different  plane,  then,  from  such  rites  as 
prayers  and  almsgiving  which  cannot  be  strictly  called 
"  Sacraments."  4 

The  definition  of  what  a  sacrament  is  had  to  be  laid 
down  before  the  number  of  Sacraments  could  be  deter 
mined.  For  that  definition  being  the  unit  of  the 
septenary  number  of  the  Sacraments,  so  long  as  it  did 
not  exist,  the  number  could  not  be  given.  It  had  also 
to  be  made  clear  that  each  of  our  seven  sacramental 
rites  was  an  efficacious  symbol  of  grace;  otherwise  it 
could  not  have  been  numbered  among  the  Sacraments. 
Now,  from  the  beginning  the  Church  has  always  lived 
her  Sacraments  and  has  always  had  faith  in  their  mar 
vellous  efficacy,  as  we  have  seen  in  our  third  chapter; 
but  she  did  not  from  the  beginning  consider  them  sys 
tematically,  ranging  them  under  the  concept  of  effica 
cious  symbols  of  grace.  This  was  a  work  of  syn 
thesis  accomplished  only  by  later  theological  specula 
tion. 

2  Cf.  below,  pp.  287  and  ff. 
s  CALVIN,  Instit.  chrct.,  iv,  19. 

4  Cf.  PALLAVICINI,  Hist,  du  concilc  de  Trente,  liv.  9,  chap.  IV, 
n.  5. —  A.  THEINER,  Ada  concilii  Trid.,  t.  i,  p.  383. 


258     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

This  double  task  —  namely  of  working  out  the 
definition  and  of  applying  the  concept  of  an  efficacious 
symbol  of  grace  to  each  of  our  seven  Sacraments  — 
went  on  rather  slowly.5 

Taking  this  into  account  we  should  naturally  expect 
that  the  determination  of  the  number  of  the  Sacra 
ments  would  be  of  a  rather  recent  date.  Such  is  the 
case.  History  does  not  give  us  a  definite  list  of  the 
Sacraments  until  the  I2th.  century.6  Ecclesiastical 
writers  of  the  Patristic  period,  not  having  a  definition 
of  a  sacrament,  did  not  even  think  of  counting  them. 
During  the  early  Middle  Ages  there  were  some  at 
tempts  to  count  the  Sacraments;  but  the  lists  then 
made  were  defective,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  defini 
tion  was  vague  and  lacking  scientific  precision. 

At  first  sight  these  facts  may  cause  some  surprise, 
but  the  preceding  considerations  show  how  they  can 
be  accounted  for.  Moreover  —  a  point  of  capital  im 
portance  —  from  the  fact  that  the  Church  did  not  have 

6  Cum  jam  per  se  sit  quaestio  difficilis  et  usque  ad  nostra 
tempora  disputationibus  obnoxia,  quae  sit  definitio  maxime  apta 
sacramentorum,  ita  multo  difficilius  erat  ex  ingenti  multitudine 
earum  rerum,  quae  aetate  Patrum  sacramenta  vocabantur,  eligere 
clare  et  distincte  proprietates  communes  sacramentorum  presse 
dictorum.  Sufficiebat  igitur  Patribus  suo  loco  explicare  hoc  vel 
illud  signum  esse  sacrum  et  ex  institutione  Christi  gratiae  col- 
lativum.  Cum  progressu  vero  temporum  et  vox  sacramenti 
restricta  et,  necessitate  postulante,  tractatus  de  sacramentis  in 
genere  institutus  est.  Eo  ipso,  quod  communis  notio  omnium 
sacramentorum  in  genere  definiebatur,  conumeratio  sacramen 
torum  sua  quasi  sponte  sequebatur.  CHR.  PESCH,  Prael.  dogm., 
vol.  vi,  n.  90. 

6TANQUEREY,  Synopsis  Theol.  dogm.  (1903),  t.  ii,  p.  161 :  Ante 
saec.  XII,  nullus  invenitur  qui  directe  et  explicite  docuerit  septem 
et  septem  tantum  esse  sacramenta. —  CHR.  PESCH,  Ibid.,  n.  87: 
Quod  S.S.  Patres  nunquam  diserte  de  septenario  numero  sacra 
mentorum  loquuntur,  neque  mirum  est  neque  contra  veritatem 
propositionis  praecedentis  [quod  sunt  septem  sacr.]  probat. 


IN  THE  PATRISTIC  PERIOD          259 

an  explicit  knowledge  of  the  number  of  her  Sacraments 
from  the  beginning,  it  does  not  follow  she  did  not  know 
them.  As  we  have  seen  many  times,  the  Church  made 
use  of  her  Sacraments  long  before  she  wrought  out 
her  sacramentary  theology ;  she  lived  the  dogma  before 
she  formulated  it.  Sacramental  practice  antedates  by 
centuries  the  systematic  elaboration  of  a  sacramentary 
theology.  This  is  to  be  expected,  for  the  latter  is  but 
a  scientific  statement  of  the  former :  lex  orandi  lex 
credendi. 


§  II.     The  Number  of  the  Sacraments  in  the  Patristic  Period. 

The  inspired  writings  mention  all  the  Sacraments 
more  or  less  clearly  and  explicitly,  without  ever  giving 
a  list  of  them.  Our  Savior,  of  course,  gave  His 
Church  all  the  sacramental  realities,  but  He  trusted  to 
tradition  and  to  theological  thought  to  develop  and 
to  bring  out  in  detail  the  different  aspects  of  these  Di 
vine  realities.  The  Church  at  once  hastened  to  make 
use  of  these  means  of  salvation  placed  at  her  disposal 
by  Christ  for  the  conversion  and  sanctification  of  men. 
But  though  she  thus  made  use  of  them  from  the  begin 
ning,  it  was  not  until  much  later  —  we  cannot  insist 
too  much  on  this  point  —  that  she  thought  of  and 
found  the  time  for  making  an  inventory  of  them.  This 
came  only  after  a  synthetic  study  7  of  the  Sacraments 
had  made  it  possible  to  take  a  survey  of  the  whole 

7  FRANZELIN,  De  Sacram.  in  gen.,  thes.  XVITI :  Facile  patet, 
demon strationem  illam  directam  septenarii  numeri  sacramentorum 
non  posse  esse  nisi  synthesin  ex  tractatibus  omnibus  specialibus 
de  sacramentis.  Neque  enim  sive  in  Scripturis  sive  a  Sanctis 
Patribus  usque  ad  saeculum  fere  XII  ea  synthesis  jam  facta, 
et  sacramenta  omnia  novae  Legis  sub  uno  numero  comprehensa 
et  plena  tractatione  velut  sub  uno  conspectu  posita  reperiuntur, 
18 


260     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

subject,  to  ascertain  their  common  features  and  to  de 
termine  their  number. 

This  work  of  synthesis,  absolutely  indispensable  to 
the  development  of  the  septenary  number,  was  not  ac 
complished  in  the  Patristic  period.  The  Fathers  spoke 
of  all  the  Sacraments,  indeed,  but  ever  from  a  strictly 
practical  point  of  view,  to  answer  actual  needs,  such  as 
the  instructing  of  the  faithful  or  catechumens  or  the 
refuting  of  heretics. 

The  Apostolic  Fathers  make  frequent  allusions  to 
Baptism  and  to  the  Eucharist.8  In  the  middle  of  the 
2nd.  century,  St.  Justin,  in  order  to  dissipate  the  wide 
spread  calumnies  of  the  pagans  about  the  Christian 
initiation,  explains  the  baptismal  and  Eucharistic  cere 
monies  of  Christians  to  the  Roman  emperors,  Anto 
ninus  Pius  and  Marcus  Aurelius.  At  the  beginning  of 
the  3rd.  century,  Tertullian  speaks,  in  different  places, 
not  only  of  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  but  also  of 
Confirmation  and  Penance.  The  penitential  rite  es 
pecially  was  brought  out  into  relief  in  the  whole 
Church  by  the  Novatian  crisis.  In  the  baptismal  con 
troversy,  both  Eastern  and  Western  writers  discuss 
the  conditions  necessary  for  the  validity  of  Baptism 
and  Confirmation  and  even  of  the  Eucharist  and  Or 
dination.  All  this  shows  that  the  Christians  of  that 
time  were  acquainted  with  the  sacramental  rites. 
They  lived  them,  but  they  never  thought  of  making  a 
comparative  study  of  them ;  consequently,  though  they 
had  them  all,  they  had  not  yet  discerned  their  common 
traits  nor  determined  their  number. 

Still,  in  the  4th.  century,  the  needs  of  catechetical 

8  The  texts  of  the  Fathers  alluded  to  in  this  chapter  will  be 
found  in  chapter  III. 


IN  THE  PATRISTIC  PERIOD          261 

instruction  prompted  the  Fathers  to  group  together 
the  three  Sacraments  of  the  Christian  initiation.  This 
was  the  beginning  of  a  list  of  the  Sacraments.  The 
custom  was,  in  those  days,  to  advance  the  catechumens 
only  gradually  in  Christian  Doctrine ;  teaching  little  at 
first,  then  more  and  more  as  they  approached  the 
day  of  their  admission  into  the  Church.  Nay,  the 
teaching  in  reference  to  Baptism,  Confirmation  and 
the  Eucharist  was  completely  imparted  to  the  newly 
baptized  only  during  the  week  following  their  initia 
tion.  The  five  mystagogical  Catecheses  of  St.  Cyril, 
the  De  Mysteriis  of  St.  Ambrose  and  the  De  Sacra- 
mentis  are  exquisite  samples  of  these  tracts  in  which 
the  teaching  of  the  Church  about  Baptism,  Confirma 
tion  and  the  Eucharist  is  briefly  summarized  for  the 
instruction  of  neophytes.  To  this  extent  it  may  be 
said  that  there  was  a  list  of  the  Sacraments  in  the 
Patristic  period  —  a  list  which  comprised  three  Sacra 
ments  and  which,  as  we  will  see  later,  was  preferred 
to  any  other  by  the  early  mediaeval  writers. 

As  to  the  other  Sacraments,  the  Fathers  of  the  4th. 
and  5th.  centuries  mention  them,  but  not  being 
prompted  by  any  practical  need,  they  do  not  attempt  to 
group  them.  Not  even  St.  Augustine  gives  a  complete 
enumeration  of  the  Sacraments  anywhere  in  his  works, 
though  he  had  a  somewhat  elaborate  theory  on  the 
"  sacr amentum."  9 

9  Here  are  some  samples  of  his  enumerations :  Ep.  liv,  i : 
Sacramentis  numero  paucissimis,  observatione  facillimis,  sig- 
nificatione  praestantissimis,  societatem  novi  poptili  colligavit 
[Christus],  sicuti  est  baptismus  Trinitatis  nomine  consecratus, 
communicatio  corporis  et  sanguinis  ipsius,  et  si  quid  aliud  in 
scripturis  canonicis  commendatur. —  Sermo  ccxxviii,  3  :  Tracta- 
vimus  ad  eos  [Infantes]  de  sacramento  symboli,  quod  credere 
debeant.  De  sacramento  orationis  dominicae,  quomodo 


262     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  absence  of  a  list  during  the  Patristic  Period  is 
no  objection  at  all  to  the  existence  of  the  sacramental 
realities,  which  Jesus  Christ  bestowed  on  His  Church. 
This  point  cannot  be  insisted  on  too  much.  Although 
our  seven  Sacraments  were  not  at  this  period  distin 
guished  from  the  rites  which  are  not  Sacraments,  they 
were,  however,  administered,  investigated  and  de 
fended  against  heretics. 

St.  Augustine  had  to  state  his  views  on  Baptism  and 
Ordination  during  the  Donatist  controversy;  and 
against  the  Pelagians  he  had  to  show  that  the  sanctity 
of  Matrimony  can  be  reconciled  with  the  propagation 
of  original  sin.  Besides  these,  all  the  other  Sacra 
ments,  except  Extreme  Unction,  are  mentioned  in  his 
writings.  Extreme  Unction  itself  is  described  in  a  con 
temporary  document,  the  letter  of  Pope  Innocent  I  to 
Decentius,  Bishop  of  Eugubium.  Quite  evidently  then 
in  the  5th.  century,  these  Sacraments  are  in  the  posses 
sion  of  the  entire  Church,  and  form  part  of  her  life,10 
but  circumstances  have  not  yet  led  her  to  list  them. 
Later  on  greater  precision  will  be  given  to  the  sacra 
mental  doctrine,  but  in  the  meantime  the  sacramental 
realities  will  undergo  no  change ;  they  will  remain  what 
they  always  were. 

petant,  et  de  sacramento  fontis  et  baptismi.  .  .  .  De  sacra- 
mento  autem  altaris  sacri,  quod  hodie  viderunt,  nihil  adhuc  audie- 
runt. —  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  v,  28:  Si  ergo  ad  hoc  valet  quod 
dictum  est  in  evangelic  (Joan.,  ix,  31)  .  .  .  tit  per  peccatorem 
sacramenta  non  celebrantur,  quomodo  exaudit  homicidam  depre- 
cantem  vel  super  aquam  baptismi,  vel  super  oleum,  vel  super 
eucharistiam,  vel  super  capita  eorum  quibus  manus  imponitur? 
10  In  the  5th.  century,  all  the  Sacraments  are  found  men 
tioned,  not  only  in  the  writings  of  Catholic  authors,  but  also  in 
those  of  the  Nestorians  and  Monophysites,  who,  though  schis 
matics,  kept  all  the  Sacraments  and  have  them  to-day. 


IN  EARLY  MEDLEVAL  WRITERS     263 

At  the  end  of  the  Patristic  Period,  the  seven  Sacra 
ments  are  looked  upon  as  sacramenta,  in  the  still  rather 
vague  sense  then  given  to  this  term.  Baptism,  the 
Eucharist  and  Matrimony  were  called  sacramenta 
from  the  time  of  Tertullian.11  St.  Cyprian  applied 
the  name,  sacrament,  to  Confirmation,12  St.  Augustine 
to  Holy  Orders,13  Innocent  to  Extreme  Unction,14  and 
St.  Gregory  the  Great  to  Penance.15  Thus  if  the 
Fathers  did  not  draw  up  a  list  of  the  Sacraments,  they 
at  least  prepared  the  data  by  the  aid  of  which  later 
writers  were  enabled  to  arrive  at  a  definitive  enumera 
tion  of  the  Sacraments. 

§  III.     The  Attempts  of  the  Early  Middle  Ages. 

It  was  inevitable  that  the  list  of  the  Sacraments 
should  undergo  fluctuations.  It  depended  essentially 
upon  the  development  of  the  definition  of  a  sacrament 
and  upon  the  development  of  the  doctrine  of  Sacra 
ments  as  efficacious  symbols  of  grace.  Such  fluctua 
tions,  in  fact,  are  quite  in  evidence  in  the  early  Middle 
Ages. 

St.  Isidore  of  Seville,  in  the  7th.  century,  dis 
tinctly  realized  the  fact  that  the  list  of  the  Sacraments 
depended  upon  the  definition  of  a  sacrament.  He  had 
grasped  the  method  to  be  followed  in  working  out  the 
list  of  the  Sacraments;  but  the  state  of  sacramentary 
theology  at  that  time  made  it  impossible  for  him  to 
arrive  at  a  definitive  result  : 

11  TERTULLIAN,  Adv.  Marcion.,  iv,  34 ;  v,  18. 
12Epist.  Ixxii,  I. 

13  De  bapt.  cont.  Donat.,  i,  2. 

14  Epist.  ad  Decentium,  8. 

16  Cf.  HARNACK,  History  of  Dogma,  vol.  6,  p.  202,  n.  7. 


264     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

"  Sunt  autem  sacramenta  baptismus  et  chrisma,  corpus  et 
sanguis.  Quae  ob  id  sacramenta  dicuntur,  quia  sub  tegu- 
mento  corporalium  rerum  virtus  divina  secretius  salutem 
eorumdem  sacramentorum  operatur,  unde  et  a  secretis  vir- 
tutibus,  vel  a  sacris  sacramenta  dicuntur."  16 

This  list  of  Isidore  contains  but  three  Sacraments: 
Baptism,  Confirmation,  and  the  Eucharist.  It  was  di 
rectly  inspired  by  the  catecheses  of  the  Fathers  in 
which  the  teaching  of  the  Church  about  the  three 
Sacraments  of  the  Christian  initiation  was  explained 
to  neophytes.  St.  Isidore  justifies  it  by  his  definition 
of  a  sacrament,  the  wording  of  which  is  meant  to 
emphasize  the  hidden  or  mysterious  virtue  of  the 
sacrament.  This  definition,  as  we  said  before,  was  not 
a  happy  one : 17  it  led  ecclesiastical  writers  up  to  the 
1 2th.  century  to  apply  the  name,  sacrament,  to  the 
mysteries  of  our  faith  such  as  the  Incarnation.  The 
consequence  of  this  confusion  was  that  the  working 
out  of  the  list  of  the  Sacraments  was  still  more  de 
layed.  But  even  with  a  perfect  definition,  Isidore 
could  not  have  succeeded  in  his  task,  at  such  an  early 
date.  Penance,  especially,18  was  not  as  yet  widely 
enough  considered  under  the  aspect  of  a  sac r amentum. 

The  8th.  and  Qth.  century  writers  made  no  fresh 
attempts  to  enumerate  the  Sacraments.  They  merely 
reproduced  the  list  of  Isidore.19  Some  of  them,  the 

16  Etymol,  lib.  vi,  cap.  19,  n.  37-40.    It  need  not  be  said  that 
St.   Isidore  and  all  writers  before  the   I2th.  century  were  not 
ignorant  of  the  existence  of  the  other  Sacraments,  though  they 
did  not  think  of  putting  them  in  their  lists. 

17  See  above,  p.  36. 

18  St.  Gregory  the  Great  (t  604)  was  the  first  to  use  the  name 
sacramentum  in  connection  with  Penance.     This  usage,  however, 
did  not  become  general  until  the  time  of  St.  Peter  Damian. 

19RABANUS  MAURUS,  De  cleric,  institut.,  i,  24;   RATRAMNUS, 


IN  EARLY  MEDIAEVAL  WRITERS     265 

Venerable  Bede  for  example,  reckoned  but  two  Sacra 
ments,  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  Confirmation  being 
included  in  Baptism. 

It  was  the  intellectual  renaissance  under  Charle 
magne,  that  led  ecclesiastical  writers  to  undertake 
synthetic  studies  on  sacramental  questions.  From 
these  studies  complete  lists  of  the  Sacraments  were 
soon  to  result.  The  teaching  and  the  training  of 
clerics  demanded  an  exposition  of  all  the  liturgical 
rules  necessary  for  the  administration  of  the  Christian 
rites,  as  well  as  the  explanation  of  the  sacramental 
doctrine,  the  knowledge  of  which  was  indispensable.20 

To  supply  this  need  several  treatises  were  compiled. 
In  these  the  doctrine  on  the  Sacraments  was  laid  down 
together  with  the  rules  for  the  recitation  of  the  Divine 
Office,  for  fasting,  the  ecclesiastical  calendar  and  in 
deed  every  bit  of  information  deemed  useful  for 
clerics.  A  work  similar  to  this  had  been  accomplished 
in  the  East,  in  the  5th.  century,  by  the  Pseudo-Diony- 
sius  in  his  Ecclesiastical  Hierarchy.  Here  the  cere 
monies  of  Baptism,  of  the  Eucharist,  of  Confirmation, 
of  ordinations,  of  the  monastic  profession  and  of 
funerals  are  explained  for  the  benefit  of  those  whose 
duty  it  was  to  administer  the  sacred  mysteries  to  the 
faithful.21  This  Dionysian  list  of  six  mysteries,  based 
on  a  too  broad  definition  of  the  word  pw-nipiov,  was 
adopted  by  many  other  Greek  writers  subsequent  to  the 
5th.  century.  Theodore  Studita  (f826)  preserves 
this  enumeration,  though  he  shows  himself  acquainted, 

De  corpore  et  sanguine  Domini,  46;  PASCHASIUS  RADBERT,  De 
corpore  et  sanguine  Domini,  3. 

20  Cf.  RABANUS  MAURUS,  op.  cit.,  praefatio.    P.L.,  ciii,  265. 

21  Cf.  Eccl.  Hierarch.,  i,  1-3. 


266      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

with  all  our  Sacraments.22  Nay,  as  late  as  the  I3th. 
century  we  still  find  Eastern  writers  reckoning  the 
monastic  profession  and  funerals  in  the  sacramental 
septenary. 

This  work  of  synthesis  led  Latin  writers  of  the 
nth.  century  to  draw  up  lists  of  all  the  Christian 
rites  in  order  to  make  teaching  easier,  by  thus  aiding 
the  students'  memory.  These  lists,  of  course,  were 
based  on  the  definition  of  a  sacrament  then  received 
in  the  schools,  namely  the  formula  of  St.  Augustine: 
"  Sacramentum  est  sacrum  signum."  23  The  less  com 
prehensive  a  term  is,  the  greater  is  the  number  of 
objects  to  which  it  may  be  applied.  If  a  definition  of 
a  sacrament  which  contains  only  the  generic  element 
is  accepted  as  a  complete  definition,  rites,  not  really 
Sacraments,  will  be  inevitably  considered  as  such. 
This  is  exactly  what  happened  to  writers  of  this 
epoch. 

In  a  sermon  upon  the  dedication  of  a  church,24  St. 
Peter  Damian  reckons  twelve  Sacraments : 

"  In  hac  [ecclesia]  congeritur  multiplex  varietas  sacra- 
mentorum,  et  contegitur  antiquitas  misericordiarum  Domi 
ni  Dei  nostri.  Et  ut  breviter  intelligentiolae  nostrae  pro- 
palemus  indaginem,  duodecim  sacramenta  sunt  in  ecclesia, 
quae  unius  fidei  pietas  contegit,  circa  quorum  instantiam 
reflectitur  christianae  religionis  auctoritas.  Primum  est 
baptismatis  sacramentum.  .  .  .  Secundum  est  sacra- 
mentum  confirmationis.  .  .  .  Tertium  est  unctio  infir- 
morum.  .  .  .  Quartum  est  consecratio  pontificis.  .  .  . 
Quintum  est  inunctio  regis.  .  .  .  Sextum  est  sacramen- 

22  PARGOIRE,  L'Eglise  lyzantine,  Paris,  1905,  p.  336. 

23  Cf.  LANFRANCUS,  De  corpore  et  sanguine  Domini,  12.    P.L., 
cl,  422.     Berenger  based  on  this  definition  his  heretical  teach 
ing  about  the  Eucharist. 

24  Sermo  Ixix ;  P.L.,  cxliv,  897  sq. 


IN  EARLY  MEDIEVAL  WRITERS      267 

turn  dedicationis  ecclesiae.  .  .  .  Septimum  est  sacra- 
mentum  confessionis.  .  .  .  Octavum  est  canonicorum. 
.  .  .  Nonum  est  monachorum.  .  .  .  Decimum  est  ere- 
mitarum.  .  .  .  Undecimum  est  sanctimonialium.  .  .  . 
Duodecimum  est  nuptiarum  sacramentum." 

This  list  we  must  say  was  not  considered  by  its 
author  as  complete,  for  it  contains  neither  the  Eu 
charist  nor  Orders,  which,  however,  together  with 
Baptism  constitute  the  "  chief  Sacraments  "of  the 
Church,  as  the  Cardinal  of  Ostia  declared  in  another 
passage.25 

Such  hesitations  about  the  proper  number  of  the 
Sacraments  show  very  clearly  the  confusion  that  ex 
isted  on  the  subject.  This  was  to  last  until  about  the 
end  of  the  i2th.  century.  Even  in  the  middle  of 
the  I2th.  century  we  find  Hildebert  of  Tours  (f  1134) 
reckoning  nine  Sacraments,  and  St.  Bernard,  though 
not  giving  a  list,  leaving  it  to  be  understood  that  the 
number  of  the  Sacraments  is  considerable.26 

On  the  other  hand,  many  writers  of  the  nth. 
century  realized  how  precarious  were  these  enumera 
tions  of  the  Sacraments  and  preferred  to  abide  by  the 
data  of  the  Fathers.  Fulbert  of  Chartres27  ( 11029) 
is  satisfied  with  quoting  the  text  of  St.  Augustine 

25  Opusc.  vi,  Liber  qui  dicitur  Gratissimus,  9:  Tria  profecto 
praecipua  sacramenta  in  sancta  f requentantur  ecclesia :  baptis- 
mus  videlicet,  corporis  quoque  et  sanguinis  Domini  salutare  mys- 
terium,  et  ordinatio  clericorum. 

2QSermo  in  Coena  Domini,  i.  St.  Bernard  regarded  the 
washing  of  feet  on  Holy  Thursday  as  one  of  the  Sacraments. 
St.  Ambrose,  De  Mysteriis,  31-33,  likewise  regarded  as  a  sac 
rament  the  ceremony  of  the  washing  of  feet,  which  at  Milan 
followed  Baptism.  The  great  majority  of  ecclesiastical  writers, 
however,  excluded  this  ceremony  from  the  number  of  the  sacra 
menta. 

27  Sermo  viii ;  P.L.,  cxii,  334. 


268     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

(Epist.  liv,  i)  where  two  Sacraments  are  enumerated 
—  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist.  Bruno  of  Wurtzburg, 
as  well  as  Berenger,  likewise  number  Baptism  and  the 
Eucharist  as  Sacraments.28  Others  simply  reproduce 
the  list  of  St.  Isidore. 

All  these  facts  illustrate  how  uncertain  the  eccle 
siastical  writers  of  this  epoch  were  about  the  number 
of  the  Sacraments.  But  this  very  fact  accomplished 
much  good  by  awakening  a  keen  interest  in  the  study 
of  the  dogma  of  the  Sacraments.  The  result  was  that 
a  new  effort  was  soon  made  which,  with  the  help  of 
God,  succeeded.  After  passing  through  a  period  of 
obscurity,  the  dogma  of  the  septenary  number  showed 
itself  to  theologians  in  all  clearness.  Though  assisted 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Church  is  not  dispensed  with 
working  to  obtain  a  clear  understanding  of  revealed 
truth.  Her  whole  history  furnishes  abundant  illus 
tration  of  this. 


§  IV.     The  Number  of  the  Sacraments  in  the  Twelfth  Cen 
tury  —  Peter  Lombard. 

1 2th.  century  writers  were  quite  alive  to  the  con 
fusion  which  existed  in  the  lists  of  preceding  theolo 
gians.  They  soon  found  the  cause  of  this  confusion 
lay  in  the  imperfect  definition  of  a  sacrament  which 
had  hitherto  been  used.  Accordingly  their  first  care 
was  to  frame  a  definition  which  would  be  suitable  to 
omni  sacramento  solique.29  Accordingly  they  defined 
a  sacrament  as  an  efficacious  sign  of  grace.  This 

28  SCHANZ,  Die  Lehre  von  den  heilig.  Sacram.,  p.   197. 

29  This   was  the   one  preoccupation   of   Hugh   of   St.   Victor, 
De  Sacram.  i,  9,  2 ;  and  of  the  Summa  Sententiarum,  tract,  iv,  i ; 
and  also  of  Peter  Lombard,  Sent.  IV,  Dist.  i,  2. 


IN  12TH.  CENTURY  WRITERS        269 

definition  was  formulated  in  view  of  Baptism  which 
serves  as  the  typical  sacrament.  It  established  a  cri 
terion  which  enabled  theologians  to  distinguish  among 
the  rites  of  the  Church,  those  which  are  productive 
signs  of  grace  and  those  which  are  only  simple  signs.30 

This  method,  as  is  evident,  was  strictly  logical.  It 
was  inevitable  that  it  should  lead  to  a  definitive  result. 

Credit  for  finding  this  method  is  due  to  the  school 
of  Abelard.  Skilled  in  dialectics,  the  theologians  of 
this  school  began  to  apply  the  rules  of  their  art  to 
theology.  As  there  was  but  one  word,  sacr amentum,31 
to  designate  the  Sacraments  and  the  rites  that  are  not 
Sacraments,  these  theologians  made  a  distinction  of 
two  kinds  of  sacramenta:  sacramenta  majora,  spiritu 
alia,  those  important  for  salvation,  and  the  others, 
those  of  less  importance.32  This  distinction  was  the 
first  step  towards  our  distinction  between  Sacraments 
and  sacramentals.  In  fact  the  Sacraments  properly  so 
called  alone  came  to  be  reckoned  among  the  sacra- 
menta  majora.  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  like  Abelard,  dis 
tinguished  between  the  chief  Sacraments,  "  in  quibus 
principaliter  salus  constat  et  percipitur,"  and  Sacra 
ments  of  less  importance  (sacramenta  minor  a)  in- 

30  Summa  Sententiarum,  1.  c. :     Et  hoc  est  quod  distal  inter 
signum  et  sacramentum ;  quia  ad  hoc  ut  sit  signum  non  aliud 
exigit  nisi  ut  illud  significet  cujus  perhibetur  signum,  non  ut  con- 
ferat.     Sacramentum  vero  non  solum  significat,  sed  etiam  confert 
illud  cujus  est  signum  vel  significatio. —  See  above,  pp.  40,  ff. 

31  The  word  sacramental  which  we  use  today  to  designate  the 
rites  which  are  not  Sacraments  was  first  used  by  Alexander  of 
Hales.    At  first  it  was  reserved  to  the  accidental  ceremonies  of 
Baptism,  but  was  soon  extended  to  all  the  rites  of  ecclesiastical 
institution. 

32  Epitome    theol.    christ.,    28:    Horum    sacramentorum    alia 
spiritualia  alia  non.   Spiritualia   sunt  ilia  majora,   quae   scilicet 
ad  salutem  valent. 


270     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

tended  to  increase  the  devotion  of  the  faithful,  like 
the  sprinkling  of  holy  water  and  the  imposition  of 
ashes,  or  to  supply  the  objects  requisite  for  Christian 
worship.33 

This  distinction  being  made,  it  still  remained  to 
draw  up  the  list  of  the  sacr  amenta  major  a.  To  ac 
complish  this,  a  collective  effort  was  required,  for  tra 
dition  had  to  be  consulted,  and  its  answer  could  be  de 
cisive  only  through  unanimity  of  theologians.  Con 
formity  of  belief  among  theologians  is,  as  all  know,  the 
distinctive  characteristic  of  Catholic  dogma. 

The  three  Sacraments  of  Isidore's  list  were,  without 
any  hesitation,  reckoned  among  the  sacramenta  ma 
jor  a:  the  teaching  of  tradition  was  very  categorical  on 
this  point.  Agreement  in  regard  to  the  other  four 
came  more  slowly.  Abelard's  Epitome  places  the 
anointing  of  the  sick  and  Matrimony  among  the  chief 
Sacraments.  The  efficacy  of  the  anointing  of  the  sick 
is  compared  to  that  of  the  Eucharist.34  Matrimony 
was  regarded  as  a  sacrament,  not  because  it  confers 
saving  grace  directly,  but  because  it  remedies  an  ob 
stacle  to  salvation,  namely  concupiscence ;  and  because 
its  symbolism  is  very  lofty.35  The  list  of  the  chief 
Sacraments  in  the  De  Sacramentis  of  Hugh  of  St.  Vic 
tor  mentions  only  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  the  Eu 
charist.36  The  other  Sacraments,  however,  all  receive 
emphatic  notice  in  his  book,  although  they  still  remain 
confounded  with  other  rites. 

The  immediate  result  of  the  work  of  the  school  of 

33  De  Sacramentis,  i,  9,  7 ;  ii,  9,  I.  Other  writers  formulated  the 
distinction  differently,  dividing  the  Sacraments  into  sacramenta 
necessitatis  and  sacramenta  dignitatis.  Cf.  ALBERT  OF  LIEGE 
(fii3i),  De  misericordia  et  justitla,  iii,  55;  P.L.,  clxxx,  956. 

3*  Epitome  Theologiae  christianae,  30. 
35  Ibid.,  28,  31.  36  De  Sacramentis,  ii,  6-8. 


IN  12TH.  CENTURY  WRITERS         271 

Abelard,  was  not,  however,  a  definitive  enumeration 
of  the  Sacraments.  What  it  did  accomplish  was  com 
pletely  to  separate  the  treatment  of  the  seven  Sacra 
ments  from  the  treatment  of  other  rites  and  from 
the  other  parts  of  theology,  whereas  up  to  this  time  the 
seven  Sacraments  had  never  been  considered  by  them 
selves. 

The  English  Cardinal,  Robert  Pulleyn,  the  restorer 
of  the  Oxford  Academy,  in  his  books  of  Sentences 
published  about  1144,  treats  all  the  Sacraments  except 
Extreme  Unction.37  The  secondary  rites  are  alto 
gether  neglected  so  as  to  mark  clearly  the  distinction 
between  them  and  the  true  Sacraments.  The  same 
preoccupation  is  noticeable  in  the  Summa  Sententi- 
arum,38  where  the  Sacraments  are  examined  succes 
sively  and  in  the  same  order,  that  Peter  Lombard  later 
follows  in  his  enumeration.  So,  too,  another  disciple 
of  the  school  of  Abelard,  Roland  Bandinelli,  later  Pope 
Alexander  III  39  gives  an  exclusive  treatise  to  the  doc 
trine  of  the  Sacraments,  following  the  order  of  the 
Summa.  Here  too,  Holy  Orders  is  left  rather  in  the 
back  ground,  being  mentioned  only  casually  in  connec 
tion  with  the  power  of  remitting  sin.  More  than  this, 
Roland  still  calls  the  Incarnation  a  sacrament.40  So 
there  was  still  something  left  for  Peter  Lombard  to  do 
before  he  could  differentiate  definitively  the  seven 
Sacraments  from  all  other  parts  of  the  Christian  re 
ligion. 

37  Sentent.,  lib.  V-VIII ;  P.L.,  clxxxvi.    He  had  studied  in  the 
nth.  century  schools  of  Paris.  - 

38  Sum.  Sent.,  tract.,  v-vii.     The  sacrament  of  Holy  Orders  is 
merely  mentioned,  vi,  15,  not  being  treated  in  a  special  chapter 
like  the  others. 

89  GIETL,  Sent.  Rolands,  pp.  195-313. 
40  Ibid.,  p.   157. 


272     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 


The  reason  why  the  Master  of  Sentences  was  en 
abled  to  advance  beyond  his  predecessors  is  to  be 
found  in  the  happy  use  he  made  of  their  method. 

When  he  wrote  the  fourth  book  of  his  Sentences, 
about  the  year  1148,  the  enumeration  of  the  seven 
Sacraments  had  already  been  practically  made  by  the 
Summae  of  the  early  i2th.  century,  and  the  notion  of  a 
sacrament  had  been  quite  accurately  set  forth  in  the 
Summa  Sententiarum.  But  Peter  emphasized  so 
strongly  the  distinction  between  the  Sacraments  prop 
erly  so  called,  efficacious  signs  of  grace,  and  the  other 
rites  which  are  mere  signs,  that  the  word  sacrament 
came  to  be  used  exclusively  to  designate  our  seven 
sacramental  rites.41 

The  only  change  he  introduced  was  to  enumerate 
together  all  the  rites  which  the  definition  covered,  at 
the  beginning  of  his  treatise  on  the  Sacraments.  Pre 
vious  writers  had  already  set  them  in  a  place  apart  in 
their  Summae.  But,  instead  of  being  satisfied,  as  they 
had  been,  with  treating  them  one  after  another,  the 
Master  of  Sentences  brought  them  together  at  the  be 
ginning  by  giving  a  list  of  the  Sacraments: 

"Jam  ad  sacramenta  novae  legis  accedamus,  quae  sunt: 
Baptismus,  Confirmatio,  panis  benedictio,  id  est  Eucharistia, 
Paenitentia,  Unctio-extrema,  Ordo,  Conjugium.  Quorum 
alia  remedium  contra  peccatum  praebent,  et  gratiam  adju- 
tricem  conferunt,  ut  Baptismus;  alia  in  remedium  tantum 

41  Sent.  IV,  Dist.  i,  2 :  Omne  enim  sacramentum  est  signum, 
sed  non  e  converse.  .  .  .  Non  ergo  significandi  tantum  gratia 
sacramenta  instituta  sunt,  sed  etiam  sanctificandi.  Quae  enim 
significandi  gratia  tantum  instituta  sunt,  solum  signa  sunt  et  non 
sacramenta. 


PETER  LOMBARD  273 

sunt,  ut  Conjugium;  alia  gratia  et  virtute  nos  fulciunt,  ut 
Eucharistia  et  Ordo."  42 

Following  the  teaching  of  the  school  of  Abelard, 
Peter  Lombard  declares  that  Matrimony  helps  us  to 
salvation  only  in  a  negative  way,  by  offering  us  a 
"  remedy  "  against  sin.  This  was  its  title  to  be  con 
sidered  a  true  sacrament.  This  theory  does  not 
satisfy  the  facts  of  the  case :  concupiscence  could  never 
be  suppressed  without  grace.  Hence  Matrimony,  to  be 
a  remedy  against  concupiscence,  must  impart  grace. 
Later  this  reasoning  appealed  to  many  theologians, 
with  the  result  that,  in  the  time  of  St.  Thomas,  the 
opinion  that  Matrimony  was  an  efficacious  sign  of 
grace  was  almost  universal.43 

The  part  the  Master  of  Sentences  played  in  the  de 
velopment  of  the  dogma  of  the  septenary  number  must 
not,  then,  be  overestimated.  His  work  consisted 
chiefly  "  in  consecrating,  as  it  were,  the  septenary  num 
ber  and  in  causing  to  be  definitively  accepted  the 
method  of  separating  systematically  the  doctrine  of 
the  Sacraments  from  the  other  parts  of  theology."  44 
It  is  impossible  to  see  in  the  work  of  Peter  Lombard, 
as  Harnack  does,45  the  formal  creation  of  a  new 
dogma.  How  did  this  work  of  synthesis,  begun  long 
since  and  now  completed  in  the  fourth  book  of  the 
Sentences,  in  any  way  alter  the  sacramental  realities? 

Moreover  that  the  number,  seven,  was  not  merely 
"  an  idea  peculiar  to  Peter  the  Lombard  "  but  also  an 
expression  of  the  tradition  of  the  Church,  is  attested 

42Dist.  2,  i. 

43  ST.   THOMAS,  In  IV.  Sent.,  Dist.   2,   qu.   2.    Cf.   TURMEL, 
Histoire  de  la  Theologie  positive,  livre  II,  Part  II,  chap.  13. 

44  PORTALIE,  Bulletin  de  Literature  ecclesiastique,  1904,  p.  274. 

45  History  of  Dogma,  vol.  6,  p.  202. 


274      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

by  the  fact  that  it  is  found  in  a  contemporary  docu 
ment,  the  Life  of  St.  Otto  of  Bamberg,  the  Apostle  of 
Pomerania.  This  was  written  about  1150  or  1152. 
In  it  the  biographer  attributes  to  the  bishop  of  Bam 
berg  a  sermon  which  contains  a  complete  enumeration 
of  the  Sacraments : 

"  Discessurus  a  vobis,  trado  vobis  quae  tradita  sunt  nobis 
a  Domino,  arrham  fidei  sanctae  inter  vos  et  Deum,  septem 
videlicet  sacramenta  Ecclesiae,  quasi  septem  santificativa 
dona  Sancti  Spiritus.  .  .  .  Ista  ergo  septem  sacramenta 
quae  iterum  vestri  causa  enumerare  libet,  Baptismum,  Con- 
firmationem,  infirmorum  Unctionem,  Eucharistiam,  lapso- 
rum  Reconciliationem,  Conjugium  et  Ordines.  .  .  . 
Quapropter  omni  honore  ac  reverentia  eadem  sacramenta 
servate,  diligite  et  veneramini ;  docete  ea  filios  vestros,  ut 
memoriter  teneant  et  diligenter  observent  in  omnes  genera- 
tiones."  46 

Everything  inclines  us  to  believe  that  the  text  of  this 
sermon  was  independent  of  the  treatise  of  Peter  Lom 
bard  :  it  expressly  mentions  the  number  seven  and  the 
Sacraments  are  enumerated  in  a  different  order  and 
under  different  names. 

In  the  second  half  of  the  I2th.  century,  a  treatise 
ascribed  to  a  priest  of  Amiens,  Robert  Paululus,47  like 
wise  gives  a  perfectly  accurate  list  of  the  Sacraments. 
It  is  based  upon  Abelard's  distinction  of  Sacraments 

46  P. L.,   clxxiii,    1357,    1360.    This    sermon   was    addressed    to 
the    Pomeranians   about    1124,   more  than   twenty  years   before 
the  composition  of  the  treatise  of  Peter.     But  its  authenticity  is 
contested.     The   Bollandists    (July  2,  vol.   I,  p.  352)    defend  it. 
The  Monumenta  Germaniae  Script.,  t.  XII,  p.  738,  and  t.  XV,  p. 
705,  cites  this  sermon  as  the  work  of  the  biographer  of  St.  Otto. 
In  that  case  we  must  date  it  from  1150-1152. 

47  HAUREAU,    Hugues    de    Saint    Victor,   Nouvel   examen    de 
I'cdition  de  ses  ceuvres,  Paris,  1859,  pp.  148-149. 


CATHOLIC  EXPLANATIONS  275 

of  prime  importance  and  Sacraments  of  less  import 
ance.48  In  the  1 3th.  century  the  list  of  Peter  Lombard 
was  accepted  by  all  the  great  scholastics.  Their  work 
consisted  in  explaining  in  detail  the  fitness  of  the 
number  of  the  Sacraments.  In  1274  at  the  Council 
of  Lyons,  the  two  Churches,  the  Greek  and  the  Latin, 
united  in  professing  solemnly  the  dogma  of  the  sep 
tenary  number.49  Such  rapidity  in  diffusion  could  not 
be  accounted  for  had  this  doctrine  been  invented  by 
Peter  Lombard,  instead  of  being  a  teaching  rooted  in 
tradition  and  supported  by  Patristic  authority.  The 
Master  of  Sentences,  far  from  creating  the  dogma, 
merely  formulated  the  data  of  tradition  more  clearly 
than  his  predecessors.  His  work  is  an  elucidation  of 
the  dogma  rather  than  a  creation  properly  so  called. 
Consequently  the  Protestant  contention  that  the 
dogma  was  then  created,  cannot  be  taken  seriously. 
Nor  can  we  accept  the  hypothesis  of  some  Catholic 
authors  50  who  have  attempted  to  explain  the  silence 
of  the  Fathers  about  the  number  of  the  Sacra 
ments  by  the  law  of  secrecy,  the  disciplines  arcani. 
According  to  this  theory,  there  would  have  been,  in 
the  Patristic  Period,  a  law  which  obliged  the  faithful 
and  the  ministers  of  the  Church  never  to  speak  ex- 

48  De  caeremoniis,  sacramentis,  oiHciis  .  .  .  ccclesiasticis, 
i,  12;  P.L.,  clxxvii,  388:  "  Septem  sunt  principalia  sacramenta 
quae  in  ecclesia  ministrantur,  quorum  quinque  generalia  sunt, 
quia  ab  eis  neuter  sexus,  nulla  aetas,  conditio  nulla  excluditur, 
videlicet,  baptismus,  confirmatio,  eucharistia,  paenitentia,  unctio 
innrmorum.  Duo  particularia  sunt,  eo  quod  non  tribuantur  om 
nibus,  sed  quibusdam  hominum,  ordines  scilicet  et  conjugium." 

49DENziNGER,  Enchiridion,  n.  388  (new  ed.,  n.  465). 

50  MERLIN,  Traite  historique  et  dogmatique  sur  les  paroles  ou 
les  formes   des  sept  sacreinents  de   l'£glise,   chap.   v.    (MiGNE, 
Theologiae  cursus,  t.  xxi,  p.  135)  ;  HURTER,  Theol.  dogmat.  com 
pendium,  t.  Ill,  n.  300 
19 


276     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

plicitly  of  the  mysteries  of  the  Christian  religion  in  the 
presence  of  infidels  or  of  catechumens.  This  law,  it  is 
asserted,  would  explain  why  we  do  not  find  any  list  of 
the  seven  Sacraments  in  the  writings  of  the  Fathers. 

Whatever  opinion  may  be  held  upon  the  impor 
tance  of  the  disciplina  arcani,50*  it  will  certainly  be 
found  an  insufficient  explanation  of  the  late  ap 
pearance  of  the  list  of  the  Sacraments.  When  the 
Fathers  were  instructing  the  neophytes  in  the  days 
which  followed  the  administration  of  Baptism,  they 
were  not  bound  by  the  law  of  secrecy :  indeed  they  ex 
plain  the  doctrine  of  Baptism  and  of  the  Eucharist 
with  copious  details.  But  nowhere  is  there  a  list  of 
the  Sacraments  given.  Besides  even  in  the  early  Mid 
dle  Ages  when  the  disciplina  arcani  certainly  no  longer 
existed,  we  do  not  find  an  enumeration  of  the  seven 
Sacraments. 

The  silence  of  the  Fathers  and  the  rather  late  date 
at  which  the  number  of  the  Sacraments  was  fixed  are 
to  be  accounted  for  by  the  development  of  dogma. 
The  determination  of  the  number  of  the  Sacraments, 
as  we  have  endeavored  to  show,  was  necessarily  subor 
dinated,  on  the  one  hand  to  the  development  of  the 
notion  of  a  sacrament,  and  on  the  other  to  the  develop 
ment  of  the  sacramentary  doctrine,  which  makes  us 
consider  our  sacramental  rites  under  the  systematic 
conception  of  an  efficacious  symbol.51  This  system- 

50aCf.  BATIFFOL,  Etudes  d'histoire  et  de  theologie,  positive, 
premiere  serie,  "  L'Arcane." 

51  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Abbe  de  Broglie,  Conferences 
sur  la  vie  surnaturelle,  Paris,  1889,  t.  iii,  Les  sacrements,  p.  306 : 
The  rites  which  possess  the  power  of  producing  grace  have  al 
ways  been  practised  in  the  Church.  With  each  one  of  these 
ceremonies,  was  connected  traditional  teaching  about  its  nature 
and  effects.  But  the  element  common  to  all  these  different  rites, 


FITNESS  OF  SEPTENARY  NUMBER      277 

atization  marks  considerable  doctrinal  progress,  but  it 
did  not  in  the  least  alter  the  sacramental  realities. 

"After  all,"  says  Abbe  de  Broglie,  "the  doctrine 
has  been  the  same  during  all  ages,  because  all  our 
sacramental  rites  have  always  been  used  with  faith  in 
their  efficacy.  But  the  systematic  and  philosophic 
form  has  progressed.  The  proposition  that  there  are 
seven  Sacraments  of  the  New  Law,  which  alone  pro 
duce  grace  ex  opere  operate,  now  a  dogma  of  faith, 
could  not  have  appeared  evident  in  the  nth.  century 
on  account  of  a  lack  of  precision  in  language.  The 
Church  advances  in  her  knowledge  of  the  truth;  she 
advances  slowly  and  prudently,  but  yet  she  does  ad 
vance  :  each  century  adds  more  precision,  more  com 
pleteness  to  her  knowledge.  The  condition  of  this 
progress  is,  as  we  have  said  elsewhere,  the  assistance 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  directing  human  thought,  and  re 
pressing  its  errors."1  52 

§  V.     The  Fitness  of  the  Number  of  the  Sacraments  —  The 
Interventions  of  the  Church. 

The  great  schoolmen  of  the  I3th.  century  explicitly 
taught  the  doctrine  of  the  septenary  number  and  con 
formably  to  the  custom  of  their  time,  they  sought  the 

the  opus  operatum,  was  not  clearly  distinguished,  in  the  early 
centuries,  from  the  other  effects  proper  to  each  sacrament.  .  .  . 
Only  considerably  later  was  the  theoretical  classification  of  the 
Sacraments  made  and  their  number  counted.  This  proves  that 
there  had  been  a  rather  slow  development  of  the  doctrine  on  this 
point.  The  term  sacrament,  Sacramentum,  and  the  Greek  term 
(jLvvT-hpiov  were  for  a  long  time  without  precise  meaning,  being 
applied  to  the  mysteries  and  to  all  sacred  things.  Thus  do  we 
find  careful  and  orthodox  writers  enumerating  some  six,  some 
twelve,  Sacraments. 

52  Ibid.,  pp.  307-308.     Cf.  O'XENHAM,  The  Catholic  Doctrine  of 
the  Atonement,  ed.  1895,  pp.  19-21. 


278      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

fitness  of  it.  Why  seven  Sacraments  rather  than 
six  or  eight?  What  reasons  can  be  given  for  this 
number?  Such  was  the  problem  they  tried  to 
solve. 

Theologians  sought  its  solution  by  studying  the  ef 
fects  of  the  Sacraments  and  the  ends  for  which  they 
had  been  instituted.  The  only  possible  way  to  form 
an  idea  of  the  Divine  plan  of  worship,  and  to  recognize 
the  reasons  why  the  sacramental  organism  should  con 
tain  seven  rites  and  neither  more,  nor  less,  was  to  make 
a  synthetic  study  of  the  effects  wrought  by  the  Sacra 
ments. 

On  the  raison  d'etre  of  the  Sacraments,  the  school  of 
Abelard  put  forth  an  idea  both  suggestive  and  tradi 
tional,  which  was  made  use  of  by  later  theolo 
gians.  They  asserted  that  the  Sacraments  were  es 
tablished  as  "  remedies  "  for  original  and  actual  sin.53 

Hugh  of  St.  Victor  developed  this  idea  conformably 
to  his  mystical  tendencies.54  "  The  Sacraments,"  said 
he,  "  were  instituted  for  three  reasons :  to  humble 
man,  to  instruct  him  and  to  supply  aliment  for  his 
activity/'  When  he  .revolted  against  his  Creator,  man 
was  enslaved  by  concupiscence  to  creatures  inferior  to 
him :  by  his  humble  submission  to  the  sacramental  ele 
ments,  he  merits  reconciliation  with  God  and  emancipa 
tion  from  his  servitude.  Further  the  Sacraments,  by 
accustoming  man  to  perceive  with  eyes  of  faith  under 

53  Cf.   GIETL,  Sent.  Rolands,  pp.    199,  215,   etc. —  A   Tractatus 
theologicus  falsely  attributed  to  Hildebert  of  Tours,  but  really 
from  the  same  source  as  the  Summa  Sententiarum,  very  clearly 
expresses   Abelard's   idea:     Contra   peccata   tarn   originalia  tarn 
actualia    .     .        .     inventa    sunt    sacramentorum    remedia,    P.L., 
clxxi,    1145.    Cf.   ROBERT   PAULULUS,  De  caeremoniis  et  oMciis 
eccl,  i,  12. 

54  De  sacramentis,  i,  9,  3. 


FITNESS  OF  SEPTENARY  NUMBER      279 

material  appearances,  those  invisible  realities  hidden 
therein,  like  remedies  in  vessels,  teach  him  to  raise 
himself  from  the  sensible  to  the  spiritual,  as  he  would 
have  done  without  effort  in  the  state  of  innocence. 
Finally  man,  under  the  sway  of  concupiscence,  is  in 
capable  of  fixing  his  activity  on  one  good  object  alone ; 
his  life  is  taken  up  with  a  multiplicity  of  successive 
exertions,  some  of  which  concern  the  necessities  of 
life,  like  eating,  drinking  and  sleeping,  while  others 
lead  to  evil.  God,  by  the  Sacraments,  offers  to  man 
works  of  virtue  in  which  he  can  spend  a  part  of  his 
activity,  perfecting  his  inner  sanctity.  Consequently 
the  Sacraments  are  eminently  remedies,  destined  to 
cure  the  evils  caused  by  sin. 

This  teaching  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  was  adopted 
by  the  Summa  Sententiarum,55  and  by  Peter  Lombard. 
The  latter,  however,  did  not  insist  much  on  it.  He 
preferred,  whilst  holding  to  the  Abelardian  idea,  to  see 
in  Christ  the  good  Samaritan  binding  up,  by  His  sacra 
ments,  the  wounds  of  humanity  received  from  original 
and  from  actual  sin.56 

The  idea  of  Abelard  rather  than  the  teaching  of  the 
mystics  was  applied  to  the  septenary  number  by  the 
theologians  of  the  I3th.  century.  Several  systems 
were  elaborated 57  to  explain  how  the  seven  Sacra 
ments  were  necessary  to  counteract  sin.  They  con 
tained  much  that  was  arbitrary  and  subtle. 

55  Tract,  iv,  I. 

56  Sent.   IV,   Dist.   i,   I :    Samaritanus   enim  vulnerato  appro- 
pians,  curationi   ejus   sacramentorum   alligamenta   adhibuit,   quia 
contra    originalis    peccati    et    acttialis    vulnera    sacramentorum 
remedia  Deus  instituit. 

57 Cf.  ALBERT  THE  GREAT,  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  2,  art.  i;  ST. 
THOMAS,  In  IV  Sent.,  D.  2,  qu.  2,  art.  i ;  ALEX.  OF  HALES,  IV, 
q.  5,  m.  7,  art.  2. 


280      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Albert  the  Great 5S  was  inclined  to  believe  that  the 
Sacraments  were  instituted  to  combat  the  seven  capital 
sins.  He  justified  his  opinion  by  considerations  some 
what  fanciful. 

Others,  among  them  St.  Bonaventure,  found  a  rela 
tionship  with  the  seven  Christian  virtues;  the  three 
theological  and  the  four  cardinal  virtues,  and  with  the 
seven  maladies  (septiformis  morbus)  caused  by  sin. 
Baptism  corresponds  to  faith  and  destroys  original 
sin ;  Penance  corresponds  to  justice  and  blots  out  mor 
tal  sin ;  Extreme  Unction  corresponds  to  perseverance, 
the  perfection  of  fortitude,  and  remits  venial  sin;  Holy 
Orders  corresponds  to  prudence,  and  destroys  ignor 
ance,  an  effect  of  original  sin;  the  Holy  Eucharist  cor 
responds  to  charity  and  cures  malice,  natural  to  fallen 
man;  Confirmation  corresponds  to  hope  and  remedies 
our  native  weakness ;  finally  Matrimony  corresponds 
to  temperance  and  checks  our  concupiscence.59 

It  is  quite  apparent  that  the  theologians  did  not 
succeed  in  justifying  the  number  of  the  Sacraments  on 
the  principles  laid  down  by  Abelard  without  some 
straining  of  resemblances.  Still  this  point  of  view 
had  acquired  such  an  authority  in  the  schools  that  St. 
Thomas,  who  had  a  better  one  to  propose,  believed  he 
ought  not  to  abandon  the  other  altogether.  Conse 
quently  he  mentions  it  in  his  Summa  after  his  own 
system. 

The  fundamental  principle  of  St.  Thomas'  system 
is  that  the  organism  of  the  Sacraments  extends  over 

ss  ibid. 

59  ST.  BONAVENTURE,  Breviloquium,  vi,  3. 


FITNESS  OF  SEPTENARY  NUMBER      281 

the  entire  Christian  life;  over  the  life  of  individuals 
as  well  as  that  of  the  Church.  This  principle  is 
founded  on  the  analogy  which  exists  between  the 
economy  of  man's  natural  life  and  that  of  his  super 
natural  life.  On  account  of  the  harmony  existing  be 
tween  the  natural  and  the  supernatural,  the  develop 
ment  of  the  Christian's  spiritual  life  follows  a  process 
quite  similar  to  that  of  his  bodily  life.  The  different 
stages  of  the  evolution  of  both  lives  must  be  sufficiently 
correlated,  to  enable  us  to  find  therein  the  justification 
of  the  number  of  the  Sacraments. 

The  natural  life  of  man  is  both  individual  and 
social.  Every  one  perfects  his  own  personality  in  the 
bosom  of  society,  because  our  individual  life  and  our 
social  life  are  necessarily  correlated. 

The  development  of  the  individual  life  begins  with 
generation,  the  source  of  being  and  life;  and  it  attains 
its  perfection  by  successive  growths.  An  essential 
condition  for  that  development  is  the  taking  of  nour 
ishment,  without  which  life  could  not  be  sustained. 
Similarly  in  the  supernatural  order,  Baptism  gives 
spiritual  life  to  the  Christian,  by  begetting  him  unto 
grace;  Confirmation  perfects  this  life;  and  Holy 
Eucharist,  a  Divine  food,  preserves  and  sustains  it. 

These  three  Sacraments  would  suffice  for  all  the 
personal  needs  of  the  Christian,  were  there  no  danger 
of  his  supernatural  life  being  lost.  But  it  can  be 
lost  like  the  life  of  the  body.  Consequently  when  the 
malady  of  sin  is  contracted,  some  means  of  being  cured 
of  it  and  of  repairing  its  evil  effects  must  be  had.  To 
this  end  Penance  is  given,  to  cure  the  Christian  of  his 
faults ;  and  Extreme  Unction  is  added  to  cause  the  evil 
effects  to  disappear  by  delivering  the  forgiven  sinner 


282     THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

from  that  spiritual  weakness,  the  result  of  sin,  which 
is  analogous  to  the  physical  weakness  of  one  newly  re 
covering  from  an  illness. 

When  we  come  to  consider  the  social  life  of  man, 
we  find  it  can  progressively  attain  its  perfection  only 
when  there  is,  in  society,  an  authority  to  direct  it  and 
when  the  gaps  made  by  death  are  filled  by  the  begetting 
of  children.  So  does  the  Church,  the  Christian  society, 
need  an  authority  to  govern  it ;  this  she  obtains  through 
the  sacrament  of  Holy  Orders.  Matrimony,  by  con 
tinually  furnishing  her  with  new  members,  insures  her 
perpetuity. 

St.  Thomas  ends  his  explanation  by  showing  its 
agreement  with  the  then  common  teaching  that  the 
seven  Sacraments  had  been  instituted  to  repair  the  evils 
caused  by  sin.60 

The  system  of  St.  Thomas,  though  assuredly  su 
perior  to  those  of  his  contemporaries,  does  not  alto 
gether  escape  arbitrariness.  While  the  institution  of 
seven  Sacraments  is  a  fact,  it  will  always  be  difficult  to 
fathom  its  ultimate  purpose ;  at  least  up  to  the  present, 
all  attempts  that  have  been  made  to  do  so  have  proved 
insufficient.  The  Angelic  Doctor,  in  order  to  justify 
the  septenary  number,  had  to  strain  the  analogy  be 
tween  the  two  lives  of  man.  For  instance,  the  effects 
of  Confirmation  do  not  correspond  exactly  with  the 
natural  growth  of  the  child.  Growth  comes  insensi 
bly,  little  by  little,  while  in  Confirmation  perfection  in 
the  spiritual  life  comes  all  at  once  to  the  baptized  per 
son.  Likewise  Penance  finds  no  equivalent  in  the 
natural  order,  because  it  not  only  cures  the  sinner,  but 
it  also  restores  him  to  the  life  of  grace.  Other 
strained  analogies  could  be  pointed  out. 

60  Sum.  Theol.,  3  p..,  qu.  65,  art  I. 


INTERVENTIONS  OF  THE  CHURCH      283 

What  is  particularly  worth  remembering  about  this 
system  is  the  general  idea,  which  is  very  true  and  beau 
tiful.  By  the  institution  of  the  Sacraments,  Christian 
life  is  sanctified  at  its  principal  stages.  The  plan  of 
Jesus,  as  far  as  we  can  follow  it  with  our  limited 
vision,  was  to  embrace  the  whole  Christian  life,  to 
sanctify  its  most  solemn  moments  and  to  provide  for 
all  its  needs. 


* 
*  * 


This  work  of  theologians  upon  the  fitness  of  the 
number  of  the  Sacraments  indicates  that,  in  the  I3th. 
century  the  dogma  had  attained  its  fullest  develop 
ment.  While  the  Church  is  making  a  dogmatic 
progress,  it  is  seldom  that  some  heresy  does  not  arise 
to  contest  the  legitimacy  of  this  progress.  Then  it  is 
that  ecclesiastical  authority  intervenes  to  condemn  er 
ror  and  to  define,  once  for  all,  the  traditional  teaching 
of  which  Christian  society  has  just  become  fully  con 
scious.  The  decisions  of  councils,  the  definitions  of 
Sovereign  Pontiffs  have  always  been  prepared  for  by 
a  dogmatic  development  extending  over  a  considerable 
length  of  time,  and  have  ordinarily  been  occasioned  by 
some  heresy.  The  dogma  of  the  septenary  number 
offers  a  good  exemplification  of  this  law. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  I3th.  century,  precisely  at 
the  period  of  the  great  development  of  the  sacramental 
doctrine,  the  Cathari  not  only  taught,  as  has  been 
pointed  out  in  the  third  chapter,  that  the  value  of  the 
Christian  rites  depends  on  the  sanctity  of  the  minister, 
but  also  rejected,  in  accordance  with  their  false  spirit 
ualism,  the  use  of  material  elements  in  the  administra 
tion  of  the  Sacraments.  They  questioned,  too,  the 
legitimacy  of  Matrimony,  infant  Baptism  and  trail- 


284     THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

substantiation.  The  fourth  Lateran  Council  (1215), 
called  by  Pope  Innocent  III  for  the  deliverance  of  the 
Holy  Land,  the  reformation  of  the  Church,  and  the 
destruction  of  heresy,61  formulated  in  its  first  capitu- 
lum  a  decree  directed  against  the  Cathari  and  the  Wal- 
denses.62  There  is  no  enumeration  of  the  seven  Sacra 
ments  to  be  found  there.  But  an  extra-conciliary 
document  of  the  same  period  does  contain  an  enumera 
tion.  This  document  is  the  profession  of  faith  ad 
dressed  by  Innocent  III  in  1210  to  the  bishops  of  the 
provinces  where  the  Waldenses  lived.  It  had  to  be 
subscribed  to  by  the  heretics  desirous  of  re-entering  the 
Church.  The  seven  Sacraments  are  successively  de 
scribed  and  the  errors  opposed  to  each  formally  re 
proved.63 

The  number  of  the  Sacraments  received  a  far  more 
official  sanction  in  the  second  Council  of  Lyons,  in 
1274. 

The  Greek  Emperor,  Michael  Paleologus,  having 
manifested  a  desire  for  the  reunion  of  his  Church  with 
that  of  Rome,  had  sent  to  him  in  the  month  of  March, 
1267,  by  Pope  Clement  IV,  a  symbol  of  faith,  the  ac 
ceptance  of  which  was  made  an  essential  condition  of 
reconciliation.64  The  Emperor  replied  in  a  letter 
which  was  read  during  the  fourth  session  of  the 
Council,  giving  his  complete  adhesion  to  the  doctrine 
contained  in  the  Roman  symbol.  In  it  was  an  enu 
meration  of  the  seven  Sacraments.65  History  records 

61HEFELE,  Hist,  des  Candles,  t.  viii,  p.   112. 

62  HEFELE,   op.   cit.,   pp.    119-120;    DENZINGER,   Enchiridion,   n. 
355-357  (new  ed.,  n.  428-430). 

63  DENZINGER,  Enchiridion,  n.  370  (new  ed.,  n.  424). 

64  HEFELE,  op.  cit.,  t.  ix,  p.  4. 

65  HEFELE,  p.  22.    Here  are  its  words  about  the  number  of  the 
Sacraments:     Tenet  etiam  et  docet  eadem  sancta   Romana  EC- 


INTERVENTIONS  OF  THE  CHURCH     285 

no  discussion  between  the  Latins  and  the  Greeks  on 
the  subject  of  the  number  of  the  sacramental  rites. 
At  the  Council  of  Florence,  in  the  I5th.  century,  this 
article  of  faith  was  considered  as  one  of  those  upon 
which  no  discord  had  ever  arisen  between  the  two 
Churches.  Is  not  this  a  sufficient  proof  that  the  dogma 
of  the  septenary  number  is  not  a  human  invention,  but 
the  expression  of  the  Catholic  truth? 

Nevertheless  though  the  Eastern  Churches  like  the 
Latin  Church,  always  possessed  the  sacramental  real 
ities  in  their  integrity,  they  did  not  arrive  so  quickly  at 
an  exact  enumeration  of  these  realities.  "  In  the 
Churches  of  the  East," 6G  says  Abbe  de  Broglie, 
sacramental  development  was  slower,  confusion 
existed  for  a  longer  time."  During  the  I3th.  century 
and  even  at  the  beginning  of  the  I4th.  century, 
some  Eastern  writers  still  placed  the  monastic  profes 
sion  and  the  funeral  ceremony  among  the  number  of 
the  seven  Sacraments.67  The  Nestorian  Ebedjesu 
(•(•1318)  considers  the  sign  of  the  cross,  and  the  holy 
yeast  or  leaven, —  which  was  thought  to  be  of  Apos 
tolic  origin  and  was  destined  for  the  making  of  altar 
breads, —  to  belong  to  the  seven  Sacraments.68  The 
influence  of  the  writings  of  the  pseudo-Dionysius,  or 
heretical  fanaticism  explain  these  mistakes.  Hence 
it  was  still  necessary,  in  the  i5th.  century,  to  ex 
plain  again  in  detail  the  sacramental  doctrine  of  the 

clesia,  septem  esse  ecclesiastica  sacramenta,  unum  scilicet  baptis- 
ma.  .  .  .  Cf.  DENZINGER,  n.  388  (new  ed.,  n.  465). 

660/>.   cit.,  p.   307- 

67  Perpetuite  de  la  Foi,  t.  v,  chap.  VIII.  Cf.  FRANZELIN,  De 
sacramentis  in  genere,  th.  xx. 

68AssEMANi,  Bibliotheca  Orientalis,  t.  iii,  p.  n,  p.  240.  Cf. 
Diction,  de  Theol.  cathol.  i,  26-27. 


286      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Roman  Church  to  the  Armenians  at  the  time  of  their 
reunion.69 

The  development  of  the  dogma  was,  as  we  see,  less 
rapid  in  the  Eastern  Churches  than  in  ours.  In  the 
actual  state  of  the  history  of  the  East,  it  is  very  diffi 
cult  to  follow  the  various  phases  of  the  development.  ° 
At  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Florence,  this  develop 
ment  might  be  said  to  be  completed.  Consequently 
when  the  Protestant  heresy  threatened,  the  "  ortho 
dox  "  Greek  Church  rose  up  with  remarkable  unison 
and  great  energy  to  condemn  it.  This  shows  how 
completely  she  had  made  her  own  the  Catholic  doctrine 
on  the  Sacraments.  The  development  was  worked 
out  in  both  Churches  without  any  clash  or  difficulty, 
because  it  consisted  merely  in  adapting  the  theological 
theory  to  the  sacramental  practice  which  was  the  same 
in  both.  To  question  this  dogmatic  progress,  as  we 
shall  see  the  Reformers  doing,  amounts  to  denying  all 
the  religious  past  of  the  Greek  Church  as  well  as  of 
the  Latin  Church. 

The  Protestant  heresy  in  its  ensemble,  was  only  one 
vast  protestation  against  the  dogmatic  progress  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  Disdaining  the  sixteen  centuries  of 
Catholic  life,  the  Reformers,  contrary  to  the  law  of 
nature,  retrograded,  pretending  to  confine  all  Chris 
tianity  within  the  text  of  the  inspired  writings.  They 

69  This  is  to  be  found  in  the  document  known  under  the  name 
of  Decree  to  the  Armenians,  DENZING.,  nn.  590  sq.  (new  ed.,  nn. 
695,  sqq). 

70  The  relations  of  the  Latins  with  the  Greeks,  both  in  the 
time  of  the  Crusades  and  during  the  periods  of  attempted  union, 
favored  this  doctrinal  development.    In  the  i6th.  century  the  Pa 
triarch     of     Constantinople,     Jeremias,     in     his     reply    to    the 
Protestants,  makes  use  of  the  scholastic  theory  of  matter  and 
form  to   explain   the   doctrine  of  the   Greek   Church  about  the 
Sacraments.     Cf.  MORIN,  De  sacris  Ecclesiae  ordinationibus,  pars 
III,  Exercit.  I,  cap.  iii,  n.  8. 


PROTESTANT  HERESY  287 

did  not  see,  or  they  did  not  care  to  see,  that  the  Apos 
tolic  Church  whose  legitimacy  they  recognised,  con 
tained  all  the  realities  of  the  future  Church;  and  that 
the  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  only  Apostolic 
Christianity  developed,  enlarged  and  become  the  great 
tree  to  whose  branches  the  birds  of  the  air  come  for 
shelter.  Since  Christianity  is  a  living  religion,  its 
rule  of  faith,  namely  the  authority  of  the  Church, 
must  also  be  living.  Dogmatic  progress  is  possible 
and  even  necessary,  when  it  is  guided  by  an  infallible 
authority  which  lives  (for  life  is  to  be  found  in 
motion),  but  it  is  inconceivable  for  those  who,  like 
the  Reformers,  adopt  a  dead  rule  of  faith,  that  is,  the 
Bible  and  the  Bible  only.71 

Hence  Protestants  hastened  to- reject  the  septenary 
number  under  the 'pretext  that  it  is  not  to  be  found 
in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  must  consequently  be  a 
corruption  of  the  Apostolic  teaching: 

"  Principio  neganda  mihi  sunt  septem  Sacramenta,  et  tan- 
turn  tria  pro  tempore  ponenda,  Baptismus,  Paenitentia, 
Panis.  .  .  .  Quamquam  si  usu  scripturae  loqui  velim, 
non  nisi  unum  Sacramentum  habeam,  et  tria  signa  sacra- 
mentalia."  72 

The  principles  laid  down  by  the  Reformers  soon 
recoiled  upon  them.  The  Bible  alone  was  incapable  of 
producing  any  agreement  among  them  as  to  the  num- 

71  Credimus  unicam  regulam  et  normam,  secundum  quam  omnia 
dogmata  omnesque  doctores  aestimari  et  jtidicari  oporteat,  nullam 
omnino  aliam  esse,  quam  prophetica  et  apostolica  scripta  cum  V. 
turn    N.    T.     Formula    concordiae    (1574),    quoted    by    HURTER, 
Theol.  dogm.,  comp.,  t.  i,  n.  1081. 

72  LUTHER,  De  captivitate  babylonica,  Initio.     M.  Lutheri  opera, 
t.  ii,  p.  275  (Ihenae,  1557)- 


288      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ber  of  the  Sacraments.  Luther  himself  could  not 
make  up  his  mind.  At  the  beginning  of  his  work 
De  Captivitate  Babylonica,  he  admits  three.  At  the 
end  he  is  inclined  to  recognise  only  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper.  The  greatest  variety  of  opinions  is 
to  be  found  among  all  the  Reformers.73  Some  add  to 
Luther's  list,  Matrimony;  others,  Penance  or  Holy 
Orders.  Calvin  recognises  only  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper.  In  brief  they  agree  only  on  rejecting 
the  number  seven.  "  I  say  that  the  Papists,"  Calvin 
tells  us,  "  have  against  them  about  their  numbering 
of  Sacraments,  not  only  the  word  of  God  but  also  the 
Ancient  Church,  although  they  pretend  and  boast  to 
have  these  on  their  side."  74  Now  in  fact,  neither 
Scripture  nor  the  Early  Church  is  against  the  num 
ber  seven.  Though  the  number  may  not  be  found, 
the  realities  which  the  number  expresses  are  there. 
Consequently  the  work  of  Christian  thought  which 
has  resulted  in  the  expression  of  this  dogma,  is  en 
tirely  legitimate. 

Hence  it  happened  that  the  Roman  Church,  which 
cannot  allow  the  legitimacy  of  a  practice  which  she 
has  employed  for  centuries  to  be  questioned,  con 
demned  in  the  Council  of  Trent  the  Protestant  claims. 
The  Greek  Church  too,  attacked  in  the  most  sacred 
treasures  of  her  religious  life  by  these  heretical  nega 
tions,  likewise  raised  her  voice  to  condemn  the  Re 
formers.  Indeed  she  had  been  directly 'provoked  by 
them  to  do  so. 

73  Cf.  BELLARMINE,  De  Sacramentis  in  genere.,  Lib.  II,  cap.  23. 
i*Institut.  chrest.,  iv,  ig3. 


PROTESTANTS  289 

§  VI.     The    Protestant   Heresy    and    the    Orthodox    Greek 

Church. 

The  Protestants  were  very  eager  to  draw  the  East 
ern  Churches  into  their  errors.  To  this  end,  about 
1576  the  Reformers  of  Wittenberg  sent  a  Greek  trans 
lation  of  the  Augsburg  confession  to  Jeremias,  Patri 
arch  of  Constantinople. 

A  sort  of  polemic  resulted  from  this  very  indiscreet 
attempt.  The  Patriarch  replied  by  refuting  the  Prot 
estant  doctrines,  especially  those  that  dealt  with  the 
Sacraments :  "  In  Chap.  VII  you  say,"  he  declared, 
"  that  you  also  recognise  a  holy  Catholic  Church,  and 
that  you  celebrate  in  the  correct  manner  the  Mys 
teries  and  the  sacred  ceremonies  of  the  Church.  To 
which  we  reply  that  there  is  only  one  holy,  catholic 
and  apostolic  Church  of  Christians.  .  .  .  The 
Mysteries  received  in  this  same  Catholic  Church  of 
orthodox  Christians  and  the  sacred  ceremonies  are 
seven  in  number :  Baptism,  the  Anointing  with  the 
sacred  Chrism,  Holy  Communion,  Holy  Orders,  Mat 
rimony,  Penance,  and  the  Holy  Oil.  As  there  are 
seven  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  according  to  Isaias,  so 
are  there  also  seven  Mysteries  wrought  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  just  seven  and  no  more."  75 

The  Wittenberg  theologians  took  this  reply  of  Jere 
mias  as  a  misunderstanding  of  their  position.  They 
replied  by  stating  their  theory  more  exactly;  though 

75  Perpctuite  de  la  fol  sur  les  sacrements,  torn.  V,  Liv.  i,  chap. 
III.  The  word  mystery  (/wycmyptoy)  is  defined  by  Jeremias  as  a 
secret  sign  which  has  a  secret  and  spiritual  effect.  It  corres 
ponds,  then,  to  our  word  sacrament. —  The  authors  of  the  Per 
pctuite  de  la  foi  have  translated  /JLvo-rripiov  as  "  sacrament."  We 
corrected  this  translation. 


290      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

attenuating  it  as  far  as  possible,  by  the  aid  of  their 
distinction  between  the  Sacraments  properly  so  called, 
namely  Baptism  and  the  Eucharist,  and  the  other 
Christian  rites  to  which  the  name,  sacrament,  in  its  true 
sense  does  not  belong.  "  The  Greek  Churches  believe 
that  there  are  seven  Sacraments  and  we  affirm  that  to 
only  two  of  them  can  this  term  be  properly  applied. 
.  .  .  Even  if  we  were  willing  to  give  the  name, 
sacrament,  to  all  the  things  by  which  it  has  pleased  God 
to  signify  celestial  and  spiritual  realities,  we  could  not 
limit  them  to  seven.  What  we  call  sacrament,  are 
those  ceremonies  of  Divine  institution  which  with  the 
word  of  Divine  promise  regarding  the  remission  of 
sins  and  the  clemency  of  God  towards  us,  have  an 
exterior  symbol  attached."  7G 

The  Patriarch  made  no  reply  to  that  entreaty;  but 
when  the  Protestants  were  emboldened  to  make  a  third 
attempt,  he  let  them  know  that  he  would  have  no 
more  correspondence  with  them  on  religious  questions, 
and  gave  them  clearly  to  understand  that,  if  there  had 
been  any  alteration  in  the  traditional  doctrine  concern 
ing  the  Sacraments,  it  was  not  to  be  found  in  his 
Church. 

The  belief  of  the  Patriarch  Jeremias  was  that  of  the 
whole  Greek  Church.  The  protestations  which  arose, 
some  years  later,  against  the  altogether  Calvinistic  con 
fession  of  one  of  his  successors,  Cyril  Lukaris,  are 
good  evidence  of  this. 

Cyril  Lukaris,  a  native  of  Candia,  spent  his  youth 
in  Italy,  Switzerland,  Germany  and  Lithuania,  becom 
ing  initiated  through  his  relations  with  Protestants, 

t*Perpetuite  de  la  foi,  Ibid. 


PROTESTANTS  AND  GREEKS         291 

into  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation.  But  so 
well  did  he  dissemble  his  opinions,  that  he  was  pro 
moted,  in  1602,  to  the  patriarchate  of  Alexandria  and, 
in  1621,  to  that  of  Constantinople.  In  1629  he  pub 
lished  in  Geneva  his  famous  Confession,  written  in 
Latin;  then  in  1633,  he  brought  out  the  Greek  text.77 
The  knowledge  of  this  document,  when  it  reached  the 
East,  and  the  liberties  accorded  to  the  Protestant 
preachers  in  Constantinople,  finally  caused  Cyril  to  be 
suspected.  During  his  lifetime  protestations  arose, 
both  in  public  conferences  and  in  writings,  against  the 
Reformation  teaching  on  the  sacramental  doctrine, 
which  the  Patriarch  was  hypocritically  trying  to 
spread.78 

It  was  not  until  1638,  however,  after  the  death  of 
this  personage  of  doubtful  attitude,  that  official  opposi 
tion  began.  The  successor  of  Cyril  Lukaris,  Cyril  of 
Beroe,  assembled  a  synod  at  Constantinople  which, 
imitating  the  anathemas  of  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria 
against  Nestorius,  condemned  all  the  propositions  of 
the  Lukarian  confession.  On  the  subject  of  the  fif 
teenth,  the  synod  expressed  itself  as  follows :  "  Let 
Cyril  be  anathematised  because  he  teaches  and  believes 
that  there  are  not  seven  Mysteries  of  the  Church,  that 
is  to  say,  Baptism,  Chrism,  Penance,  the  Eucharist, 
the  Priesthood,  Extreme  Unction  and  Matrimony,  ac 
cording  to  the  institution  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  tradition 
of  the  Apostles  and  the  custom  of  the  Church:  and 

77  Op.  cit.,  chap.  4.  The  text  of  this  confession  is  to  be  found 
in  the  appendix  of  Jon  Michalcescu's  book,  O^aavpbs  TTJS  6p0o8o£ias, 
Die  Bekenntnisse  und  die  wichtigsten  Glaubenszeugnisse  def 
grieschisch-orientalischen  Kirche  im  OriginalUxt  (Leipzig,  1904). 

™Perpetuite  de  la  foi,  Ibid. 

20 


292      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

because  he  falsely  asserts  that  Jesus  Christ  in  the  Gos 
pel  has  given  or  instituted  but  two  Sacraments,  Bap 
tism  and  the  Eucharist."  79 

As  might  well  be  expected  these  doctrinal  disputes 
brought  about  considerable  intellectual  perplexity,  so 
that  it  became  necessary  to  draw  up  a  formula  of 
faith,  destined  to  dissipate  all  misunderstanding  and 
to  bring  back  unity  in  belief.  Such  was  the  origin 
of  the  orthodox  Confession  (6/30o'So£os  6/xoAoyta)  at 
tributed  to  Peter  Mogilas,  metropolitan  of  Kiew.80 
This  Confession  was  examined  and  approved  of 
by  a  great  number  of  Eastern  patriarchs  and  bishops. 
It  received  its  official  consecration  at  the  synod  of 
Jassy,  1642,  and  can  be  considered  as  a  faithful  ex 
pression  of  the  belief  of  the  modern  orthodox  Greeks. 
It  contains  a  very  exact  enumeration  of  the  seven  Sac 
raments  as  veil  as  an  affirmation  of  their  Divine  in 
stitution  and  their  efficacy. 

The  errors  of  Cyril  Lukaris  were,  thus,  the  occasion 
of  some  very  serious  work  undertaken  by  Greek  theo 
logians  for  the  triumph  of  the  traditional  teaching. 
Among  them,  Meletius  of  Constantinople  (f  1664)  de 
serves  special  mention.81 

79  Op.  cit.,  chap.  V. 

80  The  complete  text  is  to  be  found  in  the  work  of  JON  MICH- 
ALCESCU.     The  doctrine  is  explained  by  the  method  of  questions 
and  answers.     Here  is  the  answer  to  the  question  about  the  num 
ber  of  the  Sacraments :  "  This  article  making  mention  of  baptism 
.    .     .    gives  us  occasion  to  examine  the  seven  mysteries  of  the 
Church,  which  are  baptism,  chrism,  or  confirmation,  the  Eucha 
rist,  penance,  the  priesthood,  honorable  matrimony  and  Extreme 
Unction.     These  seven  mysteries  correspond  to  the  seven  gifts 
of  the  Holy  Ghost."     The  following  question  refers  to  the  divine 
institution  and  the  efficacy  of  the  mysteries.    Cf.  Perpetuite  de 
la  foi,  Ibid.,  chap.  V. 

81  Perpetuite  de  la  foi,  Ibid. 


PROTESTANTS  AND  GREEKS         293 

And  yet  French  Protestants,  especially  Claude, 
thought  themselves  warranted,  by  the  Confession  of 
Cyril  Lukaris,  in  asserting  conformity  of  their  belief 
with  that  of  the  Greeks.  The  authors  of  the  Perpe- 
tuite  de  la  Foi  begged  M.  de  Nointel,  French  ambas 
sador  at  Constantinople,  "  to  acquaint  himself,  in  their 
own  country,  with  the  belief  of  the  Greeks  and  the 
other  Orientals."  He  induced  Dositheus,  Patriarch  of 
Jerusalem,  to  call  a  synod.  The  acts  of  this  synod 
which  was  held  at  Jerusalem  in  1672  proclaimed  "  that 
the  evangelical  Mysteries  of  the  Church  are  seven  in 

number  "      (TO,     cvayyeAiKo,    fJLVcrrrjpia    Iv    TTJ     e/c/cA^CTia    etrai 

€7rra).82  Once  more  the  orthodox  Greek  Church 
marked  its  disapproval  of  the  heresy  of  the  Reformers. 
"If  anyone  says  that  the  seven  Mysteries  of  the  New 
Testament  have  not  been  instituted  by  Our  Lord,  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  there  are  more  or  less;  let  him  be 
anathema."  83  This  anathema  formulated  in  1694  by 
the  same  Dositheus  against  a  Greek  Calvinist,  Caryo- 
phylle,  is  a  true  expression  of  the  sacramental  faith 
of  the  Orientals  at  the  end  of  the  I7th.  century. 

Since  that  time  the  orthodox  Greeks  have  remained 
unswervingly  faithful  to  the  old  belief. 

The  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  Anthimius,  and  his 
synod,  in  their  reply  to  the  encyclical  Praeclara,  ad 
dressed  by  Leo  XIII  on  the  22d.  of  June,  1894,  to  the 
princes  and  the  people,  reiterated  their  old  protesta 
tions,  already  formulated  at  the  Council  of  Florence, 
against  the  introduction  of  Filioque  into  the  Creed,  and 
against  certain  usages  of  the  Latin  Church,  such  as 

82  Id.,  chap.  VI.     The  acts  of  this  synod  as  well  as  those  of 
the  synods  of  Constantinople    (1638)   and  of  Jassy    (1642)   are 
contained  in  the  work  of  Michalcescu. 

83  Perpetuite,  Ibid. 


294      THE  NUMBER  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Baptism  by  infusion,  the  consecration  of  unleavened 
bread,  the  neglect  of  the  epiclesis  and  communion  un 
der  one  species  alone.84  No  complaint  was  made  on 
the  subject  of  sacramental  dogma. 

Is  not  this  steadfast  and  continuous  conformity  of 
belief  between  the  two  Churches  which  have  been  ene 
mies  for  so  long  a  time,  a  sufficient  proof  that  the 
dogma  of  the  septenary  number  is  a  faithful  expres 
sion  of  the  sacramental  realities  granted  by  Christ  to 
the  Christian  religion? 

84DucHESNE,  The  Churches  separated  from  Rome,  ch.  Ill, 
The  Encyclical  of  Anthimius,  pp.  49-50,  58-59. —  This  chapter 
has  been  issued  in  pamphlet  form  tinder  the  title  The  Roman 
Church  before  Constantine,  New  York,  1909. 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  DIVINE  INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

It  has  been  said  —  and  with  truth  —  that  the  lack 
of  documents  does  not  allow  us  to  construct  an  his 
torical  synthesis  of  Christian  origins,  which  will  ex 
press  the  whole  reality.  Especially  in  a  treatise  on  the 
Divine  institution  of  the  Sacraments  is  it  proper  to  bear 
this  in  mind.  Certainly  the  present  chapter  has  no 
pretension  to  be  an  adequate  expression  of  the  truth. 
Its  purpose  is  rather  negative ;  its  aim,  not  so  much  to 
tell  how  Christ  proceeded  in  instituting  the  Sacra 
ments,  as  to  harmonize  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  in 
stitution  of  the  Christian  rites  with  the  history  of  the 
beginnings  of  Christianity.  On  this  score,  the  present 
essay  is  then  legitimate.  It  will  be  found  incomplete, 
perhaps  even  totally  insufficient,  but  the  reader  will  at 
least  bear  in  mind  the  intentions  which  have  inspired  it. 

§  I.  The  Definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  the  Theo 
logical  Hypotheses  on  the  Manner  of  the  Divine  Institu 
tion  of  the  Sacraments. —  Newman's  Hypothesis. 

The  dogma  of  the  Divine  institution  of  our  seven 
Sacraments  was  defined  by  the  Council  of  Trent ;  "  Si 
quis  dixerit  Sacramenta  Novae  Legis  non  fuisse  om- 
nia  a  Jesu  Christo,  Domino  nostro,  instituta ;  aut  esse 
plura  vel  pauciora  quam  septem  .  .  .  anathema 
sit."  l  The  seven  Sacraments  of  the  Christian  religion 

1  Sess.  VII,  De  Sacramentis  in  gen.,  can.  i. 
295 


296      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

were  without  exception  instituted  by  Our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ:  such  is  the  Catholic  doctrine,  a  doctrine  which 
is  the  great  consolation  of  the  faithful,  who  come  so 
often  to  draw  Divine  life  from  these  sacramental 
springs. 

The  history  of  the  Council,  as  well  as  the  interpre 
tations  of  the  best  theologians,  prove  that  the  Fathers 
of  Trent  defined  the  fact  of  the  Divine  institution,  but 
that  they  defined  nothing  on  the  manner  of  this  insti 
tution. 

The  purpose  which  the  Council  had  was  in  fact  to 
condemn  the  Protestant  errors.  Now  these  bore  on 
the  fact  of  the  Divine  institution,  and  not  on  its 
manner.  According  to  Protestants,  the  Sacraments, 
with  the  exception  of  Baptism  and  Holy  Eucharist,  are 
purely  human  institutions,  totally  foreign  to  the  mind 
of  Our  Savior.  It  was  the  Divine  institution  itself 
which  the  Protestants  rejected;  their  error  did  not 
bear  on  this  or  that  particular  conception  of  the  man 
ner  of  this  institution. 

Moreover,  at  the  time  of  the  Council,  the  contro 
versy  as  to  the  immediate  or  mediate  institution  of  the 
sacraments  had  already  begun,  for  the  Spanish  theo 
logian,  Dominic  Soto,  expressly  affirms  this  fact  in 
his  Commentary  of  the  Sentences  of  Peter  Lombard,2 
written  before  the  definition  of  Trent.  Out  of  respect 
for  St.  Bonaventure  and  his  followers,  who  maintained 
the  mediate  institution  of  several  of  the  Sacraments, 
the  Council  did  not  wish  to  settle  the  question  by  in 
serting  in  its  definition  the  word  immediate? 

We  may  then  rightly  conclude  that  any  teaching  on 

2  In  IV,  Dist.  i,  qu.  5,  art.  2-4.     Soto  was  sent  to  Trent  as  a 
theologian  by  Charles  V  in  1545. 

3  P.  SCHANZ,  Die  Lehre  von  den  heilig,  Sacramenten,  p.   113. 


THEOLOGICAL  HYPOTHESES         297 

the  manner  of  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Sacraments, 
which  leaves  intact  the  fact  of  this  institution,  is  not 
contrary  to  this  teaching  of  the  Church. 

Such  was  the  opinion  of  theologians  subsequent  to 
the  Council.4  Without  being  blamed  by  the  Church, 
they  thought  out  several  hypotheses  to  explain  how 
Our  Savior  could  have  proceeded  in  the  institution  of 
the  Sacraments.  He  could  have  instituted  them  im 
mediately  or  mediately,  in  specie  or  in  genere.  These 
different  hypotheses  are  based  on  an  interpretation  of 
the  Council's  definition,  which  supposes  that  the  ques 
tion  of  the  institution  of  the  Sacraments  is  left  to  the 
free  investigation  of  Catholic  theologians.5  On  this 
point  then  research  should  bear,  and  the  author  who 
finds  the  true  explanation  of  this  will  have  really  jus 
tified  the  dogma  historically. 


The  hypotheses  put  forward  by  theologians  to  ex 
plain  the  manner  of  the  institution  of  the  Sacraments 
can  be  reduced  to  two :  —  the  hypothesis  of  the  im 
mediate  institution  of  some  Sacraments  and  the  medi 
ate  institution  of  others;  and  the  hypothesis  of  the 
immediate  institution  of  several  of  the  Sacraments  in 

4  FRANZELIN,  op.  cit.,  th.  xiv :  Non  tamen  consentiunt  theologi, 
utrum  hoc  sensu  institutionis  immediatae  debeat  censeri  veritas 
de  fide  definita  in  Concilio  Tridentino.     Aliqui  ut  Bellarminus  et 
Vasquez  id  affirmant ;  Suarez  et  Arriaga  aiunt,  veritatem  esse  cer- 
tam  ex  verbis  Concilii,  non  tamen  audent  dicere  simpliciter  esse 
de   fide.     .     .     .     Eodem    fere  modo  negant  etiam  alii   Ruardus 
Tapper  et  lodocus  Ravestein  doctores  Lovanienses  qui  interfue- 
runt  Concilio,  Estius,  luenin,  Tournely,  Cardinalis  Gotti,  Drouin, 
etc.,  hanc  institutionem  immediatam  omnium  sacramentorum  per 
Christum  in  terris  versantem  esse  in  Concilio  definitam. 

5  Cf.  in  Revue  Thomiste,  mars-avril    1906,  an  article  by  Mau 
rice  de  Baets  on  this  subject. 


298       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

specie,  and  the  immediate  institution  of  the  others  in 
genere.  To  explain. 

The  institution  of  the  Sacraments  is  immediate, 
when  the  author  of  the  Sacraments  establishes  them 
himself,  in  person.  It  is  mediate,  on  the  contrary, 
when  he  delegates  to  another  the  power  of  instituting 
them.  According  to  the  first  hypothesis  then,  Our 
Lord,  while  He  was  on  earth,  would  Himself  have 
established  several  of  the  Sacraments,  in  particular 
Baptism  and  Holy  Eucharist,  and  He  would  have  dele 
gated  to  His  Apostles,  specially  directed  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  work  of  founding  the  Church,  the  power 
of  instituting  the  other  sacramental  rites.6 

In  agreement  with  the  almost  universal  teaching  of 
theologians,  we  think  that  the  mediate  institution  is  to 
be  rejected.  For  it  fails  to  show  how  the  Sacraments 
instituted  in  virtue  of  this  delegated  power,  would  dif 
fer  from  purely  ecclesiastical  institutions. 

But  history,  even  more  than  theology,  is  opposed  to 
this  hypothesis.  Not  a  single  historical  fact  author 
izes  the  affirmation  that  the  Church  employed  this  al- 

6  FRANZELIN,  De  Sacr.  in  gen.,  th.  xiv:  Posset  intelligi  [insti- 
tutio  sacramentorum]  ita,  ut  apostoli  potestate  a  Christo  ipsis 
commtmicata,  qua  vero  sub  directione  quidem  Spiritus  Sancti  sed 
tamen  suo  arbitrio  tanquam  rectores  ecclesiae  uterentur,  potuerint 
instituere  et  instituerint  aliqua  sacramenta,  quibuscum  Deus  ex 
Christi  mentis  conjungeret  dignitatem  et  virtutem  ad  conferen- 
dam  gratiam. —  The  eminent  Jesuit  mentions,  to  reprove  it,  an 
other  hypothesis  which  was,  according  to  him,  admitted  by  certain 
theologians  of  the  Middle  Ages:  Posset  concipi  institutio  per 
apostolos  ita,  ut  post  Christi  ascensionem  Spiritus  Sanctus  per 
apostolos  tanquam  sua  organa  revelationis  et  divinae  operationis 
instituerit  aliqua  sacramenta.  Hoc  modo  apostoli  non  essent  pro- 
prie  institutores  sed  potius  promulgatores  divinae  institutionis. — 
This  hypothesis,  of  which  we  will  speak  in  exposing  the  doctrine 
of  the  writers  of  the  Middle  Ages,  is  not  in  agreement  with  the 
definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 


THEOLOGICAL  HYPOTHESES         299 

leged  power.  When  the  Church  had  to  defend  her 
Sacraments  against  the  heresies,  she  never,  as  will  ap 
pear  again  and  again  in  the  following  pages,  thought 
that  she  possessed  the  power  of  instituting  them;  on 
the  contrary,  she  always  believed  that  they  came  from 
Christ.  How  then  can  we  admit  that  the  Church  is 
the  depositary  of  a  power  of  which  she  was  never  con 
scious?  Besides,  this  mediate  institution  is  inconceiva 
ble  for  several  of  the  very  Sacraments,  to  which  at  first 
sight  it  might  appear  particularly  to  apply.  Thus 
Matrimony  is  one  of  the  Sacraments  of  which  the 
Church  became  explicitly  conscious  rather  late :  a  fact 
which  theologians  were  inclined  to  explain  by  the  hy 
pothesis  of  the  mediate  institution.  But  the  Church 
instituted  nothing  in  Matrimony,  nor  is  there  anything 
in  it  which  she  could  institute,  because  the  sacrament 
of  Matrimony  consists  in  the  matrimonial  contract  it 
self.  Now  this  was  certainly  not  established  by  the 
Church:  how  then  could  the  sacrament  be?  If  finally 
the  sacrament  of  Matrimony  was  only  of  mediate  in 
stitution,  we  would  have  to  admit  that  the  Christians 
of  the  primitive  Church  did  not  receive  the  sacrament 
when  they  married !  The  hypothesis  of  the  mediate 
institution  seems  then  altogether  untenable. 

That  of  the  immediate  institution  would  be  equally 
unacceptable,  if  it  were  not  correctly  understood.  It 
can  be  taken  in  the  strict  sense,  in  specie,  or  in  the 
broad  sense,  in  gencre.  A  sacrament,  we  know,  com 
prises  two  parts :  the  external  and  visible  part,  which  is 
the  sacramental  sign,  and  the  internal  and  invisible, 
which  is  the  spiritual  effect  produced.  Christ  could 
have  Himself  determined  both  parts;  He  would  then 
have  instituted  them  immediately  In  specie.  Or  He 
could  have  been  content  to  determine  the  spiritual  ef- 


300      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

feet  only  and  to  leave  to  His  Apostles  and  to  His 
Church  the  mission  of  choosing  an  appropriate  sacra 
mental  sign:  He  would  then  have  instituted  the  Sac 
raments  immediately,  but  only  in  genere.  Baptism 
and  the  Eucharist  were  instituted  in  specie;  all  theolo 
gians  agree  on  that  point.  As  for  the  other  Sacra 
ments,  it  is  possible  that  they  were  instituted  only 
in  genere.1 

Thus  interpreted  the  immediate  institution  is  nearer 
to  the  facts,  but  it  still  remains  incapable  of  explaining 
the  considerable  development  which  history  attests  in 
the  sacramental  institution  of  the  Christian  religion. 

It  seems  then  lawful  to  apply  to  the  institution  of 
the  Sacraments  Newman's  theory  of  development. 
Might  not  the  Savior  have  instituted  some  Sacraments 
in  an  implicit  state  ?  Might  He  no  have  been  satisfied 
to  lay  down  the  essential  principles,  from  which,  after 
a  more  or  less  protracted  development,  would  come 
forth  the  fully  constituted  Sacraments  ?  8  Might  there 
not  be  in  this  conception  of  the  origin  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  the  explanation  of  this  relatively  late  explicit 
consciousness,  which  the  Church  had  of  some  of  her 
Sacraments  ? 

7  Duplici  modo   sacramenta  a   Christo   institui   potuerunt :   in 
genere,  determinando  quidem  gratiam  propriam  hujus  sacramenti, 
et  statuendo  simul  adhibendum  esse  signum  ad  gratiam  illam  sig- 
nificandam  idoneum,  sed  Ecclesiae  relinquendo  hujus  signi  elec- 
tionem ;  in  specie,  eligendo  non  solum  gratiam,  sed  etiam  signum 
adhibendum,  addita  lege  eo  semper  utendi.    TANQUEREY,  Synopsis 
theol.  dogtn.,  t.  iii,  pp.   197-198. — Modern  theologians  are  more 
and  more  inclined  to  abandon  the  hypothesis  of  the  immediate 
institution  in  specie  for  all,  except  Baptism  and  Holy  Eucharist. 

8  This   is   after   all   what  those   theologians   admit   who  think 
that  the  Savior  left  to  His  Church  the  mission  of  choosing  the 
sacramental  sign  of  some  Sacraments.     These  Sacraments  would 
not  have  been  fully  constituted  until  the  Church  had  determined 
their  matter  and  form. 


IMPLICIT  AND  EXPLICIT  INSTITUTION  301 

Shall  we  not  be  allowed,  following  in  the  steps  of 
Newman,  to  propose  a  third  hypothesis,  or  rather  to 
modify  a  little  the  hypothesis  of  the  immediate  institu 
tion  in  genere,  by  saying  that  Christ  instituted  all  the 
Sacraments  immediately,  but  did  not  Himself  give 
them  all  to  the  Church  fully  constituted?  On  some, 
particularly  essential  to  Christianity,  Baptism  and  Holy 
Eucharist  for  example,  Christ  explained  Himself  com 
pletely,  so  that  the  Church  has  had  from  the  very 
beginning  full  and  entire  consciousness  of  these  sacra 
mental  rites.  As  to  the  rest,  the  Savior  laid  down 
their  essential  principles,  leaving  to  development  to 
show  the  Apostles  and  the  Church  what  the  Divine 
Master  wished  to  accomplish.  Jesus  was  not  able  to 
say  everything  to  His  Apostles :  Non  potestis  p  or  tare 
modo.  Just  as  He  left  to  the  Holy  Ghost  the  care  of 
making  known  explicitly  to  the  Church  the  revealed 
Catholic  dogma,  so  He  could  have  confided  to  this 
same  Holy  Spirit  the  mission  of  unveiling  all  the  riches 
of  the  sacramental  institution,  when  the  needs  of  the 
growing  Christian  society  would  demand  it.  It  can 
thus  be  understood  how,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
history,  the  Church  did  not  have  from  the  very  begin 
ning,  a  full  and  entire  consciousness  of  some  Sacra 
ments. 

The  formula  which  we  shall  employ  to  express  this 
undoubtedly  complex  doctrine,  is  this:  Jesus  insti 
tuted  immediately  and  explicitly  Baptism  and  Holy 
Eucharist ;  He  instituted  immediately  but  implicitly  the 
five  other  Sacraments.9  This  statement  of  the  dogma 

9  Like  all  general  formulas,  this  is  too  absolute.  The  degree 
of  implicitness  is  not  in  fact  the  same  for  the  five  Sacraments. 
The  meaning  of  the  formula  will  be  made  more  precise  in  the 
following  pages. 


302      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

is  not  contrary  to  the  definition  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  for,  the  implicit  being  real,  an  implicit  institu 
tion  is  a  real  institution.  And  this  statement  is  suf 
ficiently  justified  by  history. 


§  II.     The  Divine  Institution  of  the  Sacraments  According 
to  Scripture. 

That  the  Savior  instituted  Baptism  and  Holy  Eu 
charist  in  a  very  formal  manner,  the  most  certain  texts 
make  it  impossible  to  deny. 

Liberal  critics  would  have  Christian  Baptism  be  a 
creation  of  the  primitive  Christian  community,  a  trans 
formation  of  the  Jewish  rite  of  purification  10  and  of 
the  baptism  of  John  the  Baptist,  brought  about  without 
any  intervention  of  the  will  of  Jesus.11  Now  this 
very  transformation  of  the  Jewish  baptism  into  Chris 
tian  Baptism  is  inexplicable,  unless  it  be  the  work 
of  the  Savior.  For,  since  the  first  days  of  the  Church, 
Christian  Baptism  appears  wholly  distinct  from  both 
the  Jewish  baptism  and  that  of  John  the  Baptist. 
This  altogether  primitive  distinction  remains  inexplic 
able,  if  it  is  denied  that  Jesus  Himself  completely  set 
tled  this  point  of  the  Christian  worship.  A  purely 
human  transformation  of  any  institution  demands  a 
certain  limit  of  time  to  be  produced. 

In  the  mind  of  the  Apostles  and  of  the  first  Chris 
tians,  Christian  Baptism  was  really  distinct  from  the 
Jewish  baptism  of  John.  They  were  given  different 
names.  Christian  Baptism  was  called  baptism  "  in  the 
name  of  Jesus  "  from  the  day  of  Pentecost ; 12  the  bap- 

10  Numb.,  xix,  1-22. 

11  Cf.  A.  SABATIER,  Religions  of  Authority,  pp.  51,  ff. 

12  Acts,  ii,  38.     Cf.  Acts,  viii,  12;  x,  48;  xix,  5. 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE          303 

tism  of  John  was  designated  by  the  name  of  the 
Baptist,  "  the  baptism  of  John."  13  The  effects  of  the 
two  baptisms  were  also  carefully  distinguished  : 
Christian  Baptism  remits  sin  and  confers  the  Holy 
Ghost;14  the  baptism  of  John  was  indeed  the  bap 
tism  of  penance  "  unto  the  remission  of  sins,"  but  it 
did  not  give  the  Holy  Ghost.  John  the  Baptist  him 
self  declared  the  inferiority  of  his  baptism  to  that  of 
Jesus.15  Besides,  so  well  persuaded  were  the  Apostles 
of  the  insufficiency  of  John's  baptism,  that  they  would 
give  Christian  Baptism  to  those  who  had  received  only 
that  of  the  Baptist.16 

These  facts  allow  us  to  affirm,  without  any  rashness, 
the  existence  of  a  very  primitive  tradition,  assigning  to 
Jesus  the  establishment  of  Christian  Baptism.  This 
tradition  is  moreover  formally  attested  in  the  last  verses 
of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  :  "  Going  therefore  teach  ye 
all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ;  "  17  and  by 
the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  in  the  interview  of  Jesus  with 
Nicodemus,18  where  there  is  question  of  the  Christian 
Baptism,  as  the  Council  of  Trent  has  defined.  An 
impartial  criticism  could  not  contest  the  truthfulness  of 
this  tradition. 

Equally  firm  and  universal  is  the  Apostolic  tradi 
tion,  attributing  to  Jesus  the  institution  of  the  Holy 


f.,  xxi,  25;  Lk.,  xx,  4;  Acts,  xix,  3. 

14  Acts,  ii,  38.     Cf.  /  Cor.,  vi,  n;  Acts,  xxii,  16. 

15  Mk.,  i,  8  ;  Acts,  xi,  16. 

16  Acts,  xix,  5. 

17  The  discussion  of  the  difficulties  raised  against  the  authen 
ticity  of  this  text  has  no  place  in  this  synthetic  study.     It  is, 
besides,  possible  to  show  the  Divine  institution  of  Baptism  with 
the  Acts  and  the  Epistles  only. 

18  /wo.,  iii,  5. 


304       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Eucharist,  at  the  time  when  He  celebrated  the  Last 
Supper,  the  night  before  He  died.  St.  Paul  in  his 
first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,19  written  23  or  28  years 
after  the  death  of  Jesus,  narrates  this  institution. 
This  narrative  came  from  the  Savior ;  the  Apostle 
transmitted  it  to  the  Corinthians  as  he  received  it.20 
While  St.  Paul  was  telling  the  Corinthians  the  story 
of  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist,  the  other  Apostles 
were  announcing  it  to  the  faithful  whom  they  evan 
gelized:  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  at 
test  it.  During  the  Apostolic  period,  the  Holy  Eu 
charist  was  considered  as  instituted  by  Christ,  and 
was  celebrated  in  memory  of  Him  to  obey  His  com 
mand.  If  this  tradition  bringing  back  to  Christ  the 
institution  of  the  Eucharist  is  not  true,  we  must  give 
up  all  certitude.21 

The  Savior  then  explained  Himself  clearly  in  regard 
to  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Eucharist.  Hence  the 
Church  has  had  from  the  very  beginning  full  con 
sciousness  of  these  two  Sacraments,  and  this  is  why  the 
manner  of  their  institution  has  seemed  different  from 
that  of  the  others. 

Catholic  theology  has  always  taught  that  Scripture 
alone,  without  the  aid  of  Tradition,  was  incapable  of 
demonstrating  the  Divine  institution  of  all  the  Sacra 
ments.  In  fact  the  Gospels  allow  us  to  discern  in 

19  /  Cor.,  xi,  24-25.    Cf.  P.  BATIFFOL,  L'Enseignement  de  Jesus, 
P-  247. 

20  /  Cor.,  xi,  23.     For  I  have  received  of  the  Lord  that  which 
also  I  have  delivered  unto  you,   (viz.)  that  the  Lord  Jesus  the 
same  night  in  which  He  was  betrayed,  took  bread.     .     .     . 

21  See  in  Etudes  d'Histoire  et  de  Theologie  positive  of  Mgr. 
Batiffol,  2nd.  series,  pp.  58  ff.,  the  exposition  and  the  criticism  of 
the  recent  theories  of  liberal  criticism  regarding  the  origin  of 
the  Holy  Eucharist. 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE          305 

certain  acts  or  certain  words  of  Jesus  only  the  prin 
ciples  whence  the  other  five  Sacraments  have  origi 
nated.  And  if  the  development  of  tradition  did  not 
teach  us  that  from  these  words  and  acts  Sacraments 
arose,  we  could  not  even  affirm  that  these  words  and 
these  acts  contained  the  institution  of  the  several 
Sacraments.  The  oak  has  its  beginning  in  the  acorn, 
but  we  know  this  only  because  experience  has  shown 
us  that  oaks  come  from  acorns.  We  must  proceed  in 
the  study  of  the  development  of  dogma,  says  Newman, 
as  in  the  interpretation  of  the  prophetical  and  typical 
passages  of  the  Old  Testament.  "  The  event  which 
is  the  development  is  also  the  interpretation  of  the 
prediction;  it  provides  a  fulfillment  by  imposing  a 
meaning.  .  .  .  Now  it  is  but  a  parallel  exercise 
of  reasoning  to  interpret  the  previous  steps  of  a  de 
velopment  by  the  later.  .  .  .  Those  who  will  not 
view  the  beginning  in  the  light  of  the  result,  are 
equally  unwilling  to  let  the  whole  elucidate  the  parts. 
The  Catholic  doctrines  .  .  .  are  members  of  one 
family,  and  suggestive  or  correlative  or  confirmatory 
or  illustrative  of  each  other."  22  To  determine  then 
the  Divine  principles  of  the  Christian  Sacraments,  let 
us  consider  the  latter  in  their  full  development  and 
search  out  their  origin.  This  we  find  in  an  intention 
of  Jesus  manifested  by  word  or  act.  An  application 
of  this  doctrine  to  five  Sacraments  will  make  it  more 
clear. 

Jesus  laid  down  the  essential  principle  of  Confirma 
tion,  when  He  promised  to  give  the  Holy  Ghost.  The 
Savior  made  this  promise  to  the  Apostles;  and  this 
promise  had  as  an  object  not  the  ordinary  giving  of  the 

22  J.   H.    NEWMAN,    Development   of   Christian   Doctrine,   old 
edit.,  pp.  149,  153-154;  new  edit->  PP-  93,  102-106. 


306      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Holy  Ghost,  as  the  sanctifier  of  souls,  but  a  special  giv 
ing:  that  which  took  place  on  Pentecost.23 

This  promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost  did  not  concern  the 
Apostles  alone,  but  all  those  who  were  to  believe  in 
Jesus  and  receive  His  Baptism.  As  such  was  it  under 
stood  by  the  disciples  of  Jesus.24  St.  Peter  in  his  dis 
course  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  proclaims  that  those 
who  will  "  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ " 
will  receive  also  the  "  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  25  In 
fact  the  Apostles  conferred  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the 
newly  baptized  by  the  laying-on  of  hands.26 

This  rite  of  giving  the  Holy  Ghost,  although  some 
times  conferred  separately  from  Baptism,  was  never 
theless  considered  as  its  complement,  and  as  forming 
with  it  but  one  moral  whole.  Later  development  has 
had  for  effect  the  complete  separation  of  Confirmation 
from  Baptism.  In  a  certain  manner  then  Baptism  has, 
as  Newman  remarks,  developed  into  Confirmation.27 

According  to  Newman's  idea,  Baptism  developed 
still  further  into  Penance,  by  a  process  which  may  be 
fairly  well  conceived. 

Jesus  gave  to  His  Apostles  and  by  them  to  His 
Church,  an  unlimited  power  of  remitting  sins.  This 

23  Lk.,  xxiv,  49;  Acts,  i,  4;  Jno.,  xiv. 
^Acts,  xi,  16. 

25  Acts,  ii,  38. 

26  Acts,  viii,  14-17;  xix,  1-6. 

27 "  From  the  sacramental  principle  come  the  Sacraments 
properly  so-called.  .  .  .  Of  the  Sacraments,  Baptism  is  de 
veloped  into  Confirmation  on  the  one  hand ;  into  Penance,  Purga 
tory,  and  Indulgences  on  the  other.  .  .  .  Again  the  doctrine 
of  the  Sacraments  leads  to  the  doctrine  of  Justification;  Justi 
fication  to  that  of  Original  Sin.  .  .  .  Nor  do  these  separate 
developments  stand  independent  of  each  other,  but  by  cross  re 
lations  they  are  connected,  and  grow  together  while  they  grow 
from  one."  Loc.  cit.,  old  ed.,  p.  154;  new  ed.,  p.  94. 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE          309 

preaching  penance,  of  expelling  demons,  of  healing 
the  side  and  of  working  other  prodigies.*1  St  Mark 
tells  us  that  the  Apostles  fulfilled  the  orders  of  the 
Master,  and  healed  the  sick  by  anointing  them  with 
oiL**  To  relieve  the  sick  by  anointing  with  oil  was  a 
Jewish  custom.2* 

The  text  of  the  Gospel  does  not  tell  us  whether  the 
Savior  had  commanded  or  approved  the  use  of  these 
anointings.  But  one  can  assume  that  He  did.  For 
Jesus  could  not  be  ignorant  of  the  use  the  Apostles 
made  of  these  anointings,  all  the  more  so,  since  it  was 
in  virtue  of  the  supernatural  power  with  which  He  had 
invested  the  Apostles,  that  these  anointings  cured.  It 
is  not  rash  then  to  conjecture  that  the  employment  of 
these  anointings  had  been  authorized  by  the  Savior. 

There  exists  between  these  Apostolic  anointings  and 
our  sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction  (Last  Anointing), 
certain  real  resemblances,  not  only  in  the  rite  but  in  the 
effects.  Catholic  tradition  following  in  the  footsteps 
of  St.  James40  has  for  a  long  time  placed  bodily  heal 
ing  in  the  first  rank  of  the  effects  of  Extreme  Unction. 
These  resemblances  authorize  us  to  connect  our  sacra 
ment  with  the  anointings  of  the  Galilean  ministry,  as 
to  the  seed  whence  it  sprang. 

As  to  the  manner  in  which  tins  seed  has  developed. 
and  the  circumstance  in  which  the  Savior  explained 
His  thought  on  the  anointing  of  the  sick,  the  Gospel 
history  is  silent,  and  we  are  reduced  to  conjectures 
Here  we  must  remember  the  insufficiency  of  written 
records.  What  the  Gospel  history  permits  us  to  af- 


x,  5-S;  Lk.,  ix,  i-z. 
~Mk.,  ri,  13. 
»/^i,6;  I*.,  x,  34- 
«*/«.,  T,  I4-I> 


3o8      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

by  Baptism,32  and  is  dead  to  sin  in  the  water  of  re 
generation,33  he  ought  to  fall  no  more. 

Nevertheless  the  number  of  Christians  increasing 
and  at  the  same  time  the  primitive  fervor  diminishing, 
many  would  inevitably  fall  into  sin  and  indeed  such 
was  the  fact.  Would  there  be  for  these  lapsi  no 
means  of  salvation  ?  Some  so  thought  in  the  time  of 
Hermas.34  But  the  Church  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  proclaimed  that  she  held  from  Christ  the 
power  of  pardoning  post-baptismal  sins.  St.  Paul  in 
the  affair  of  the  sinner  of  Corinth  had  already,  it 
seems,  made  use  of  this  power.  In  any  case,  the  docu 
ments  of  the  end  of  the  2nd.  century  inform  us  that 
at  this  period  the  Church  had  a  full  and  entire  con 
sciousness  of  her  power  to  remit  post-baptismal  sins. 
The  ecclesiastical  authority  used  this  power  first 
only  partially,  excluding  certain  sins  from  pardon,  for 
reasons  merely  disciplinary.  At  the  end  of  the  3rd. 
century  it  made  use  of  it  in  its  entirety.35 

Penance  then  appears  to  us  as  a  second  Baptism.  It 
was  instituted  implicitly  by  Christ,  when  He  gave  His 
Church  an  unbounded  power  of  forgiving  sins. 
Christ  left  to  His  Church  the  care  of  regulating  the 
exercise  of  this  power,  and  in  fact  its  exercise  has 
during  the  centuries  taken  on  different  forms.36 

During  His  ministry  in  Galilee,  Jesus  sent  His  dis 
ciples  into  the  towns  and  villages,  with  the  mission  of 

32  Gal.,  Hi,  27. 

3SRom.,  vi,  11. 

34  Cf.  TIXERONT,  op.  cit.,  pp.  123,  sq. ;  BATIFFOL,  op.  cit.,  Origines 
de  la  Penitence,  sect.  i. 
.     35  On  all  these  facts  to  which  we  allude,  cf.  sup.,  pp.  105,  ff. ; 

112,    ff. 

38  See  the   views   of    Newman   on   this   subject,   Development, 
old  edit,  pp.  410,  ff. ;  new  edit.,  pp.  384,  ff. 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE          309 

preaching  penance,  of  expelling  demons,  of  healing 
the  sick  and  of  working  other  prodigies.37  St.  Mark 
tells  us  that  the  Apostles  fulfilled  the  orders  of  the 
Master,  and  healed  the  sick  by  anointing  them  with 
oil.38  To  relieve  the  sick  by  anointing  with  oil  was  a 
Jewish  custom.39 

The  text  of  the  Gospel  does  not  tell  us  whether  the 
Savior  had  commanded  or  approved  the  use  of  these 
anointings.  But  one  can  assume  that  He  did.  For 
Jesus  could  not  be  ignorant  of  the  use  the  Apostles 
made  of  these  anointings,  all  the  more  so,  since  it  was 
in  virtue  of  the  supernatural  power  with  which  He  had 
invested  the  Apostles,  that  these  anointings  cured.  It 
is  not  rash  then  to  conjecture  that  the  employment  of 
these  anointings  had  been  authorized  by  the  Savior. 

There  exists  between  these  Apostolic  anointings  and 
our  sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction  (Last  Anointing), 
certain  real  resemblances,  not  only  in  the  rite  but  in  the 
effects.  Catholic  tradition  following  in  the  footsteps 
of  St.  James  40  has  for  a  long  time  placed  bodily  heal 
ing  in  the  first  rank  of  the  effects  of  Extreme  Unction. 
These  resemblances  authorize  us  to  connect  our  sacra 
ment  with  the  anointings  of  the  Galilean  ministry,  as 
to  the  seed  whence  it  sprang. 

As  to  the  manner  in  which  this  seed  has  developed, 
and  the  circumstance  in  which  the  Savior  explained 
His  thought  on  the  anointing  of  the  sick,  the  Gospel 
history  is  silent,  and  we  are  reduced  to  conjectures. 
Here  we  must  remember  the  insufficiency  of  written 
records.  What  the  Gospel  history  permits  us  to  af- 

37  Mtt.,  x,  5-8 ;  Lk.,  ix,  1-2. 

38  Mk.,  vi,  13. 

39  Is.,  i,  6 ;  Lk.,  x,  34. 
*QJas.,  v,  14-15. 


3io      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

firm  is  that  the  Savior  looked  as  much  to  the  interest 
of  the  souls  of  the  sick  as  to  that  of  their  bodies,  and 
that  many  times  He  cured  the  spiritual  infirmities  at 
the  same  time  as  the  bodily  ones.41  The  Apostles  con 
forming  to  a  Jewish  belief,  to  which  Jesus  may  have 
accommodated  Himself,  were  persuaded  that  every 
sickness  is  the  result  of  sin,  and  that  to  heal  a  sick 
person  was  at  the  same  time  to  forgive  his  sins.42 
The  bodily  cure  and  the  remission  of  sins  were  thus 
according  to  their  way  of  looking  at  it,  in  a  necessary 
correlation.  That  Jesus  should  have  explained  Him 
self  on  the  anointing  of  the  sick  and  have  given  it  for 
the  future  a  spiritual  efficacy,  would  be  altogether  in 
harmony  with  the  Gospel  history. 

In  fact,  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  ^  leads  us  to  be 
lieve  that  this  explanation  was  given,  and  that  in  any 
case,  primitive  Christianity,  to  which  this  writing  is 
addressed,  already  has  a  well  developed  conception  of 
the  efficacy  of  the  anointing  of  the  sick.  These  anoint 
ings  cure  the  bodily  maladies  as  those  of  the  Galilean 
ministry,  but  they  also  forgive  sins.  They  were  per 
formed  by  the  presbyters  who  are  substitutes  and  suc 
cessors  of  the  Apostles  in  the  government  of  the 
churches.  The  sick  are  anointed  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  to  signify  that  these  anointings  are  those 
of  the  Lord,  and  that  they  are  administered  in  His 
memory  to  Christians  only. 

The  sacramental  development  of  the  anointing  of 
the  sick  is  far  from  being  ended.  It  is  enough  for  us 
to  realize  how  this  sacrament  can  be  traced  back  to 

Jesus,  and  how  it  is  "  insinuated  in  Mark "  as  the 
i 

41  Mk,,  ii,  5 ;  Lk.,  xiii,  16. 

42  Job,  iv-v;  John,  v,  14;  ix,  2,  34. 

43  v,  14-15- 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE  311 

Council  says,44  making  its  own  the  teaching  of  the 
theologians  of  the  I3th.  century. 

The  intention  of  Jesus  to  institute  the  Christian 
priesthood  is  manifested  by  the  fact  that  He  gave  to 
His  Apostles  all  the  powers,  with  the  mission  of  trans 
mitting  them  to  their  successors.  The  Gospel  history 
in  fact  shows  us  the  Savior  entrusting  to  His  Apostles 
the  power  of  governing  His  Church,  of  remitting  sins, 
and  of  celebrating  the  Holy  Eucharist.  Since  the 
Church  is  an  institution  destined  to  last  forever,  these 
powers  must  necessarily  be  transmitted  to  the  suc 
cessors  of  the  Apostles,  and  so  well  did  the  Apostles 
understand  this,  that  they  conferred  on  their  disciples 
by  the  rite  of  imposition  of  hands  all  the  powers  neces 
sary  to  govern  their  Churches.45  It  is  then  easy  to 
understand  how  Jesus  laid  down  the  essential  princi 
ples  of  the  sacrament  of  Orders. 

But  it  was  only  little  by  little,  owing  to  the  develop 
ment  of  the  constitution  of  the  Church  and  of  the 
sacramentary  theology,  that  the  different  degrees  of  the 
hierarchy  appeared  and  that  the  Church  became  con 
scious  of  the  sacramental  nature  of  the  rites  which 
conferred  them. 

It  is  far  from  being  easy  to  perceive  at  all  clearly  the 
different  stages  of  the  development  of  the  hierarchy, 
the  texts  not  always  being  coherent. 

Without  in  the  least  pretending  to  give  a  definitive 
explanation,  one  can  perhaps  represent  this  develop 
ment  as  follows:  Would  not  the  different  degrees  of 
the  hierarchy  be  the  successive  division  of  the  apos- 

44  Sess.  xiv.     De  Extretna  Unctione,  cap.  i.     The  Council  de 
fined  (can.  i)  that  Extreme  Unction  was  instituted  by  Jesus  and 
promulgated  by  the  Epistle  of  St.  James. 

45  /  Tim.,  iv,  14 ;  //  Tim.,  i,  6. 


3i2       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

tolate  which  was  formally  instituted  by  the  Savior? 
During  the  Apostolic  period,  the  hierarchy  would  em 
brace  only  two  degrees,  the  diaconate  whose  origin  is 
described  in  the  Acts*Q  and  the  degree  to  which  were 
promoted  those  superior  ministers,  called  indifferently, 
in  primitive  writings  "  episcopal "  or  "  presbyters!' 47 
In  each  of  the  churches  founded  by  the  Apostles,  and 
under  their  direction  was  a  hierarchy  of  episcopoi  and 
deacons,  exercising  the  liturgical  functions.48  The 
higher  ministers  possessed  the  fulness  of  the  priest 
hood  ;  they  were  all  bishops  in  the  actual  sense  of  the 
word.49  They  governed  collectively  the  church  con 
fided  to  their  care  by  the  Apostles  or  by  the  disciples  of 
the  Apostles.  Side  by  side  with  this  hierarchy,  the 
Apostolic  writings  show  us  a  certain  number  of  other 
ministers,  such  as  "  the  prophets,"  "  the  doctors  "  50 
and  "  the  deaconesses,"  whose  functions  rather  diffi 
cult  to  determine  disappeared  or  were  confided  to  the 
episcopoi. 

At  a  very  primitive  period,  the  higher  degree  of  the 

*»vi,  1-6. 

47  "  In  the  title  of  his  letter  to  the  Philippians,  written  about 
63,  St.  Paul  addresses  himself  to  *  the  saints  in  Christ  which  are 
at  Philippi  with  the  episcopoi  and  the  deacons.'  Some  years 
before,  on  his  way  to  Jerusalem,  he  had  summoned  the  'pres 
byters  '  of  Ephesus  and  commended  to  their  care  the  infant 
church,  in  which,  he  said,  the  Holy  Ghost  had  made  them  '  epis 
copoi/  Here  already  appears  an  absence  of  clear  distinction 
between  presbyters  and  episcopoi  and  the  collegiate  government 
of  the  Church."  DUCHESNE,  The  Early  History  of  the  Church, 
c.  vii,  p.  65.  Cf.  BATIFFOL,  Etudes  d'Histoire  et  de  Theologie 
positive,  First  series,  La  Hierarchic  primitive.  VAN  HOOFE, 
Catholic  Encyclopedia,  art.  Bishop,  II,  p.  582. 

^  Phil,  i,  i.     Cf.  Acts,  xiv,  22;  xx,  17;  Tit.  i,  5. 

49  In  fact  the  "  presbyters  "  laid  hands  on  Timothy  to  ordain 
him.     I  Tim.,  iv,  14. 

50  Acts,  xiii,  3;  and  Eph,,  iv,  n.     Cf.  Didache,  xi,  xiii,  2. 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE          313 

hierarchy  was  subdivided  and  gave  birth  to  the  epis 
copate  and  the  presbyterate.  The  collegial  episcopate 
disappeared;  each  church  was  governed  by  a  single 
monarchical  bishop,  having  under  his  authority  priests, 
his  inferiors  in  dignity,  and  deacons.  Such  will  be 
henceforth  the  composition  of  the  hierarchy  of  the 
churches. 

The  first  traces  of  this  threefold  hierarchy  are 
found  in  the  lifetime  of  the  Apostles.  In  Jerusalem, 
after  the  dispersion  of  the  Apostles,  James,  "  a  brother 
of  the  Lord,"  governs  the  local  church  as  supreme 
head,  with  the  hdp  of  presbyters  and  deacons.  This 
monarchical  government  was  continued,  about  61,  by 
his  successor,  Simeon.  The  situation  of  Timothy  and 
Titus,  as  it  is  described  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  has 
also  many  analogies  with  the  monarchical  episcopate ; 
for  these  two  men  are  the  heads  of  their  churches, 
and  they  have  presbyters  and  deacons  under  them. 
The  monarchical  episcopate  existed  also  at  Rome :  St. 
Irenaeus  gives  us  the  succession  of  the  bishops  of  that 
city  from  St.  Peter  to  Eleutherius.51 

The  hierarchy  of  three  degrees  goes  back  then,  in  its 
beginnings,  to  Apostolic  times.  But  it  became  an  alto 
gether  universal  institution  only  toward  the  middle  of 
the  2nd.  century.  For,  although  in  the  letter  of 
St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch  it  appears  very  clearly  at 
the  end  of  the  ist.  century,52  still  in  the  Letter  of  St. 
Clement  to  the  Corinthians,53  written  about  90  A.D., 
and  in  the  Didachc  54  we  still  find  the  hierarchy  of  two 

51  Adv.  Haer.,  iii,  3. 

52  Smyrn.,  viii,  I :     Obey  the  bishop  as  Jesus  Christ  obeyed  His 
Father;  obey  the  priests  as  the  Apostles  and  honor  the  deacons. 

53  I  Clem.,  xlii,  4. 

54  xv,  i. 


314      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

degrees.  If  the  hierarchy  made  up  of  episcopate, 
presbyterate,  and  diaconate,  owes  its  birth,  as  one  may 
conjecture,  to  the  successive  divisions  of  the  aposto- 
late,  founded  by  Jesus,  the  powers  proper  to  each  one 
of  the  degrees  of  this  hierarchy  are  then  all  of  Divine 
origin.55 

The  Savior,  replying  to  an  insidious  question  of  the 
Pharisees,  proclaimed  the  unity  and  the  indissolubility 
of  Marriage,,  and  declared  that  polygamy  and  divorce 
were  contrary  to  the  primitive  institution.56  "  Be 
cause  of  the  hardness  of  the  heart "  of  the  Jews, 
Moses  allowed  divorce ;  no  longer  will  this  be  so,  and 
whoever  shall  repudiate  his  wife  to  marry  another  will 
commit  adultery.  Such  is  the  law  of  the  indissolu 
bility  of  Marriage  promulgated  by  Christ,  and  which 
St.  Paul  will  recall  to  the  Christians  of  Corinth  as 
the  precept  of  the  Lord.57 

The  intention  of  Jesus  is  not  obscure :  He  wished 
Matrimony  to  be  for  Christians  an  institution  more 
holy  and  sacred  than  it  was  among  the  Jews.  This 
character  of  holiness  which  Jesus  gave  to  Christian 
Marriage  is  the  principle  of  the  sacrament.  It  is  in 
fact  by  reflecting  on  the  holiness  of  Marriage,  as  re 
formed  by  Christ,  that  Christian  thought  came  gradu 
ally  to  the  consciousness  of  its  sacramental  efficacy, 
and  to  the  knowledge  of  the  full  bearing  of  this  sancti- 
fication.  For  the  whole  institution  of  the  sacrament 
of  Matrimony  consisted  —  and  could  only  consist  — 
in  the  sanctification  of  the  matrimonial  contract. 
Jesus'  intention  of  sanctifying  is  but  half  manifested 
to  us  by  the  texts;  without  later  development  we 

55  Cf.  Cone.  Trid.,  Sess,  xxiii,  de  Sacramento  Ordinis,  can.  6. 

56  Mk.,  x,  2-13. 

BT7  Cor.,  vii,  10-11,  39. 


ACCORDING  TO  SCRIPTURE          315 

would  never  have  known  it  in  its  entirety.  But,  if 
development  went  on,  shall  we  not  be  justified  in  con 
cluding  that  the  end  of  this  development  is  in  perfect 
harmony  with  its  beginning,  that  is,  with  the  intention 
of  Jesus  to  render  Christian  Marriage  more  perfect 
than  that  of  the  Mosaic  Law  ? 

This  progressive  consciousness  of  the  sanctity  of 
Christian  Marriage  appeared  clearly  even  during  the 
Apostolic  period.  St.  Paul  writing  to  the  Ephesians  58 
remarks  that  the  indissoluble  union  of  man  and  wife 
is  a  mysterious  symbol  of  that  between  Christ  and  the 
Church.  This  lofty  symbolism  which  the  Apostle  per 
ceives  in  Christian  Marriage  shows  what  a  high  idea 
he  conceived  of  the  excellency  and  sanctity  of  Mar 
riage.  This  Pauline  idea  has  forever  guided  Chris 
tian  thought ;  from  it  has  sprung  to  a  great  extent  the 
sacramental  theology  of  Matrimony.59 

58  v>   32. 

59  This  manner  of  conceiving  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Sac 
raments   differs    radically    from   that   of    M.   Loisy,   as    may  be 
judged  from  this  page  of  L'Evangile  et  I'Eglise,  chap,   vi    (3e 
edit.)  :     On  peut  dire  que  Jesus  au  cours  de  son  ministere  ri'a  ni 
prescrit  a  ses  apotres  ni  pratique  lui-meme  aucun  reglement  du 
culte  exterieur  qui  aurait  caracterise  1'fivangile  comme  religion. 
Jesus  n'a  pas  plus  regie  d'avance  le  culte  chretien  qu'il  n'a  regie 
formellement   la   constitution   et   les   dogmes   de   1'figlise.     C'est 
que,  dans  1'fivangile,  le  christianisme  n'etait  pas  encore  une  re 
ligion  existant  par  elle-meme.     II  ne  se  posait  pas  en   face  du 
judaisme   legal;   les   rites   mosaiques,   pratiques   par   le   Sauveur 
et  ses  disciples,  tenaient  lieu  d'autre  institution  et  satisfaisaient 
au  besoin  qu'a  toute  religion  de  s'exprimer  dans  un  culte.  L'fivan- 
gile,  comme  tel,  n'etait  qu'un  mouvement  religieux,  qui  se  pro- 
duisait  au  sein  du  judaisme,  pour  en  realiser  parfaitement  les 
principes  et  les  esperances.     Ce  serait  done  chose  inconcevable 
que  Jesus,  avant  sa  derniere  heure,  eut  formule  des  prescriptions 
rituelles.     II  n'a  pu  y  songer  qu'a  ce  moment  supreme,  lorsque 
raccomplissement  immediat  du  regne  messianique  apparut  comme 
impossible  en  Israel,  et  qu'un  autre  accomplissement,  mysterieux 
dans  sa  perspective,  obtenu  par  la  mort  du  Messie,  resta  la  der- 


316       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

For  Baptism  and  Eucharist  then,  the  Divine  institu 
tion  is  formally  stated  in  the  Apostolic  writings.  And 
we  shall  find  clear  statements  of  these  in  the  eccle 
siastical  writers  of  the  first  centuries  of  the  Church. 
As  to  the  Divine  institution  of  the  other  Sacraments,  it 
emerged  only  gradually  into  Catholic  consciousness. 
It  remains  for  us  only  to  point  out  at  what  periods 
and  under  what  influences  this  work  went  on  in  the 
infallible  Church,  ever  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

§  III.  The  Dogma  of  the  Divine  Institution  according  to 
the  Fathers — The  Thesis  of  Liberal  Protestantism  on  the 
Origin  of  the  Sacraments. 

The  Divine  institution  of  Baptism  and  Holy  Eu 
charist  is  attested  to  by  St.  Justin.  "  We  baptize," 
he  says,  "  those  who  believe  in  the  truth  of  the  Chris 
tian  doctrine,  for  the  Savior  declared  that  unless  one 
is  born  again,  one  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."  60  In  the  same  way  the  Holy  Eucharist  is 
celebrated,  because  "  the  Apostles  in  their  memoirs 
which  are  called  gospels,  tell  us  that  Jesus  gave  them 

niere  chance  du  royaume  de  Dieu  sur  la  terre.  La  cene  eu- 
charistique  se  montre  alors  comme  le  symbole  du  royaume  que 
doit  amener  le  sacrifice  de  Jesus.  Encore  est-il  que  Feucharistie, 
au  jour  de  sa  celebration  premiere,  signifie  plutot  1'abrogation  du 
culte  ancien  et  I'avenement  prochain  du  royaume,  que  1'institu- 
tion  d'un  nouveau  culte,  le  regard  de  Jesus  n'embrassant  pas  Tidee 
d'une  religion  nouvelle,  d'une  figlise  a  fonder,  mais  toujours 
1'idee  du  royaume  des  cieux,  a  realiser. —  Autour  d'un  petit 
livre,  p.  7 :  On  pergoit  encore  sans  difficulte,  dans  le  Nouveau 
Testament,  que  I'figlise  n'a  ete  fondee  et  les  sacrements  n'ont  etc 
institues,  a  proprement  parler,  que  par  le  Sauveur  glorifie.  II 
s'ensuit  que  1'institution  de  1'figlise  et  des  sacrements  par  le  Christ 
est,  comme  la  glorification  de  Jesus,  un  objet  de  foi,  non  de 
demonstration  historique. 
60  /  Apol.,  61. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  FATHERS       317 

these  recommendations.  He  took  bread  and  having 
given  thanks,  He  said,  *  Do  this  in  memory  of  Me. 
This  is  My  Body.'  He  took  also  the  chalice,  and 
having  given  thanks,  He  said  to  them,  '  This  is  My 
Blood.'  61  Similar  statements  are  found  in  the  writ 
ings  of  St.  Irenaeus,62  of  Tertullian,63  and  of  writers 
of  the  following  centuries. 

The  Divine  origin  of  the  power  of  forgiving  sins 
after  Baptism  was  brought  into  full  light  at  the  time 
of  Tertullian.  The  latter  refused  Pope  Callistus  the 
right  of  granting  the  pardon  of  the  Church  to  sins  of 
the  flesh.  The  Bishop  of  Rome,  on  the  contrary,  af 
firmed  his  right,  and  to  justify  his  merciful  measure, 
alleged  the  power  of  the  keys  which  he  held  from 
Christ  through  Peter.  (Matthew,  xvi,  19. )64  The 
Church  then  was  conscious  that  she  was  the  de 
positary  of  an  unlimited  power  of  forgiving  sins,  a 
power  coming  from  Christ,  and  neither  the  expostula 
tions  of  Tertullian  nor  those  of  St.  Hippolytus  65  suc 
ceeded  in  disturbing  her. 

Some  years  later,  when  the  Novatians  protested 
against  the  reconciliation  of  the  lapsi,  started  by  St. 
Cyprian  and  authorized  by  Pope  Cornelius,  the  Church 
excluded  them  from  her  pale.  Catholic  writers,  such 
as  St.  Cyprian 66  and  after  him  St.  Pacian,  Bishop  of 
Barcelona,67  and  St.  Ambrose  68  demonstrated  to  the 

61  /  Apol,  66. 

62  St.  Irenaeus  affirms  in  several  places  the  institution  of  the 
Eucharist  by  Christ,  Adv.  Haer.,  iv,  17,  4-5;  iv,  33,  2. 

™'De  Baptis.,  13;  Adv.  Marc.,  iv,  40. 
6*  TERTULLIAN,  De  Pudicitia,  21. 
^Philos.,  ix,  12. 

66  Ep.  Iv. 

67  Ep.  ad  Sempronianum. 

68  De  Paenitentia. 


3i8       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Novatians  by  Holy  Scripture  and  particularly  by  the 
text  of  St.  John:  Quorum  remiseritis  .  .  .  the  Di 
vine  origin  of  the  power  to  forgive  all  sins  without  ex 
ception. 

At  the  moment,  then,  when  the  Novatian  crisis  oc 
curred,  the  Church  had  a  complete  and  entire  con 
sciousness  of  the  Divine  institution  of  the  power  to 
remit  all  post-baptismal  sins,  that  is,  recognized  the 
Divine  institution  of  what  would  afterwards  be  called 
the  sacrament  of  Penance. 


The  Divine  origin  of  the  different  degrees  of  the 
ecclesiastical  hierarchy  was  also  set  into  relief  on  the 
occasion  of  an  heretical  movement,  Gnosticism,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  2nd.  century. 

The  Gnostics  undertook  to  interpret  the  doctrine  of 
Christianity  by  the  help  of  an  unsound  philosophy,  and 
without  any  dependence  on  the  authority  of  the 
Church.  The  defenders  of  orthodoxy  combated  them 
by  affirming  that  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ  is  found 
only  in  the  teaching  of  the  divinely  established  hier 
archy.  St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch,  who  witnessed  the 
beginning  of  Judaizing  Gnosticism,  exhorts  inces 
santly  the  faithful  of  Asia,  in  order  to  protect  them 
against  the  heresy,  to  hold  to  the  doctrine  of  their 
bishops,  priests  and  deacons,  and  to  do  nothing  with 
out  the  Bishop.69  The  Bishop,  his  priests  and  deacons 
were  in  fact  founded  by  the  will  of  Christ  and  con 
firmed  by  the  Holy  Spirit.70  St.  Irenaeus,  some  years 
later,  to  decide  between  orthodox  and  heretics,  also 
refers  to  the  teaching  of  the  bishops  of  the  universal 

69  Phila.,  vii. 

70  Phila.,  Inscr  ;  Cf .  Eph.,  iii ;  Trail,  III ;  Smyrn.,  viii. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  FATHERS       319 

Church,  and  principally  to  the  teaching  of  the  Church 
of  Rome.71 

The  Divine  institution  of  the  hierarchy  was  also  af 
firmed  on  the  occasion  of  certain  local  difficulties,  re 
lative  to  the  government  of  the  churches.  Toward 
the  end  of  the  ist.  century,  the  Church  of  Corinth 
was  in  revolt  against  its  legitimate  heads.  St.  Cle 
ment  of  Rome  had  to  intervene.  "  We  must  respect 
our  heads,"  says  he  72  to  the  Corinthians,  "  for  the 
Apostles  instituted  the  episcopal  and  the  deacons,  and 
the  Apostles  were  sent  by  Christ  just  as  Christ  was 
sent  by  God."  73  When  a  century  and  a  half  later  the 
arrogant  confessors  and  martyrs  of  Carthage  pre 
tended  to  dispense  with  the  Bishop  and  the  priests  in 
the  reconciliation  of  the  lapsi,  St.  Cyprian  made  an 
elaborate  protest.  According  to  the  Divine  law,  given 
by  Christ,  he  said,  the  Church  is  built  upon  the  bishops, 
the  succession  of  whom  goes  back  to  St.  Peter,  and 
upon  the  clergy.  Nothing  ought  to  be  done  in  the 
Church  without  the  authorization  of  the  bishops: 

"  Dominus  noster,  cujus  praecepta  metuere  et  servare  de- 
bemus,  episcopi  honorem  et  ecclesiae  suae  rationem  dis- 
ponens  in  evangelic  loquitur  et  dicit  Petro:  Ego  tibi  dico 
quia  tu  es  Petrus.  .  .  .  Inde  per  temporum  et  succes- 
sionum  vices  episcoporum  ordinatio  et  ecclesiae  ratio  decur- 
rit  ut  ecclesia  super  episcopos  constituatur  et  omnis  actus 
ecclesiae  per  eosdem  praepositos  gubernetur.  Cum  hoc  ita 
tlivina  lege  fundatum  sit,  miror  quosdam  audaci  temeritate 
sic  mihi  scribere  voluisse  ut  ecclesiae  nomine  litteras  face- 
rent,  quando  ecclesia  in  episcopo  et  clero  et  in  omnibus  stan- 
tibus  sit  constituta."  74 

71  Adv.  Haer.,  iii,  3,  I,  2. 
72 1  Clem.,  xxi,  6. 
™lbid.,  xlii,  4. 
i,  i. 


320       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

In  different  places,  the  Bishop  of  Carthage  speaks  of 
the  ordinations  by  which  "  the  Divine  priesthood  "  75 
and  the  other  orders  are  conferred.76 

The  rite  of  episcopal  Ordination  is  the  laying  on  of 
hands,77  and  this  Ordination  is  just  as  much  of  Divine 
right  as  the  order  which  it  confers. 

The  development  of  tradition  on  the  subject  of  the 
Divine  institution  of  the  sacrament  of  Holy  Orders 
took  place  without  giving  rise  to  any  serious  contro 
versy.  The  Montanist  theory  of  Tertullian  according 
to  which  all  Christians  were  vested  with  the  priest 
hood  78  was  considered  an  eccentric  doctrine.  The 
thesis  of  St.  Jerome,79  the  counterpart  of  which  is 
found  in  St.  Epiphanius  80  and  according  to  which  the 
distinction  of  episcopate  and  presbyterate  would  not 
be  of  Divine  right,  made  only  a  slight  impression  on 
ecclesiastical  writers. 

Hence  at  the  time  of  St.  Augustine,  Ordination  was 
considered  as  a  Sacramentwn  Domini,81  and  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  S2  and  Peter  Lom 
bard  83  affirmed  their  belief  in  the  Divine  institution  of 
the  different  orders,  by  showing  how  the  Savior  exer 
cised  all  their  functions  and  gave  the  Church  the  com 
mand  to  imitate  Him. 

Besides  the  three  degrees  of  the  episcopate,  presby- 

75  Ibid. 

76  Ep.    xxxviii,  2 ;  Ixvi,  I,  etc. 

77  Ep.  Ixvii,  5- 

78  De  Monog.,  12. 

79  In  Tit.,  i,   5.    Epistola  146,  ad  Evangelum.    Cf.    SANDERS, 
Etudes  sur  S.  Jerome. 

*«Haer.,  75,  4-5. 

81  De  Bono  Conj.,  32. 

82  De  Sac.  lib.  ii,  pars  iii,  c.  5,  seq. 

83  Sent.,  iv,  24. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  FATHERS       321 

terate  and  diaconate,  there  appeared  in  the  3rd.  cen 
tury,  certain  inferior  orders.  In  Rome  according  to 
the  letter  written  in  251  by  Pope  Cornelius,84  to  Fa- 
bius,  the  Bishop  of  Antioch,  there  were  five :  those  of 
subdeacon,  acolyte,  exorcist,  lector  and  porter.  In  the 
East,  there  were  only  two:  the  subdiaconate  and  the 
order  of  lectors.  These  inferior  orders  appear  his 
torically  as  subdivisions  of  the  diaconal  functions.  As 
such  they  are  participations  of  the  priesthood,  insti 
tuted  by  Christ,  as  is  taught  by  a  school  of  theologians 
following  in  the  footsteps  of  St.  Thomas. 

In  the  Patristic  period,  the  doctrine  of  the  sanctity 
of  Christian  Matrimony,  one  and  indissoluble,  was  de 
veloped,  in  the  instructions  given  by  pastors  to  mar 
ried  Christians,  and  on  the  occasion  of  errors  put  forth 
on  this  subject  by  false  teachers. 

Marriage  is  placed  under  the  supervision  of  the 
Bishop,  says  St.  Ignatius ;  it  must  be  according  to  the 
Lord  and  not  according  to  passion.85  And  the  Church 
has  always  defended  it  as  a  sacred  good  which  Jesus 
had  entrusted  to  her,  and  has  surrounded  it,  from  the 
very  beginning,  with  holy  ceremonies,  of  such  nature 
as  to  enhance  its  excellence  in  the  eyes  of  the  faith 
ful. 

At  the  end  of  the  2nd.  century,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  Tertullian,  Marriage  had  to  be  contracted 
before  the  Church,  to  be  recognized  as  truly  legiti 
mate;86  for  the  Church  forms  its  bond,  the  holy  ob 
lation  confirms  it,  and  the  sacerdotal  blessing  seals 

^Euscb.,  H.  E.,  vi,  43.     Cf.  DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  p. 

344 

^  Ad  Polyc.,  v,  2. 
8(5  D.e  Pud.,  4. 


322       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

it.87  Tertullian,  it  is  true,  under  the  sway  of  Montan- 
ist  rigorism,  contended  later  against  remarriages,  to 
which,  in  fact,  he  had  never  been  favorable,  and  he 
went  even  so  far  as  to  condemn  the  principle  itself  of 
the  union  of  the  sexes.  But  these  Montanist  excesses 
do  not  weaken  the  value  of  the  testimony  of  the  Cath 
olic  Tertullian. 

In  the  2nd.  century,  the  Encratic 88  and  Gnostic 
sects,  inspired  by  those  philosophical  theories,  then 
widely  diffused,  relative  to  the  essentially  evil  charac 
ter  of  matter,  condemned  Marriage  because  it  propa 
gated  the  flesh.  They  were  combated  by  the  eccle 
siastical  writers  of  the  time,  especially  by  Clement  of 
Alexandria.89 

The  Manicheans,  in  the  4th.  and  5th.  centuries, 
revived  the  errors  of  the  Gnostics.  This  time  in  order 
to  destroy  them  completely,  the  Fathers  insisted  on 
the  divine  origin  of  Christian  Marriage.  How  could 
Marriage  be  bad,  when  it  was  sanctified  by  Christ,  both 
when  He  was  present  at  the  wedding- feast  of  Cana, 
as  was  stated  by  St.  Epiphanius,90  St.  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen,  91  and  by  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,92  and  when  He 
pronounced  the  word :  Et  erunt  duo  in  came  una,  ac 
cording  to  St.  Ambrose.93  Such  was  the  idea  of  the 
sanctity  of  the  conjugal  tie  then  existing,  that  many 
hesitated  to  recognize  the  lawfulness  of  remarriage.94 

87  Ad  Uxor.,  ii,  9. 

88  Cf.  TIXERONT,  pp.  208-209. 

89  Strom.,  in,  16.    Cf.  TERTULL.  Adv.  Marc.,  i,  29. 
9QHaer.,  67,  6. 

91  Orat.  xl,  1 8. 

92  In  Joann.,  ii,  u. 

93  Epis.  xlii,  3. 

9*  Synod  of  Caesarea,  can.  3,  7.    HEFELE,  History  of  Councils, 
vol.  I,  pp.  224-227. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  FATHERS       323 

The  most  explicit  teaching,  however,  is  given  by  St. 
Augustine.  The  holy  Bishop  had  to  defend  Marriage 
not  only  against  the  Manichean  doctrines,  but  also 
against  his  own  doctrine  of  original  sin.  This  doc 
trine  the  Pelagians  found  of  a  nature  to  dishonor  mar 
ried  life,  which  propagates  original  sin.  Marriage  is 
holy,  he  explains,  because  it  is  the  "  sacramentum," 
the  symbol,  of  the  union  of  Christ  with  His  Church.95 
And  it  was  by  assisting  at  the  wedding- feast  of  Cana, 
that  the  Savior  unveiled  this  symbolism : 

"  Dominus  invitatus  venit  ad  nuptias,  etiam  excepta  mys- 
tica  significatione,  confirmare  voluit  quod  ipse  fecit  nup 
tias.  .  .  .  Ipsae  [virgines]  pertinent  ad  nuptias  cum 
tota  ecclesia,  in  quibus  nuptiis  sponsus  est  Christus.  Ac  per 
hoc  ergo  Dominus  invitatus  venit  ad  nuptias,  ut  conjugalis 
castitas  firmaretur,  et  ostenderetur  sacramentum  nuptiarum: 
quia  et  illarum  nuptiarum  sponsus  personam  Domini  figura- 
bat  cui  dictum  est :  Servasti  bonum  vinum  usque  adhuc"  96 

Henceforth  the  Divine  institution  of  Marriage  as  a 
sacramentum,  i.e.,  as  a  holy  symbol  of  the  union  of 
Christ  with  His  Church,  will  be  universally  acknowl 
edged.  Later  tradition  will  make  more  precise  the 
sacramental  efficacy  of  this  Divine  symbol,  and  will 
show  that  Marriage  is  holy  as  being  a  source  of  holi 
ness. 

The  existence  of  Confirmation  as  a  sacrament  really 
distinct  from  Baptism,  is  formally  stated  by  the  writers 
of  the  5th.  century.97 

95  De  Bono  Conj.,  21,  32. 

96  In  Joann.,  tr.  ix,  2. 

97  In  particular  by  Pope  Innocent  I,  in  his  letter  to  Decentius, 
Bishop  of  Eugubium.     Cf.  DENZ.,  Enchir.,  n.  60   (new  edit,  n. 
98).     From  the  beginning  the  distinction,  at  least  virtual,  of  the 
two  rites,  Baptism  and  the  anointing  with  chrism,  was  taught; 

22 


324     INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  creation  of  country  parishes  was  the  occasion 
of  this  absolute  distinction.  While  the  Bishop  pre 
sided  over  the  solemn  administration  of  Baptism,  Con 
firmation  was  given  to  the  neophytes  immediately  after 
the  baptismal  immersion :  it  was  given  separately  only 
to  those  who  had  received  clinical  Baptism  during  their 
sickness.  When  the  country  parishes  were  founded 
and  confided  to  the  care  of  simple  priests,  the  Bishop 
reserved  Confirmation  to  himself,  in  the  West.  At 
that  time,  a  more  or  less  protracted  period  began  to 
separate  the  reception  of  the  two  Sacraments  and 
thereby  accentuate  their  distinction.  In  the  East, 
priests  in  charge  of  parishes  were  given  the  right  to 
confirm  immediately  after  Baptism,  a  custom  which  is 
still  in  existence.98 

As  to  the  origin  of  Confirmation,  the  Fathers  con 
tented  themselves  with  identifying  this  sacrament 
with  the  Apostolic  rite  of  conferring  the  Holy  Ghost." 
The  sacramental  rite  of  Confirmation  embraces  not 
only  the  laying  on  of  hands,  but  also  an  anointing  with 
blessed  and  scented  oil.  This  anointing  was  intro 
duced  in  the  2nd.  century  under  an  exclusively  Bib 
lical  and  Christian  inspiration.  St.  Paul  compares 
the  action  of  God  in  a  baptized  person  to  an  anointing.1 
Christ  was  anointed  (XP^TO<S)  by  His  Father;2  it 
is  fitting  that  the  Christian  (xpto-navo?)  should  re 
ceive  a  bodily  anointing,  in  His  initiation  into  the  re 
but  in  the  5th.  century,  in  the  West,  the  distinction  became  a 
complete  separation. 

98  Cf.  DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  p.  338. 

99  ST.  CYPRIAN,  Ep.,  Ixxiii,  9;  INNOCENT  I.  Ep.  ad  Decent.,  3; 
ST.  AUG.,  De  Trin.,  xv,  26.     Cf.  TURMEL,  Hist,  de  la  Theologie 
Positive,  1.  i,  par.  i,  ch.  x  and  1.  ii,  p.  i,  ch.  ix. 

1  //  Cor.,  i,  21. 

2  Heb.,  i,  9. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  FATHERS       325 

ligion  of  Christ.  This  symbolism  of  anointing  which 
expresses  so  well  the  Christian  consecration,  is  ex 
plained  by  Tertullian :  "  The  anointing  of  the  newly 
baptized,"  he  says,  "  recalls  the  sacerdotal  anointing 
which  Aaron  received  from  Moses  and  the  one  which 
was  given  spiritually  to  Christ."  3  A  like  doctrine  is 
taught  by  contemporary  and  succeeding  writers,  when 
they  treat  of  Confirmation.  "  Holy  oil,"  declares 
Didymus,4  "  with  which  Aaron  was  anointed  and  with 
which  the  priests  of  the  Old  Law  also  were  anointed, 
was  the  figure  of  the  anointing  with  holy  chrism  which 
we  all  receive." 

Before  the  beginning  of  the  5th.  century,  the  only 
known  Patristic  documents  that  allude  to  the  anoint 
ing  of  the  sick,  are  the  liturgical  texts.  The  Eucholo- 
gium  of  Serapion  of  the  middle  of  the  4th.  century, 
contains  a  formula  for  blessing  the  oil  of  the  sick, 
which  was  evidently  inspired  by  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James :  5  "  We  beseech  Thee  who  hast  all  power  and 
strength,  the  Savior  of  all  men,  the  Father  of  our  Lord 
and  Savior,  Jesus  Christ,  and  we  pray  Thee  to  send 
from  Heaven  the  healing  power  of  the  Only  Begotten 
upon  this  oil,  that  it  may  become  to  those  who  are 
anointed  by,  or  who  partake  of,  these  Thy  creatures, 
for  a  throwing  off  of  every  sickness  and  every  infirm 
ity,  for  a  remedy  against  every  demon,  for  a  separa 
tion  of  every  unclean  spirit,  for  an  expulsion  of  every 
evil  agent,  for  a  driving  out  of  all  fever  and  ague, 

3  De  Bapt.,  7.  Cf.  THEOPH.  OF  ANTIOCH,  Ad  Autolycum,  i,  12 : 
We  are  called  Christians  because  we  have  been  anointed  with 
divine  oil  (/caAotf/ietfa  xpiffriavoi  '6rt  xpio/ue#a  eAcno?  #eou). 

*  De  Trin.,  ii,  14;  P.O.,  xxxix,  712. 

5  xxix,  Ed.  FUNK.  The  title  reads  as  follows :  "  Prayer  for 
the  blessing  of  the  oil  for  the  sick,  of  bread  and  water." 


326      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

and  every  infirmity,  for  good  grace  and  remission  of 
sins,  for  a  medicine  of  life  and  salvation,  for  health 
and  soundness  of  soul,  body,  spirit,  for  perfect 
strengthening.  O  Master,  let  every  Satanic  agency, 
every  demon,  every  snare  of  the  adversary,  every 
plague,  every  scourge,  every  pain,  every  labor  or  stroke 
or  shaking  of  evil  shadowing,  fear  Thy  holy  Name 
which  we  have  now  invoked,  and  the  Name  of  the 
Only  Begotten;  and  let  them  depart  from  the  inward 
and  the  outward  parts  of  these  servants,  that  His  Name 
may  be  glorified,  who  for  us  was  crucified  and  rose 
again,  who  took  up  our  sicknesses  and  our  infirmities, 
Jesus  Christ,  and  who  is  coming  to  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead.  Because  through  Him  to  Thee,  the  glory 
and  the  power  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  now  and  for  ever 
and  ever.  Amen."  6 

The  effects  of  the  anointing  of  the  sick,  described  by 
St.  James, —  the  healing  of  the  body  and  the  remission 
of  sins,  are  very  clearly  indicated  in  this  prayer.  We 
are  then  justified  in  concluding  that  the  rite  of  anoint 
ing  the  sick  was  employed  in  the  Patristic  period,  de 
spite  the  silence  of  writers  prior  to  the  5th.  century. 

What  confirms  this  conclusion  is  the  practice  of  the 
bishops,  attested  by  the  Canons  of  Hippolytus?  of 

6  Bishop   Serapion's   Prayer  Book.    S.P.C.K.    1899,   pp.   77-78. 
Cf.  Const.  Ap.,  viii,  29,  and  Test.  Dom.  Nos.  Jes.  Christ,   (ed. 
RAHMANI),  p.  49. 

7  199-200  (DUCHESNE,  Christian  Worship,  pp.  537,  538).    "Sit 
diaconus  qui  episcopum  comitetur  omni  tempore  illique  indicet 
singulos  infirmos.     Magna  enim  res  est  infirmo  a  principe  sacer- 
dotum  visitari :  reconvalescit  a  morbo  quando  episcopus  ad  eum 
venit   imprimis   si   super  eo  orat,  quia  umbra  Petri  sanavit  in- 
firmum."     The  text  does  not  speak  of  anointings. —  Innocent  I  in 
his   letter   to   Decentius    says   that   the   visiting   of   the   sick,   to 
anoint  them   with   oil   blessed   by   the   bishop,   is   also    done   by 
priests,    "  quia   episcopi    occupationibus   aliis   impediti   ad   omnes 
languidos  ire  non  possunt." 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  FATHERS       327 

visiting  the  sick,  to  pray  over  them,  and  also  the 
generality  of  the  use  of  these  anointings,  and  the  pre 
cise  idea  which  was  had  of  them  in  Rome  at  the  be 
ginning  of  the  5th.  century.  Pope  Innocent  I  in  his 
letter  to  Decentius,  Bishop  of  Eugubium,  declares  that 
the  anointings,  of  which  St.  James  speaks,  are  the 
same  as  those  which  were  then  given  to  the  sick  among 
the  faithful  by  the  priests  or  by  their  own  relatives, 
with  the  oil  blessed  by  the  Bishop: 

"  Quod  non  est  dubium  de  fidelibus  aegrotantibus  accipi 
vel  intelligi  debere  [illud  Jacobi],  qui  sancto  oleo  chrismatis 
perungi  possunt,  quod  ab  episcopo  confectum,  non  solum 
sacerdotibus  sed  et  omnibus  uti  Christianis  licet  in  sua  aut 
suorum  necessitate  inungendum." 

Innocent  calls  the  oil  of  the  sick,  blessed  by  the  Bishop, 
"  a  sort  of  sacrament,"  which  on  this  account  should 
not  be  given  to  penitents.  "  Nam  paenitentibus  istud 
infundi  non  potest,  quia  genus  sacramenti  est.  Nam 
quibus  reliqua  sacramenta  negantur,  quomodo  unum 
genus  putatur  posse  concedi  ?  "  Later  development 
will  more  clearly  distinguish  the  anointings  given  by 
the  priests  from  those  which  are  given  by  the  simple 
faithful  in  case  of  sickness. 

St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  8  identifies  the  practice  of 
the  anointing  of  the  sick  with  the  rite  described  in  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  and  he  recommends  insistently  to 
the  faithful  recourse  to  it  rather  than  to  the  magicians. 
St.  Csesarius  of  Aries  does  the  same.9  All  writers 
then  see  in  the  text  of  St.  James  the  origin  and  the 

8  D&  ador.  in  spir.  et  ver.,  lib.  vi.    P.G.,  Ixviii,  472. 

9  See  above  p    155.     Only  Origen,  Horn,  ii,  4,  in  Lev.,  and  St. 
John  Chrys.  de  Sacerdot.,  iii,  6,  apply  the  text  of  St.  James  to 
Penance. 


328      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

efficacy  of  the  custom  of  anointing  the  sick  among  the 
faithful  with  oil  blessed  for  the  purpose.10 


A  considerable  progress  then  in  worship  and  hier 
archy  took  place  in  the  Patristic  period.  This  de 
velopment  is  lawful,  for  it  is  homogeneous  with  its 
starting  point,  viz.,  the  principles  laid  down  by  Christ. 

Protestant  historians  affirm  for  the  most  part  that 
the  development  took  place  under  the  influence  of 
Hellenic  religions:  the  Church  of  the  2nd.  and  3rd. 
centuries  would  have  appropriated,  with  slight  modifi 
cation,  the  superstitious  rites  of  the  Pagan  mysteries, 
to  reconcile  the  more  easily  the  minds  of  the  Graeco- 
Roman  world.  According  to  Harnack,11  Confirma 
tion  would  be  due  to  Mithraic  infiltrations,  and  the 
Pagan  influences  would  have  also  been  particularly 
felt  in  the  constitution  of  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy 
and  in  the  development  of  the  Christian  cult  in  gen 
eral.12 

These  systematic  affirmations  are  inspired  more  by 
the  prejudices  of  liberal  Protestantism,  according  to 
which  Christ  would  have  instituted  a  religion  without 
external  worship,  "  the  religion  of  the  spirit,"  than  by 
an  impartial  study  of  ecclesiastical  literature. 

In  tracing  back  the  historical  development  of  the 
Christian  worship,  one  is  struck  by  this  fact,  that  the 
inspiration  which  guided  it  is  exclusively  Christian. 
It  was  the  Apostles  who  established  the  episcopoi  and 

10  TURMEL,  Hist,  de  la  Theol.  Pos.  liv.  i,  par.  i,  ch.  xiii,  and  liv. 
ii,   par.   i,   ch.    xii.     Cf.    BOUDINHON,   La   thcologie   de   I'extreme 
onction,  in  Revue  des  Eglises,  1905,  pp.  345,  ff.     This  article  is 
a  review  of  FULLER,  The  Anointing  of  the  Sick,  1904. 

11  History  of  Dogma,  vol.  ii,  p.  141,  note, 
i2/d.,  pp.   195-207. 


LIBERAL  PROTESTANTISM  329 

the  presbyters,  declares  St.  Clement  of  Rome;  it  was 
Christ,  it  was  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  instituted  bishops, 
priests  and  deacons,  proclaims  in  his  turn  St.  Ignatius 
of  Antioch.  Confirmation  is  considered  as  the  con 
tinuation  of  the  Apostolic  rite  described  in  the  Acts, 
and  when  the  Church  adds  to  this  rite  the  anointing 
with  scented  oil,  it  is  in  Holy  Scripture  and  not  in 
Pagan  rites  that  she  finds  the  idea.  Baptism  and  the 
Holy  Eucharist  are  celebrated  because  Christ  com 
manded  it. 

Besides  when  one  knows  the  aversion  of  the  first 
Christians  to  Paganism,  the  idea  that  "  they  could 
have  sought  models,  for  whatever  purpose,  in  the  in 
stitutions  which  they  held  in  horror,  seems  altogether 
unacceptable."  13  That  later,  when  Paganism  was  to 
tally  vanquished,  in  the  4th.  and  5th.  centuries,  the 
Church  christianized  certain  Pagan  institutions,  feasts 
for  example,  in  order  to  change  their  character,  power 
less  as  she  was  to  suppress  them,  is  incontestable. 
But  in  the  2nd.  and  3rd.  centuries, —  the  period  of  the 
sacramental  development, —  the  conditions  in  which 
Christianity  found  itself  in  relation  to  Paganism  and 
the  spirit  which  animated  the  ecclesiastical  writers,  ren 
dered  facts  of  such  a  nature  impossible.  To  be  con 
vinced  of  this,  it  is  sufficient  to  read  the  violent 
diatribe  of  Clement  of  Alexandria 14  against  the 
Pagan  rites  whose  impiety  and  obscenity  are  revolting, 
or  the  De  Corona  of  Tertullian,  in  which  the  hatred 
of  Paganism  is  pushed  so  far  as  to  refuse  a  Christian 
soldier  the  right  of  wearing  the  laurel  crown  in  a  mili 
tary  festival.15 

13DucHESNE,  Ongines  du  Culte  Chretien,  p.  10,  note  2  (edit. 

1889). 

14  Cohort,  ad  Gent.,  cap.  2. 

15  Tertullian   has   written   three  treatises,   De  Spectaculis,  Dt 


330      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Stress  is  indeed  laid  on  the  resemblances  which  exist 
between  certain  Pagan  rites  and  the  Christian  rites. 
The  Mithraic  cult  in  particular  offers  certain  striking 
resemblances  to  Christianity.  The  Mithraists  were  in 
itiated  by  a  baptismal  rite  accompanied  by  other  cere 
monies  analogous  to  Confirmation  and  Communion. 

But  do  these  resemblances  necessarily  postulate  an 
interdependence?  And  if  there  has  been  such  an  in 
fluence  exercised,  which  of  the  two  cults  copied  the 
other?  Christianity,  according  to  Harnack.  Con 
temporary  Christian  writers,  well  placed  to  gain  knowl 
edge  of  this,  affirm  on  the  contrary,  that  it  is  Mith- 
racism.  "  The  evil  demons/'  says  St.  Justin,  "  have 
imitated  this  institution  (the  Holy  Eucharist)  in  the 
mysteries  of  Mithra:  they  take  bread  and  a  cup  of 
water  in  the  ceremonies  of  initiation,  and  they  pro 
nounce  certain  formulas  which  you  know  or  can  find 
out"  16  It  is  the  devil's  part,  Tertullian  affirms,  to 
pervert  truth.  "  Does  he  not  ape  in  the  mysteries  of 
idols  the  things  of  the  Divine  faith?  He  also  bap 
tises  his  believers,  his  faithful,  and  promises  to  make 
their  faults  disappear  by  a  laver  of  his  own.  If  I 
am  not  mistaken,  Mithra  signs  the  forehead  of  his 
soldiers  and  celebrates  the  oblation  of  bread."  17  But, 
declares  Tertullian,  these  baptisms  of  Mithra  as  well 
as  those  of  the  other  Pagan  cults,  of  Isis  and  of  Eleusis 

Corona,  and  De  Idololatria,  to  explain  the  duties  which  a  Chris 
tian  must  fulfil  to  avoid  idolatry. 

16  /    Apol,    66.    In    vain    has    Harnack    tried    to    show,    to 
strengthen   his  thesis,   that  the   official   usage   of  the   primitive 
Church   was   to  celebrate  the   Eucharist  with  bread  and  water 
only.     (Texte   und    Untersuchungen,   vii,    2.)     The    practice    of 
using  water  only  was  reproved  by  St.  Cyprian  (Ep.  Ixiii)  and  the 
bishops  who  had  unlawfully  adopted  it  were  inspired  by  motives 
altogether   foreign  to  the  Mithraic  cult. 

17  De  Praescr.,  40.     Cf.  De  Corona,  15. 


LIBERAL  PROTESTANTISM  331 

among  others,  are  vain  and  useless ;  they  are  the  lying 
and  diabolical  counterfeits  of  the  divine  operation.18 

This  language  clearly  leaves  it  to  be  understood  that 
if  any  religion  imitated  the  others,  it  was  not  Chris 
tianity.19  If  the  writers  of  the  end  of  the  2nd.  cen 
tury  had  been  the  witnesses  and  the  contemporaries 
of  these  Pagan  infiltrations  into  Christian  worship, 
would  not  their  hatred  of  Paganism  and  the  accusa 
tions  of  plagiarism  which  they  hurl  against  it,  be  al 
together  incomprehensible  ? 

In  reality,  the  influence  of  Hellenic  cults  could  have 
been  exercised  on  Christianity  only  in  an  absolutely 
extrinsic  way :  in  this  sense,  that  Christianity,  in  order 
to  oppose  the  surrounding  religions  and  show  itself 
totally  distinct  and  different  from  them,  should  have 
surrounded  its  worship  with  a  mysterious  external  ap 
parel.  Only  the  initiated  could  be  present  at.  its  as 
semblies,  and  secrecy  was  demanded  of  the  members 
of  the  Christian  communities.  This  external  apparel 
of  the  Christian  worship  disappears'  with  the  circum 
stances  which  gave  it  birth,  and  it  was  replaced  by 
others  conformed  to  the  social  relations  of  the  different 
periods  of  the  history  of  Christianity.  This  influence 
which  Paganism  could  have  exercised  on  the  Christian 
religion,  is  not  then  a  creative  influence,  which  would 
have  given  birth  to  our  Sacraments ;  it  touched  only 
the  exterior,  only  the  entirely  accidental  forms  of  worr 
ship.  The  internal  development  of  the  Christian  wor 
ship  went  on  —  the  documents  give  evidence  of  it - 
conformably  to  the  principles  laid  down  by  Christ  and 

18  De  Bapt.,  5.     St.  Justin,  /  Apol,  62,  also  accuses  the  devils  of 
imitating  the  Christian  Baptism. 

19  Cf.    TH.    MOMMSEN    and   J.    MARQUARDT,   Manuel   des   An- 
tiquites  Romaines.    Le  culte  chez  les  Remains,  t.  i,  p.  108  ff.     (Fr. 
tr.)  ;  also  FR.  CUMONT,  Les  Mystcres  de  Mithra,  c.  5. 


332       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

His  Apostles  and  under  the  guarantee  of  the  severe 
control  of  the  Church. 

The  history  of  the  dogma  of  the  efficacy,  set  forth 
in  the  third  chapter,  is  itself  another  demonstration  of 
the  exclusively  Christian  origin  of  our  Sacraments. 
If,  in  fact,  the  Church  had  sought  its  sacred  rites  in 
the  Hellenic  religions,  it  would  likewise  have  adopted 
the  idea  which  these  religions  had  of  the  efficacy  of 
their  rites.20  Now  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  effi 
cacy  of  the  Sacraments  is  an  original  doctrine,  wholly 
different  from  the  conception  which  the  Pagans  had  of 
the  efficacy  of  their  mysteries.  These  acted  magic 
ally,  i.  e.  they  did  not  demand  on  the  part  of  those  who 
received  them  any  moral  cooperation,  any  true  conver 
sion  of  the  heart,  whereas  the  Christian  Sacraments 
give  salvation  only  to  those  who  have  repaired  by  a 
serious  penance  their  past  disorders  and  who  are  "  to 
tally  dead  to  sin."  Tertullian,21  as  will  be  remem 
bered,  insists  so  much  on  this  penance  preparatory  to 
Baptism,  that  he  seems  to  accord  to  it  almost  the  whole 
work  of  the  regeneration  of  the  Christian.  The  teach 
ing  of  Tertullian  is  also  that  of  all  the  Fathers,  who 
always  feared  lest  catechumens  should  descend  with 
unrepentant  souls  into  the  baptismal  waters. 

It  is  not  Paganism  which  could  have  inspired  Chris 
tian  writers  with  such  a  just  idea  of  the  efficacy  of  the 
Sacraments;  it  is  the  traditional  teaching  of  the 
Church.  Besides  we  have  on  this  point  the  positive 

20Harnack,  /.  c.,  and  many  other  Protestants  with  him 
pretend  that  the  Church  really  derived  from  Paganism  its  doc 
trine  of  the  sacramental  efficacy.  According  to  these  writers 
the  efficacy  which  Catholics  assign  to  their  Sacraments  is  a 
"  magical  and  superstitious "  efficacy,  such  as  the  Pagans  at 
tributed  to  their  rites ! 

21  De  Paen.,  i,  6. 


LIBERAL  PROTESTANTISM  333 

testimony  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers.  Christians  are 
regenerated  and  washed  in  the  water,  says  St.  Justin, 
conformably  to  the  doctrine  which  the  Apostles  have 
transmitted  to  us.22  The  water  has  the  power  of  re 
generating,  declares  Tertullian,  because  at  the  begin 
ning  of  the  world,  it  was  consecrated  by  the  Spirit  of 
God  who  rested  upon  it.23  Salvation  is  impossible 
without  baptismal  ablution,  for  Christ  said,  "If  any 
one  be  not  born  again  of  water,  he  has  not  life  in 
him."  24 

Tertullian,  it  is  true,  to  demonstrate  that  the  doc 
trine  of  the  regenerative  efficacy  of  baptismal  water 
contains  nothing  absurd,  alleges  the  belief  of  the 
Pagans  in  the  efficacy  of  their  religious  ablutions,  and 
finds  in  it  a  proof  that  the  water  possesses  a  power  of 
purifying.  But  he  adds  also  that  this  Pagan  belief  is 
vain,  and  founded  on  a  diabolical  fraud.25  The  Chris 
tian  faith  alone  is  conformable  to  reality,  for  it  is 
founded  on  the  testimony  of  God  Himself. 

The  Christian  writers  of  the  2nd.  and  3rd.  centuries 
constantly  set  in  opposition  Christianity,  a  Divine 
institution,  to  Paganism,  a  diabolical  institution.  It  is 
then  incredible  that  the  Christians  would  have  sought 
their  doctrine  in  an  institution  so  hostile  and  so  de 
tested.  It  is  very  desirable  that  Catholic  science 
should  dispose  once  for  all  of  those  prejudiced  Protes 
tant  positions. 

22  /  ApoL,  61. 

23  De  Bapt.,  3. 
2*De  Bapt.,  12. 
25  De  Bapt.,  5. 


334       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

§  IV.     The  Dogma  of  the  Divine  Institution  According  to 
the  Theologians. 

a.     The  Fact  of  the  Divine  Institution  of  the  Seven  Sacra 
ments  is  Affirmed. 

The  theologians  of  the  Middle  Ages,  as  was  their 
method,  collected  in  a  vast  synthesis  all  the  data  of 
tradition  and  laid  down  a  general  statement  of  the 
Divine  institution  of  the  seven  Sacraments.  Before 
them,  St.  Augustine  had  indeed  declared,  in  sentences 
of  an  apparently  sweeping  character,  that  the  Chris 
tian  Sacraments  have  Christ  for  their  author.  But 
the  context  shows  that  he  had  in  view  only  Baptism 
and  the  Holy  Eucharist.26  In  the  Middle  Ages,  the 
list  of  the  seven  Sacraments  being  clearly  fixed,  the 
question  of  their  Divine  institution  was  treated  sys 
tematically. 

The  Fathers  had  clearly  taught  that  Baptism,  Eu 
charist,  Penance,  Holy  Orders  and  Matrimony  came 
from  Christ ;  they  did  not  speak  explicitly  of  the  insti 
tution  of  Confirmation  nor  of  Extreme  Unction.27  In 
the  1 2th.  century,  writers  said  commonly  enough  that 
these  two  Sacraments  were  instituted  by  the  Apostles,28 
without  specifying  whether  the  Apostles  had  received 
from  Christ  a  special  delegation  to  this  effect.  But 
this  teaching  was  soon  made  precise,  for  a  rite  which 
is  efficacious  of  grace  and  capable  of  "  causing "  it, 
can  have  no  one  but  God  for  its  author.  The  dogma 
of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  which  is  in  a  certain 

26  Supra,  pp.  31-32. 

27TURMEL,    /.    C. 

28  ROLAND  (GIETL,  Die  Sent.  Rolands,  p.  213);  HUGH  OF  ST. 
VICTOR,  De  Sacramentis,  ii,  par.  15,  2;  Summa  Sent.,  vi,  15;  P. 
LOMBARD,  Sent,  iv,  23,  2. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  THEOLOGIANS      335 

manner  the  generator  of  sacramentary  theology,  was 
then  leading  the  writers  to  an  exact  understanding  of 
the  origin  of  Confirmation  and  Extreme  Unction.  So 
the  Divine  institution  of  the  seven  Sacraments  of  the 
Christian  religion  is  universally  affirmed  in  the  first 
half  of  the  I3th.  century.29 

It  was  indeed  by  reflecting  on  the  marvellous  efficacy 
of  the  Sacraments  that  the  Catholic  mind  clearly 
perceived  the  dogma  of  the  Divine  institution  of  the 
seven  Sacraments.  It  is  from  God  alone,  St.  Thomas 
remarks,  that  the  power  of  the  Sacraments  comes; 
they  could,  then,  have  none  but  God  for  their  author.30 
It  was  Christ  who  instituted  them;  as  God,  He  had 
absolute  power  over  the  Sacraments,  and  as  man,  He 
possessed  a  high  ministerial  power,  of  which  He  made 
use  in  establishing  the  Christian  rites.31  The  seven 
Sacraments  of  the  Law  of  grace,  affirms  in  his  turn 
St.  Bonaventure,  have  for  author  Christ  the  mediator 
and  lawgiver  of  the  New  Covenant.32  It  was  in  vir 
tue  of  His  sovereign  power  that  He  made  them  effi 
cacious  and  salutary. 

At  the  moment  when  the  dogma  of  the  Divine  insti 
tution  of  the  seven  Sacraments  was  explicitly  affirmed 
and  studied  by  theologians,  the  plan  of  worship  which 
Jesus  had  but  incompletely  made  known  to  His  Apos 
tles  appeared  in  all  its  beauty.  Jesus  had  wished,  by 
the  institution  of  the  Sacraments,  to  sanctify  the  prin- 

29  ALEX.  OF  HALES,  Summa  TheoL,  iv,  qu.  5,  memb.  2,  art.  i, 
ST.  THOMAS,  ST.  BONAVENTURE,  etc. 

30  Summa   TheoL,  3,  qu.  64,  art.  2 :    Virtus  sacramenti  est  a 
solo  Deo.  Ergo  solus  Deus  potest  instituere  sacramentum. 

31  Ibid.,  art.  3. 

32  Breviloq.,   par.    6.    c.    4 :     Septem    sacramenta   legis    gratiae 
Christus   instituit  tanquam  Novi  Testament!  mediator  et  prae- 
cipuus  lator  legis. 


336      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

cipal  epochs  of  the  Christian  life,  its  beginning,  its 
successive  growth  and  its  end  here  below.  He  wished 
also  to  provide  for  the  needs  of  the  government  of 
His  Church.  The  intentions  of  Jesus  relative  to  the 
Sacraments  are  only  imperfectly  revealed  in  the  in 
spired  writings ;  it  is  the  development  of  dogma  which 
has  given  us  an  integral  knowledge  of  them  in  the 
course  of  centuries.  At  the  end  of  their  development, 
they  shine  forth  in  all  their  brilliancy,  and  we  are  as 
sured,  by  the  infallibility  of  the  Church,  that  the  idea 
given  of  them  by  tradition  is  in  perfect  accord  with 
reality. 

b.     The  Manner  of  the  Divine  Institution  of  the  Sacraments. 

If  all  the  writers  of  the  I3th.  century,  starting 
from  the  dogma  of  the  sacramental  efficacy,  affirmed 
the  divine  institution  of  the  seven  Sacraments,  all  did 
not  certainly  have  the  same  idea  as  to  the  manner  of 
this  institution.  The  cause  of  the  divergencies  of 
views  which  were  given  forth  is  due  to  the  insuf 
ficiency  of  the  Gospel  records.  How  could  Christ  be 
the  institutor  of  the  seven  Sacraments  when  we  read 
nowhere  in  the  Sacred  Writings  that  He  explained 
Himself  on  all  of  them?  Two  schools  were  formed, 
the  Franciscan  school  and  the  Thomist.33 

Alexander  of  Hales,  when  speaking  of  the  institu 
tion  of  the  Sacraments  in  general,  declares  that  all  the 
Sacraments  have  Christ  for  their  author,  but  all  were 
not  instituted  by  Him  immediately.  "  Omnia  (insti- 
tuit)  profecto  auctoritative,  sed  non  omnia  dispensa- 
tive." 34  Certain  ones,  Confirmation  and  Extreme 

33  Cf.  TURMEL,  Hist,  de  la  Theol  Pos.  liv.  ii,  p.  i,  ch.  x. 

34  Sum.  theol.,  IV,  qu.  5,  m'embr.  2,  art.  i :     Sacramenta  N.  L. 
digniora   stint   sacramentis   veteris   legis,  in  quantum  hujusmodi 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  THEOLOGIANS      337 

Unction  in  particular,  were  established  by  the  Apostles 
in  virtue  of  the  power  which  they  had  received  from 
Christ.  This  doctrine  does  not  substantially  differ 
from  the  modern  theory  of  the  mediate  institution : 

"  Haec  duo  sacramenta  [confirm,  et  extr.  unc.]  .  .  . 
data  sunt  dispensatione  apostolorum,  qui  tamen  quantum  ad 
potestatem  quam  acceperunt  a  Christo  majoris  erant  dignita- 
tis  quam  ille  qui  erat  in  lege  [mosaica]."  35 

But  when  Alexander  treats  of  Confirmation  further 
on  in  his  Summa,  he  adopts  an  opinion  altogether  dif 
ferent.  Absolutely  convinced  that  the  matter  and 
form  of  the  Sacraments  are  unchangeable,  and  that 
they  must  have  been  determined  by  the  institutor  of 
the  Sacraments,  just  as  they  were  in  the  I3th. 
century,  he  was  led  to  say  that  Confirmation  was  in 
stituted  under  a  special  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  a  council  of  Meaux  in  the  Qth.  century.  Pre 
viously  the  Holy  Ghost  had  been  given  to  the  faithful 
without  the  medium  of  any  sacramental  rite.36 

This  conception  of  the  origin  of  Confirmation  rests 
on  a  doctrine  which  is  very  true,  but  of  which  Alex 
ander  made  an  excessive  use,  viz.,  the  ever  present  ac 
tion  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  Church.  This  action 
would  have  as  its  purpose  not  only  to  give  to  the 
Christian  society  a  progressive  manifestation  of  the 
truth  revealed  to  the  Apostles,  but  also  to  inspire  in  it 
the  thought  and  give  to  it  the  power  of  instituting  new 
Sacraments.  A  strange  theory  indeed,  which  ap- 

et  per  digniorem  sunt  instituta,  scilicet  per  Christum  vel  apos- 
tolos  auctoritate  ipsius  et  doctrina/' 

35  Ibid. 

36  Ibid,,  qu.  9,  mem.  i,  2. 


338       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

pears  for  the  first  time  in  the  Summa  of  the  Irre 
fragable  Doctor !  37 

St.  Bona venture  followed  the  teaching  of  Alexan 
der,  but  with  some  slight  modification.  According 
to  the  teaching  of  the  Seraphic  Doctor,  the  essential 
matter  and  form  of  Confirmation  were  instituted  by 
the  Holy  Ghost,  but  only  shortly  after  the  death  of 
the  Apostles. 

"  Sed  postquam  bases  Ecclesiae  Apostoli,  scilicet  qui  a 
Deo  non  per  homines  erant  ordinati  praelati  et  confirmati 
defecerunt,  instituit  Spiritus  Sanctus  hujus  sacramenti  for- 
mam,  cui  etiam  virtutem  sanctificandi  dedit."  38 

Extreme  Unction,  according  to  St.  Bonaventure, 
would  have  an  analogous  origin:  the  Holy  Ghost 
would  have  instituted  it  by  the  mediation  of  the  Apos 
tles  :  St.  James  would  be  the  promulgator  of  the  insti 
tution.  If  Extreme  Unction  was  really  the  work  of 
Christ,  the  Gospels  would  have  mentioned  it.  Now 
they  are  silent  on  this  subject,  for  the  institution  of 
Extreme  Unction  can  no  more  be  found  in  the  com 
mand  of  the  Savior  to  His  Apostles  to  heal  the  sick  of 
Galilee  by  anointing  them  with  oil,  than  can  that  of 
Confirmation  be  discovered  in  the  fact  that  Jesus  laid 
hands  on  children  during  His  mortal  life.  It  must 

37  It  is  the  institution  of  the  sacrament  itself  and  not  only 
of  its  matter  and  form  which  is  attributed  to  the  Holy  Ghost. 
For  then  they  did  not  consider  that,  to  be  the  institutor  of  a 
sacrament,  it  sufficed  to  determine  its  spiritual  effect  without 
also  choosing  the  rite. 

38 IV  Sent.,  Dist.  7,  art.  I,  qu.  I. —  Ibid.,  qu.  2:  Postea  suc- 
cessoribus  [apostolorum]  institutis  dandus  erat  [Spiritus  S.]  vi 
verborum  et  invisibiliter :  ideo  oportuit  institui  sensibile  elemen- 
tum.  Institutum  est  ergo  hoc  elementum  [chrisma]  Spiritu 
Sancto  dictante  ab  ipsis  Ecclesiae  rectoribus. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  THEOLOGIANS      339 

then  be  the  Holy  Ghost  who  instituted  Extreme  Unc 
tion  through  the  medium  of  the  Apostles.39 

The  great  representatives  of  the  Franciscan  school 
of  the  1 3th.  century,  then,  admitted  that  two  Sacra 
ments,  Confirmation  and  Extreme  Unction,  had  for 
their  author  not  Christ,  but  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  they 
were  Divine  institutions,  but  not  institutions  of  Christ. 
Still  the  opinion  of  St.  Bonaventure  seems  to  have 
varied.  According  to  the  Breviloquium^  as  has  al 
ready  been  said,  all  the  Sacraments  were  instituted  by 
Christ,  only  in  different  manners.  This  doctrine  is 
also  that  of  the  Commentary  on  the  Sentences*1 

S9  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  23,  art.  I,  qu.  2. — "  Concedendae  igitur  sunt 
rationes  probantes  Spiritum  Sanctum  per  Apostolos  hoc  sacra- 
mentum  (extr.  unct.)  instituisse." 

40  Pa'rs   6,   cap.   iv:     Instituit  autem    [Christus]    praedicta   sa- 
cramenta  diversimode.     Quaedam  scilicet  ex  eis  confirmando,  ap- 
probando    et    consummando,    ut    matrimonium    et   paenitentiam  • 
quaedam   autem    insinuando   et   initiando,   ut   confirmationem   et 
unctionem  extremam:  quaedam  vero  initiando  et  consummando 
et  in  semetipso   suscipiendo,  ut  sacramentum  baptismi,  euchar- 
istiae    et   ordinis.     Haec    enim   tria   et   plene    instituit    et    etiam 
primus  suscepit. 

41  Fr.  A.   Vander  Heeren,  reviewing  my  book  in  the  Revue 
d'Histoire  ecclesiastique  de  Louvain  (Oct.  15,  1907,  pp.  798-802), 
pretends   that   this   "  apparent   contradiction "  of   Alexander  of 
Hales  and  of  St.  Bonaventure,  who  teach  on  the  one  hand  that 
all  the  Sacraments  were  instituted  by  Christ,  although  in  differ 
ent   ways,   and   on   the  other,   that   Confirmation   and   Extreme 
Unction   were   instituted  by  the  Holy  Ghost,   can  be  explained 
by  the  hypothesis  of  the  immediate  institution  in  genere.    Thus 
the  institution  of  the  rite  alone  would  be  attributed  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,   the    effect    of   the    sacrament   having    already   been    de 
termined  by  Christ.     Consequently,  between  the  opinions  of  the 
Franciscans  and  the  modern  theory  of  immediate  but  generic 
institution  there  would  be  only  "a  difference  of  clearness  and 
terminology"    (p.  801). —  I  cannot  accept  the  explanation   pro 
posed  by  Fr.  V.  Heeren.     It  tends  to  interpret  ancient  writers 
by  a  modern  theory  —  a  dangerous  procedure.     Besides  it  does 
not   square   with   the   texts.     St.    Bonaventure   says   that   Jesus 

23 


340       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

The  Thomist  school  always  taught  that  all  the  Sacra 
ments  were  instituted  by  Christ.  The  silence  of  Scrip 
ture  on  the  establishment  of  some  of  them  is  explained 
by  the  fact  that  not  all  that  Jesus  said  is  contained  in 
the  inspired  writings.  Albert  the  Great  declared  that 
Christ  instituted  Confirmation  as  to  its  actual  matter 
and  form ;  that  the  Apostles  used  determined  words 
and  matter  as  we  do  in  giving  the  Holy  Ghost;  that 
besides  the  Areopagite,  then  considered  as  a  contem 
porary  of  the  Apostolic  age,  mentioned  the  use  of 
chrism.42  Extreme  Unction  likewise  had  Christ  as  its 
author,  to  which  the  text  of  St.  Mark  43  is  an  indirect 
witness : 

"  Marci  enim  (VI)  legitur,  quod  Apostolis  euntibus  a 
Domino  missis  ad  praedicandum,  multos  infirmos  ungebant 
oleo,  et  curabantur:  et  non  est  praesumendum,  quod  aliquid 
fecerint  nisi  ex  institutione  et  imperio  Domini."  44 

This  teaching  is  surely  exaggerated.  St.  Thomas 
tried  to  bring  it  nearer  the  truth.  It  was  really  Jesus, 
he  declares,  who  instituted  Confirmation,  for  the  in 
stitution  of  a  sacrament  is  an  attribution  of  a  superior 
power  which  belongs  to  Christ  alone.  But  Jesus  in 
stituted  Confirmation  in  promising  the  Holy  Ghost, 

instituted  Confirmation  and  Extreme  Unction  "  insintiando  et 
initiando"  (Brevil.,  vi,  4).  He  says  nowhere  that  we  should  un 
derstand  these  formulas  as  meaning  the  determination  of  the 
spiritual  effects  of  these  Sacraments  by  Christ.  Besides,  when 
speaking  of  Extreme  Unction  St.  Bonaventure  gives  us  to  un 
derstand  the  contrary.  He  says  that  this  sacrament  is  "insin 
uated  "  in  Mark  (vi,  13)  because  the  anointings  of  the  Apostles 
produced  no  spiritual  effect.  IV  Sent.,  D.  23,  A.  I,  q.  2,  in  fine. 

**IV  Sent.,  Dist.  7,  art.  2. 

43  vi,  13. 

id.t  Dist.  23,  art   13. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  THEOLOGIANS      341 

which  was  to  be  given  only  after  the  Ascension.  As 
to  chrism,  the  matter  of  the  sacrament,  its  choice  was 
suggested  to  the  Apostles  by  the  tongues  of  fire,  under 
the  form  of  which  the  Holy  Ghost  came  down  upon 
them  visibly  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  for  oil  is  really 
the  fuel  of  fire.45  The  Angelic  Doctor  gives  us  to  un 
derstand  that  the  Savior  entrusted  the  Apostles,  who 
were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  with  determining  the 
sacramental  rite  of  Confirmation.46 

As  to  Extreme  Unction,  it  also  was  instituted  by 
Christ  Himself,  and  promulgated  by  His  Apostles. 
This  institution  is  not  related  by  the  Evangelists.  Still 
St.  Mark  mentions  the  anointings  made  on  the  sick  of 
Galilee.47  St.  Thomas  sees  some  relation  between 
these  anointings  and  our  sacrament,  but  he  does  not 
indicate  it  with  precision. 

The  teaching  of  the  Thomist  school,  which  assigns 
to  Christ  Himself  the  institution  of  all  the  Sacraments 
soon  became  general,  while  that  of  Alexander  and  St. 
Bona venture,  making  the  Holy  Ghost  the  author  of 
Confirmation  and  Extreme  Unction,  was  abandoned 
or  very  much  modified.48  Instead  of  saying  that  it 
was  the  Holy  Ghost  who  inspired  the  Apostles  to  insti 
tute  these  two  Sacraments,  it  was  said  that  Christ  Him 
self  had  ordered  it.  Confirmation  and  Extreme  Unc- 

*5  St.  Thomas  says  further  on  (72,  art.  4)  that  the  Apostles  in 
administering  Confirmation  used  a  matter  and  form  "  ex  man 
date  Christi."  But  that  command  of  Christ  would  concern 
rather  the  necessity  of  a  matter  and  form  than  the  determination 
thereof. 

46  Summa  Theol.,  3,  72,  art.  i  and  2. 

47 IV  Sent.,  Dist.  23,  qu.  i,  art.  i.  Summa  Theol.,  suppl.,  29, 
art.  3. 

48  Duns  Scotus  is  nevertheless  favorable  to  the  opinion  of  St. 
Bonaventure  as  to  the  origin  of  Confirmation.  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist. 
?,  qu.  i. 


342      INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

tion  would  have  thus  been  instituted  mediately.  It 
is  this  point  of  view  which  later  theologians,  particu 
larly  those  contemporary  with  the  Council  of  Trent, 
will  attribute  to  St.  Bonaventure  and  his  disciples.  St. 
Thomas  and  his  school  resolutely  maintained  the  im 
mediate  institution  of  all  the  Sacraments:  Christ  Him 
self  instituted  all  the  Sacraments,  although  He  Him 
self  did  not  promulgate  all  of  them;  Confirmation  and 
Extreme  Unction  were  promulgated  by  His  Apostles. 
The  Angelic  Doctor  thus  exposes  these  two  opin 
ions,  which  are  from  this  time  to  hold  such  a  great 
place  in  the  theology  of  the  Sacraments: 

"  Circa  hoc  [institutionem  extr.  unct]  est  duplex  opinio. 
Quidam  enim  dicunt  quod  sacramentum  istud,  et  confirma- 
tionis,  Christus  non  instituit  per  se,  sed  apostolis  instituen- 
dum  dimisit;  quia  haec  duo  propter  plenitudinem  gratiae 
quae  in  eis  confertur,  non  potuerunt  ante  Spiritus  Sancti 
missionem  plenissimam  institui.  .  .  .  Alii  dicunt  quod 
omnia  sacramenta  Christus  instituit  per  seipsum :  sed  quae- 
dam  per  seipsum  promulgavit,  quae  sunt  majoris  difficultatis 
ad  credendum ;  quaedam  autem  apostolis  promulganda  re- 
servavit,  sicut  extremam  unctionem  et  connrmationem.  Et 
haec  opinio  pro  tanto  videtur  probabilior  quia  ad  fundamen- 
tum  legis  pertinent,  et  ideo  ad  legislatorem  pertinet  eorum 
institutio."  49 

The  hypothesis  of  the  immediate  institution,  consid 
ered  by  St.  Thomas  as  more  probable  than  that  of  the 
mediate  institution,  became  predominant.  In  the 
1 4th.  century,  Durandus  of  St.  Pourgain,  so  much 
inclined  to  break  away  from  the  common  teachings, 
accepts  this  unhesitatingly.  It  was  regarded  as  al 
most  of  faith  at  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  so 

49  Summa  Theol,  suppl.,  29,  art.  3.  Cf.  IV  Sent,  ii,  23,  qu.  I, 
art.  i. 


ACCORDING  TO  THE  THEOLOGIANS      343 

much  so  that  several  theologians  believed  that  it  had 
been  the  intention  of  the  Fathers  to  define  it.50  In 
reality,  as  has  already  been  said,  the  Church  kept  out 
of  the  controversy.  She  defined  that  all  the  Sacra 
ments  have  Christ  for  their  author ;  by  that  she  form 
ally  disapproved  of  every  theory  that  attributed  to  the 
Holy  Ghost  the  institution  of  any  sacrament.  She 
also  adopted  and  consecrated  the  Thomist  teaching 
on  the  origin  of  Extreme  Unction,  instituted  by  Jesus 
and  promulgated  by  St.  James.51  But  she  did  not 
wish  to  pronounce  on  the  manner  of  the  institution  of 
the  Sacraments. 

Theologians  after  the  Council  of  Trent  made  new 
efforts  to  understand  better  and  better  the  dogma  of 
the  Divine  institution  of  the  Sacraments.  They  taught 
almost  unanimously  that  Christ  Himself  established 
them  all  in  person;  the  hypothesis  of  the  mediate  insti 
tution  never  gained  many  followers  in  modern  times.52 

But  the  historical  studies  of  the  I7th.  century 
obliged  the  writers,  as  we  have  seen  in  Chapter  II,53 
to  limit  the  action  of  Christ  in  the  institution  of  some 
Sacraments,  to  determining  the  spiritual  effect,  the 
choice  of  the  rite  being  left  to  the  Apostles  and  the 
Church.  Thus  arose  the  hypothesis  of  the  immediate 
institution  in  genere  and  in  specie;  which  entered  the- 

50  BELLARMINE,  De  sacram.  in  gen.,  lib.  I,  cap.  23 :     Qiti  canon 
non  debet  ita  intelligi,  quasi  concilium  velit  sacramenta  instituta 
esse  a  Christo  immediate,  vel  mediate,  sed  solum  immediate :  nam 
alioqui   concilium    frustra   canonem   istum   posuisset,   cum   nemo 
unquam  dubitaverit,  quin  saltern  mediate  sacramenta  a  Deo  sint 
instituta.     Cf.  VASQUEZ,  In  3am  Part.,  qu.  64,  disp.  135,  cap.  i. 

51  Sess.  XIV,  dc  Extrema  Unctione,  can.  i. 

52  Cf.  DE  LUGO,  DC  Sac.  in  gen.,  Disp.  vii,  sect,  i.;  H.  TOUR- 
NELY,  DC  Sac.  in  gen.,  qu.  5,  art.  i. 

53  See  above,  pp.  87,  ff. 


344       INSTITUTION  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

ology  definitively  from  the  beginning  of  the  i/th. 
century.  Honore  Tournely  (71729)  exposes  and 
discusses  it  as  a  doctrine  known  in  the  schools.54 

The  hypothesis  of  the  immediate  institution  in  specie 
and  in  genere  was  a  happy  result  of  the  efforts  of 
theological  thought,  striving  to  solve  the  problem  of 
the  manner  of  the  institution  of  the  Sacraments.  Can 
this  result  be  called  definitive?  A  more  complete 
study  of  the  historical  beginnings  of  many  of  our 
Sacraments  seems  to  show  that  it  cannot.  The  true 
solution  must  be  sought,  if  we  are  not  mistaken,  in  the 
traditional  and  fertile  idea  of  development,  to  which 
Newman,  that  great  thinker,  has  so  opportunely 
brought  back  Catholic  theology. 

54  De  Sac.,  qu.  i,  art.  4.    Cf.  BILLUART,  De  Sac.  in  comm.,  Dis 
sert,  i,  art.  5. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  INTENTION  OF  THE  MINISTER  AND  THE  RECIPIENT 

For  the  validity  of  the  Sacraments  the  only  condi 
tion  common  to  both  minister  and  recipient  is  the  in 
tention  of  administering,  or  of  receiving  the  sacra 
mental  rite. 

The  seven  Sacraments  cannot,  it  is  clear,  be 
administered  or  received  by  any  and  everyone  indis 
criminately  :  each  sacrament  demands  special  condi 
tions,  either  on  the  part  of  the  minister  or  of  the 
recipient.  Thus,  while  it  is  true  that  anyone,  even  a 
Pagan,  may  baptize  validly,  it  is  equally  true,  that 
priests  alone  have  power  to  say  Mass,  to  absolve  sin, 
jurisdiction  (of  course)  presupposed,  and  to  adminis 
ter  Extreme  Unction  to  the  sick.  Likewise  in  the 
Latin  Church,  Confirmation  is  reserved  to  bishops; 
although  among  the  Greeks  it  is  commonly  enough 
conferred  by  ordinary  priests.  As  for  the  conferring 
of  Holy  Orders,  it  is  exclusively  the  function  of  the 
bishop.  Only  bishops  can  validly  ordain  the  higher 
ministers  of  the  Church. 

As  with  the  minister,  so  also  with  the  recipient :  the 
conditions  demanded  of  him  are  not  the  same  for  all 
Sacraments.  Thus,  whereas  Baptism  can  be  validly 
conferred  on  any  living  person  without  exception,  be 
cause  it  is  necessary  to  salvation,  the  other  Sacraments 
can  be  validly  conferred  on  those  only  who  are  already 

345 


346        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

baptized:  it  is  the  baptismal  character  that  renders 
their  reception  possible.  But  still,  not  every  baptized 
person  is  a  fit  subject  for  all  the  Sacraments:  those 
who  have  never  enjoyed  the  use  of  reason,  and,  con 
sequently  could  never  sin,  cannot  be  absolved  at  the 
tribunal  of  Penance,  nor  be  anointed  with  the  oil  of 
the  sick,  because  these  two  Sacraments  presuppose  the 
possibility  of  sin.  Nor  can  Marriage  be  contracted 
by  those  not  of  age,  or  who  lack  those  qualities  essen 
tial  to  the  purpose  or  end  of  the  sacrament,  or  lastly, 
by  those  who  have  been  disqualified  by  the  Church 
legislation,  such  as  clerics  in  Major  Orders  and  re 
ligious  under  solemn  vows.  Only  those  who  are  in 
serious  danger  ought  to  receive  Extreme  Unction ;  and 
men  only  can  receive  the  sacrament  of  Orders. 

The  intention  is  then  the  sole  condition  for  the 
validity  1  that  is  common  to  both  minister  and  subject 
of  all  the  Sacraments;  as  we  know,  neither  faith,  nor 
the  state  of  grace,  is  necessary. 

§  I.    Doctrine  of  the  Church. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Church  relative  to  the  minister's 
intention  was  defined  also  in  condemnation  of  Protest 
ant  errors  —  hence,  an  understanding  of  these  errors 
will  furnish  also  a  correct  idea  of  the  true  doctrine  of 
the  Church. 

It  was  but  the  logical  consequence  of  the  sacra 
mental  principles  of  the  Reformation  to  discard  the 

1  It  is  not  to  our  purpose  to  speak  here  of  the  conditions 
requisite  in  the  minister,  that  the  administration  of  the  sacra 
ment  be  licit,  nor  of  the  dispositions  demanded  of  the  recipient 
for  the  profitable  reception  of  the  sacrament:  this  latter  belongs 
rather  to  Moral  Theology, 


DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CHURCH         347 

necessity  of  any  intention  whatsoever  in  the  minister, 
with  reference  to  the  conferring  of  the  sacrament.  If 
all  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  comes  from  the  faith 
of  the  subject,  and  if  the  sacramental  rite  has  no  other 
purpose  than  to  excite  the  faith  by  recalling  the  Divine 
promise,  it  is  readily  seen  that  the  end  may  be  attained 
independently  of  all  intention  on  the  part  of  the  minis 
ter :  "  All  we  believe  we  receive,"  Luther  said,  "  that 
we  do  actually  receive,  regardless  of  what  the  minister 
does  or  does  not  do,  even  though  he  act  through  dis 
simulation  or  in  open  mockery."  2  '  The  penitent  who 
believes  that  he  is  really  absolved  is  certainly  absolved, 
even  though  the  priest  pronounce  the  words  solely  for 
amusement's  sake."  3 

The  ministerial  act  of  the  priest  has  then  no  share  in 
the  production  of  the  sacramental  effects ;  for  this 
reason,  Luther  added,  all  Christians  without  distinction 
have  equal  power  either  to  teach  the  word  of  God  or 
to  confer  the  Sacraments ;  there  is  no  difference,  from 
this  point  of  view,  between  priest  and  layman.4 

The  Church  on  the  contrary  attributes  to  the  sacra 
mental  rite  an  intrinsic  power,  an  objective  efficacy; 
the  administration  of  the  sacrament  is  an  act  of  Christ, 
who  is  represented  by  the  minister.  Since  therefore 
he  is  Christ's  representative  and  acts  in  His  name,  and 
since  he  makes  use  of  power  coming  from  Christ,  the 

2  It  was  this  proposition  of  Luther's  that  was  submitted  to  the 
examination  of  the  Council  of  Trent.    THEINER,  I,  384;  PALLA- 
VICINI,  Book  IX,  chap,  vi,  n.  3. 

3  Twelfth  proposition  of  Luther's  condemned  by  Leo  X.  DEN- 
ZING.,  n.  636  (new  edit.,  n.  752). 

4  Omnes  christiani  habent  eamdem  potestatem  in  verbo  et  sa- 
cramento  quocumque,  et  claves  ecclesiae  omnibus  sunt  communes : 
Luther's  words  proposed  at  the  Council  of  Trent  for  examina 
tion.    THEINER,  i,  384. 


348        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

minister  of  the  sacrament  should  accordingly  con 
form  his  will  to  the  will  of  Him  whose  place  he  holds ; 
otherwise  his  transactions  are  not  valid:  proxy  does 
not  act  validly  in  the  name  of  his  principal,  unless  he 
conforms  to  the  latter's  intentions. 

For  this  reason  the  Council  of  Trent  defined  that  in 
tention  in  the  minister  of  the  Sacraments  is  necessary: 
that  is,  the  will  to  do  what  the  Church  does.5  To  will 
to  do  what  the  Church  does  in  the  administration  of 
the  Sacraments  is  to  will  what  Christ  willed;  for  the 
Church's  intentions  are  Christ's  intentions  regarding 
the  Sacraments. 

This  intention  may  be  had  sufficiently  even  in  the 
case  of  one  who  would  not  recognize  the  Church  of 
Rome  to  be  the  true  Church,  as  for  example,  the 
Protestants;  or  even  in  the  case  of  one  who,  like  the 
Pagans,  would  be  totally  ignorant  of  the  Church's  ex 
istence;  it  suffices  that  he  wills  to  do  what  Christians 
do  —  he  thereby  intends  to  will  what  Christ  willed. 
Hence  it  is  that  a  heretic,  a  profligate,  a  Pagan,  wish 
ing  to  baptize,  may  have  implicitly  this  intention  of 
doing  what  the  Church  does.  Moreover  often  it  is 
necessary  in  order  that  the  minister  be  actually  the 
representative  of  Jesus,  that  he  be  invested  with  the 
sacerdotal  character.  The  ordinary  Christian  has  not 
the  power  to  administer  all  the  Sacraments 6  as 
Luther  falsely  asserted. 

Such  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Council  of  Trent  as  in 
terpreted  by  Cardinal  Bellarmine.7  The  different 

5  Sess.   VII,  De  sacram.  in  gen.,  can.   n:     Si  quis  dixerit,  in 
ministris   dum   sacramenta  conficiunt   et   conferunt,   non   requiri 
intentionem  saltern  f aciendi  quod  facit  Ecclesia ;  A.  S. —  Cf.  Sess. 
XIV,  can.  9,  et  cap.  vi. 

6  Sess.   VII,  De  sacram.  in  gen.,  can.  10. 

7  De  Sacr.  in  gen.,  Lib.  II,  cap.  27. 


DOCTRINE  OF  THE  CHURCH         349 

qualities  which  the  intention  of  the  minister  of  the 
Sacraments  should  have,  will  be  explained  in  the  his 
torical  sketch  which  is  to  follow.  Let  it  suffice  to 
note  here  (as  Pallavicini  expressly  declares  8)  that  the 
Council  did  not  define  that  the  intention  of  doing  what 
the  Church  does  should  be  internal  in  the  sense  given 
the  word  by  theologians.  The  famous  controversy  to 
be  given  at  length  further  on,  is  not  therefore  irrevo 
cably  closed. 

According  to  the  unanimous  teaching  of  theologians 
which,  although  not  expressly  sanctioned  by  the 
Church,  must  be  followed  in  practice,  the  intention 
of  receiving  the  sacred  rite  is  required  in  every  adult 
who  has  the  use  of  reason  and  comes  to  the  sacra 
ment.  The  reception  of  the  sacrament  must  fulfil 
the  conditions  of  a  human  act,  that  is,  must  in  some 
manner  proceed  from  consciousness  and  free  will. 
The  degree  of  consciousness,  as  will  be  explained  later, 
varies  according  to  the  nature  of  the  sacrament.  It 
is  obvious  that  the  sick  or  the  dying  whom  the  priest 
attends  cannot  be  asked  to  have  as  perfect  an  intention 
as  is  required  of  those  who  receive  Holy  Orders  or 
Matrimony,  and  thereby  contract  serious  obligations 
for  life. 

The  dogma  of  the  necessity  of  intention  developed 
on  parallel  lines  with  the  other  sacramentary  dogmas : 
and  although  the  Church  had  not  from  the  very  be 
ginning  an  explicit  theory  on  the  intention,  it  may 
readily  be  shown  that  she  at  all  times  practised  what 
that  theory  expresses.  Once  again  we  see  that  dogma 
is  an  expression  of  the  traditional  practice  of  the 
Church  and  that  anyone  who  will  seek  out  the  traces 

8  Hist,  du  concile  de  TV.,  liv.  IX,  chap,  vi,  n.  2. 


350         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

of  her  sacramentary  dogmas  in  the  life  of  Christian 
society,  must  feel  his  faith  grow  stronger  and  deeper. 
In  the  early  centuries,  the  doctrine  of  the  intention 
was  tacitly  implied  in  the  teaching  of  the  Fathers 
regarding  the  ministerial  action  of  bishop  or  priest, 
when  conferring  the  Sacraments;  bishops  or  priests 
were  considered  the  representatives  of  Christ  and 
His  Church;  their  intentions  therefore  were  to  ac 
complish  what  Christ  ordained.  St.  Augustine  was 
the  first  to  sketch  the  outlines  of  a  theory  about  the 
intention  of  the  minister  and  of  the  recipient  of  Bap 
tism  ;  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the  holy  Doctor 
did  not  come  to  a  definitive  result.  He  did  at  least 
lay  down  with  precision  the  principles  upon  which 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  William  of  Auxerre,  Alexander 
of  Hales  and  St.  Thomas  formulated  the  complete 
dogma  later  on. 


§  II.  From  the  Beginning  up  to  St.  Augustine,  the  Minis 
ter  of  the  Sacrament  is  considered  as  the  Representative 
of  Christ  or  His  Church  —  The  Ordinations  imposed  by 
force  in  the  Fourth  and  Fifth  Centuries. 

St.  Paul  declares  to  the  Corinthians  that  the  preach 
ers  of  the  Gospel  are  to  be  regarded  "  as  the  ministers 
of  Christ  and  the  dispensers  of  the  mysteries  of 
God,"  9  and  as  fulfilling  "  the  functions  of  ambassa 
dors  of  Christ "  in  "  the  ministry  of  reconciliation  " 
of  men  with  God.10  This  dignity  of  representatives 
of  Jesus,  which  the  Apostles  attribute  to  themselves, 
when  they  preach  the  Gospel,  belongs  to  them  like 
wise  when  they  celebrate  the  Christian  rites. 

°7  Cor.,  iv,  i. 

10 II  Cor.,  v,  18-20. 


IN  APOSTOLIC  TIMES  351 

The  Apostles,  with  the  faithful  of  the  primitive 
Church,  whenever  they  partook  of  the  Eucharist,  had 
formally  the  intention  of  repeating  what  the  Savior 
had  done  and  commanded  to  be  done,  at  the  Last  Sup 
per:  "  Hoc  facite  in  meam  commemorationem/' 
Hence  it  is  that  whenever  they  came  together  for  the 
Eucharistic  Banquet,  it  is  "  the  Lord's  Supper  "  that 
they  intended  to  celebrate.11  It  was  likewise  in 
memory  of  Christ,  and  out  of  conformity  to  His  ex 
press  will,  that  the  Apostles  baptized  and  instructed 
others  to  baptize  in  the  name  of  Jesus.  It  was  also  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  that  the  anointings  with  oil  were 
made  on  the  sick  by  the  presbyters  of  the  churches.12 
When  the  Apostles  laid  hands  on  the  newly  baptized, 
to  confer  on  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  was  because 
Jesus  had  promised  the  Paraclete,  the  Holy  Spirit,  to 
all  who  should  believe  his  doctrine.  When  St.  Paul 
orders  the  Corinthians  to  expel  from  their  meetings 
the  incestuous  Christian,  he  claims  to  be  using  a  power 
which  he  has  from  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  be  acting  in 
His  name.13 

The  Apostles  then  consider  themselves  and  wish  to 
be  considered  by  the  Christians  as  the  representatives 
of  Jesus,  and  the  executors  of  His  will. 

The  intention  of  carrying  out  the  will  of  Christ,  in 
the  administration  and  reception  of  Baptism  and  the 
Eucharist  is  clearly  indicated  in  the  2nd.  century,  in 
St.  Justin's  writings.  "  In  the  name  of  God,  the 
Father  and  Master  of  all  things,  and  of  Jesus  Christ 
our  Savior,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  (i.e.  the  ad 
herents  of  Christianity)  are  then  washed  in  the  water. 

11  /  Cor.,  xi,  20,  24. 

12  James,  v,  14. 

13  /  Cor.,  v,  4-5;  II  Cor.,  x,  8. 


352         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

For  Christ  has  said :  '  Unless  you  be  born  again,  you 
will  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'  14  So,  too,  the 
Christians  partaking  of  the  Eucharist  believe  that  it 
is  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Jesus  Incarnate,  because,  ac 
cording  to  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles,  Jesus  had  said 
*  Do  this  in  memory  of  Me ;  this  is  my  Body  .  .  . 
this  is  My  Blood.'  "  15  The  writers  in  the  following 
centuries  express  themselves  in  the  same  manner  as 
St.  Justin,  when  they  treat  of  Baptism  and  the  Eu 
charist.16 

This  intention  on  the  part  of  the  Church  of  acting 
in  conformity  to  the  will  of  Jesus  evidences  itself  par 
ticularly  at  the  moment  where  the  development  of  the 
sacramentary  system  brings  a  Christian  rite  into  bold 
prominence.  At  the  opening  of  the  3rd.  century,  when 
the  rigorists  were  contesting  the  power  of  Pope 
Callistus  to  remit  sins  of  the  flesh,  he  declared  that 
he  held  from  Christ,  through  the  medium  of  St.  Peter, 
the  power  to  bind  and  to  loose.17  He  thereby  mani 
fested  his  intention  of  using  that  power  in  the  name 
of  Him  who  had  given  it.  St.  Ignatius  of  Antioch  at 
the  beginning  of  the  2nd.  century,  in  like  manner 
lets  us  understand  that  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons 
are  established  in  the  Church  in  conformity  to  the  will 
of  Christ.18  The  intention  of  carrying  out  the  orders 
of  Jesus  is,  besides,  necessarily  contained  in  the  cele 
bration  of  a  rite  of  which  He  is  declared  the  author; 

14  7  ApoL,  61. 
«  7  ApoL,  66. 

16  Cf .    ST.    CYPRIAN,    Epist.    Ixiii,    14 :     Si    in    sacrificio    quod 
Christus  obtulit  non  nisi  Christus  sequendus  est,  utique  id  nos  ob- 
audire  et  facere  oportet  quod  Christus  fecit  et  quod  faciendum 
esse  mandavit. 

17  TERTULLIAN,  De  pudicitia,  21. 

inscr. 


IN  THE  PATRISTIC  AGE  353 

the  minister  considers  himself  then  as  holding  the 
place  of  Christ  in  the  liturgical  function,  as  doing  what 
He  did  Himself  or  ordered  to  be  done. 

Besides,  the  minister  of  the  sacrament  is  Christ's 
representative  not  only  by  his  intention,  but  likewise 
because  he  has  been  officially  constituted  in  the  Church 
to  perform  the  ceremonies  of  Christian  worship. 
Liturgical  and  sacramentary  functions  in  the  Christian 
worship  have,  in  fact,  always  been  reserved  to  special 
persons  truly  set  apart  from  the  ordinary  faithful  by  a 
particular  consecration.  These  persons  were  the  epis- 
copoi  or  presbyters  and  the  deacons,  in  the  Apostolic 
age.  After  the  hierarchical  organization  of  the 
churches  had  been  fully  established,  each  having  at  its 
head  a  sovereign  Bishop,  under  whose  authority  la 
bored  a  number  of  priests  and  deacons,  the  administra 
tion  of  Baptism,  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist,  and 
the  reconciliation  of  penitents  became  functions  of  the 
bishop ;  19  ordinary  priests  could,  however,  fulfil  them 
in  the  bishop's  absence,  or  when  delegated  by  him. 
There  was,  before  the  erection  of  rural  parishes  in 
the  4th.  century  —  and  this  fact  explains  the  above 
discipline  —  a  bishop  at  the  head  of  every  church.  It 
was  therefore  no  more  than  natural  that  he  should  be 
the  one  to  preside  at  liturgical  functions,  just  as  our 
pastors  to-day  preside  at  all  ceremonies  of  any  im 
portance  that  occur  in  their  churches.  The  creation  in 
country  places  of  parishes  entrusted  to  ordinary  priests 
put  an  end  to  this  episcopal  reservation. 

Power  over  the  Sacraments  was  thus  always  consid 
ered  as  residing  in  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy.     The  j 
Montanist  heresy  tried  to  make  it  the  prerogative  of  - 

19  Cf.   ST.  IGNATIUS,  Smyrn.,  viii ;  TERTULLIAN,  De  Bapt.,  17; 
De  pudicit.,  18. 


354         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

spiritual  men;  the  confessors  and  martyrs  of  Carthage, 
in  the  days  of  St.  Cyprian,  claimed  to  have  power,  in 
dependently  of  the  bishop,  to  reconcile  the  lapsi  to  the 
Church,  but  they  had  to  yield  before  the  strenuous  op 
position  of  the  Church.20  The  Gnostic  sects  alone  al 
lowed  the  laity  and  even  women  to  celebrate  the  sacra 
mental  rites.21  But  such  practices  were  strongly  con 
demned  as  heretical  alterations  of  the  official  usage 
of  the  Church.22  Firmilian,  Bishop  of  Csesarea,  tells 
with  indignation  of  a  false  prophetess,  who  baptized, 
celebrated  the  Eucharist,  and  seduced  many  of  the 
faithful  in  Cappadocia,  about  the  middle  of  the  3rd. 
century.23 

In  the  4th.  century  this  idea  that  the  minister  of 
the  sacrament  is  a  personage  specially  consecrated  to 
hold  the  place  of  Christ,  evolved  into  a  magnificent 
doctrine  on  the  Christian  Priesthood,  of  which  the 
loftiest  expression  is  found  in  the  writings  of  St.  John 
Chrysostom,24  especially  in  his  treatise  on  The  Priest 
hood. 

This  doctrine  of  the  priesthood  was  brought  into 
close  relation  to  ecclesiology  during  the  Donatist 
controversy.  The  minister  of  the  sacrament,  who  was 

20  See  VACANDARD,  Revue  du  Clerge  Fr.,  1905,  pp.  236-260. 

21  SR.  EPIPHANIUS,  Plaer.  xlix,  3;  ST.  IREN^US,  Adv.  Haer.,i,g. 

22  Cf.  TERTULLIAN,  De  virg.  velandis,  9;  De  bapt.,  17. 
^Epist.   Ixxv,    10    (Cypriani  opp.,  HARTEL,  ii,  817-818).     Cf. 

TILLEMONT,  Mcmoires,  t.  iv,  art.  on  Saint  Firmilian. 

24  In  prodit.  Judae  horn,  i,  6 :  It  is  not  a  man  in  fact  that 
causes  the  oblations  to  become  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ; 
it  is  Christ  Himself,  who  was  crucified  for  us.  The  priest  is 
there  to  represent  Him  and  pronounce  the  words.  In  reality  it 
is  the  power  and  the  grace  of  God  that  operate.  Cf.  In  Matt, 
horn.  Ixxxii,  5.  Beautiful  considerations  on  the  grandeurs  of 
the  priesthood,  and  on  the  perfection  of  the  virtues  demanded 
in  that  state,  are  deduced  from  this  doctrine  in  the  treatise  On 
the  Priesthood,  iii,  4,  5,  6;  vi,  4. 


IN  ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  TIMES          355 

considered  Christ's  representative,  was  consequently 
regarded  as  the  representative  of  the  Church,  be 
cause  the  Church  is  Jesus  Christ.  St.  Cyprian,  in 
declaring  void  the  baptism  conferred  by  an  heretical 
minister,  had  brought  up  the  question  of  the  rela 
tions  between  the  minister  of  the  sacrament  and  the 
Church,  and  had  given  to  it  a  wrong  solution.  St. 
Augustine,  preeminently  the  doctor  on  ecclesiology, 
was  brought,  through  his  conflicts  against  the  Donat- 
ists,  to  state  these  relations  with  great  precision. 

The  minister  of  the  sacrament  is,  by  his  indestructi 
ble  character,  the  representative  of  the  Church  every 
where;  hence,  Baptism  conferred  by  him  is  always 
valid,  as  well  in  heresy  or  schism  as  in  Catholic  unity. 
And  since  there  is  between  Christ  and  His  Church  25 
a  moral  identity,  the  conferring  of  a  sacrament  is  an 
act  of  Christ,  working  through  his  Church,  as  repre 
sented  in  the  minister. 

The  minister  of  the  sacrament  is  thus  the  repre 
sentative  of  the  Church  as  well  as  of  Christ.  Me 
diaeval  theologians  will  conclude  from  this  that  he 
must  have  an  intention,  the  will  to  conform  to  the 
intentions  of  the  Church.  St.  Augustine  did  not 
think  of  deducing  this  conclusion,  but  in  practice  he 
lived  it,  he  and  all  of  the  bishops  of  the  Patristic  period. 
The  dogma  of  the  necessity  of  the  intention  in  the 
minister  did  therefore,  actually  exist,  although  as  a 
life  more  than  as  a  theory. 

25  Enar.  2,  in  psalm.  30,  n.  4 :  Fit  ergo  tanquam  ex  duobus  una 
quaedam  persona,  ex  capite  et  corpore,  ex  sponso  et  sponsa. 
...  Si  duo  in  came  una,  cur  non  duo  in  voce  una?  Loquatur 
ergo  Christus,  quia  in  Christo  loquitur  Ecclesia,  et  in  Ecclesia 
loquitur  Christus.  Cf.  Sermo  cxxxvii,  I. 

24 


356         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 


* 

•>,-  * 


The  same  must  be  said  of  the  intention  required  in 
the  recipient  of  the  sacrament.  Even  as  bishops  and 
priests  in  the  performance  of  the  sacramental  rites, 
considered  themselves  as  representatives  and  ambas 
sadors  of  Jesus,  so  too  the  faithful  received  the  Sacra 
ments  with  the  intention  of  obeying  Christ,  of  shar 
ing  in  the  sacred  rites  of  the  Church,  and  of  thus 
obtaining  salvation.  It  is  from  these  intimate  disposi 
tions  of  the  faithful  that  the  theology  on  the  intention 
of  the  recipient  of  the  Sacraments  will  be  deduced 
later  on. 

Against  this  view  several  cases  of  ordinations  by 
violence  might  be  adduced.  Everyone  knows  what 
repugnance  the  Saints  have  ever  manifested  as  regards 
the  burden  of  the  episcopacy.  Many  a  time  recourse 
to  ruse,  deception  and  even  violence  was  needed  to 
force  them  to  submit  to  imposition  of  hands.  Cor 
nelius,  according  to  St.  Cyprian  26  "  vim  passus  est  ut 
episcopatum  coactus  exciperet." 

It  was  thanks  to  the  stratagem  of  St.  John  Chrys- 
ostom  that  his  friend  St.  Basil,  allowed  himself  to  be 
ordained  bishop.27 

In  the  4th.  and  5th.  centuries,  when  laymen  had  a 
share  in  the  sacerdotal  and  episcopal  elections,  no  small 
number  of  holy  persons  were  constrained,  often  by 
popular  riots,  to  suffer  themselves  to  be  made  priests 
or  bishops.  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen  received  his 
priestly  ordination  under  such  circumstances,  and  was 


v,  8. 

27  St.  John  Chrysostom  let  St.  Basil  believe  he  himself  was  re 
ceiving  the  Episcopacy  at  the  same  time  as  Basil.  De  Sacerdotio, 
i,  6-7;  cf.  TILLEMONT,  Memoires,  t.  xi,  art.  5. 


IN  ST.  AUGUSTINE'S  TIMES          357 

so  deeply  grieved  thereby  that  he  fled  into  solitude; 
"  nor  could  considerations  of  either  country  or  friends 
or  relatives,  or  father  or  mother  keep  him  back."  28 
He  returned  to  Nazianzus,  however,  to  exercise  there 
his  priestly  duties,  "  for  fear  of  falling  into  the  crime 
and  incurring  the  punishment  of  the  disobedient." 

St.  Augustine  in  like  manner  dreaded  the  priest 
hood  ;  he  carefully  avoided  the  towns  where  there  was 
no  bishop,  for  fear  that  he  would  be  raised  to  the 
episcopate  in  spite  of  himself.  One  day  he  came  to 
Hippo,  "  without  the  least  apprehension,  for  Hippo 
had  a  bishop,  the  venerable  and  saintly  Valerius.  But 
it  happened,  that  a  priest  was  needed,  a  fact  of  which 
St.  Augustine  was  unaware.  The  congregation  being 
assembled,  the  Saint  came  to  the  Church  without  sus 
pecting  anything.  The  people  already  knew  of  his 
virtues  and  his  doctrine,  and  they  loved  him  because 
they  had  heard  how  he  had  abandoned  his  property  to 
consecrate  himself  to  God.  When,  therefore,  Valerius 
in  his  sermon  spoke  of  his  need  of  ordaining  some  one 
to  the  priesthood,  the  people  took  hold  of  Augustine 
and,  according  to  the  custom,  presented  him  to  the 
Bishop  for  ordination:  unanimously,  with  loud  cries 
and  passionate  ardor  they  all  insisted  on  it.  And  as 
for  him,  he  burst  into  tears  at  the  thought  of  the  dan 
gers  of  the  priesthood,  and  all  the  difficulties  and  trials 
to  which  the  government  of  a  church  would  expose 
him."  29 

Two  years  later,  in  393,  St.  Paulinus,  the  future 

28  TILLEMONT,  Memoires,  t.  ix,  art.  19,  20. 

29  TILLEMONT,  Memoires,  t.  xiii,  art.  59.     See  art.  191,  192,  on 
the  strange  uprising  that  broke  out  in  411  at  Hippo  because  a 
holy  man,   Pinian,  husband  of   St.   Melania  the  younger,   reso 
lutely  refused  to  be  made  a  priest. 


358         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

Bishop  of  Nola,  was  ordained  priest  in  the  same  way 
despite  himself,  in  the  church  of  Barcelona.  Whilst 
he  was  praying,  the  multitude  seized  him  by  the 
throat  30  and  forced  him  to  allow  himself  to  be  or 
dained.  "  And  thus,  although  desiring  not  to  drink 
that  chalice,  yet  realizing  that  Jesus  Christ  Himself  had 
said  He  had  come  to  minister,  not  to  be  ministered 
unto,  he  was  forced  to  say  to  God:  Thy  will,  not 
mine,  be  done." 

We  need  not  multiply  examples.31  At  first  sight 
we  might  be  tempted  to  suppose  that  these  holy  men, 
of  whom  we  have  just  spoken,  were  ordained  entirely 
against  their  will,  and  consequently,  without  sufficient 
intention.  But  on  a  closer  examination  of  the  facts 
we  perceive  that  after  a  moment  of  strong  resistance, 
the  candidates  so  constrained  at  last  consented  to  their 
ordination.  St.  Augustine  adds  that  these  violent  pro 
ceedings  were  meant  to  induce  those  who  were  worthy, 
to  accept  wilfully  the  burden  of  the  episcopate.32  Fi 
nally,  what  clearly  proves  that  these  saintly  men 
were  not  ordained  wholly  against  their  will  is  that 
after  ordination  they  fulfilled  the  duties  of  their  Or 
ders.  We  may  very  well  compare  them  to  the  holy 
priests  of  the  Middle  Ages  or  of  modern  times,  who 
have  been  forced  by  Sovereign  Pontiffs,  under  pain 
of  censure,  to  accept  the  episcopal  office. 

30  Vi  multitudinis  strangulantis  correptus  est.     SANCTI  PAUL- 
INI  Epist.  i,  10;  ii,  2.\  iii,  4.     Cf.  TILLEMONT,  t.  xiv,  art.  13,  on 
St.  Paulinus. 

31  Several  examples  are  given   in  HALLIER,  De  sacrls  electio- 
nibus  ei  ordinationibus,  part,  i,  sect,  v,  cap.   i    (MiGXE,  Cursus 
Theol.,  t.  xxiv,  408  ff),  and  MANY,  De  sacra  ordinationc,  p.  594. 

32  Epist.  clxxii,  ad  Donatum,  n.  2. :     Multi,  ut  episcopatum  sus- 
cipiant,   tenentur    inviti,    perdncuntur,    includuntur,    custodiuntur, 
patiunttir  tanta  quae  nolunt,  donee  eis  adsit  voluntas  suscipiendi 
operis  boni. 


ORDINATION  BY  VIOLENCE          359 

History  does,  however,  mention  cases  of  violence 
that  are  to  be  regretted  thoroughly  —  cases  in  which 
the  validity  of  the  ordinations  may  have  been  com 
promised.  Here  are  two  which  we  quote  from  Tille- 
mont. 

The  monks  of  a  monastery  in  Bethlehem  com 
plained  to  St.  Epiphanius,  about  the  year  394,  of  hav 
ing  no  priest  with  them  to  celebrate  the  Sacraments, 
and  they  urgently  asked  that  Paulinian,  St.  Jerome's 
brother,  might  be  ordained  for  the  purpose.  Paulin 
ian  on  the  other  hand  terribly  dreaded  a  charge  as 
heavy  as  that  of  the  priesthood.  But  one  day  when 
St.  Epiphanius  was  celebrating  the  Holy  Mysteries  in 
the  church  of  a  city  near  his  monastery,  he  had 
Paulinian  seized  by  the  deacons  when  he  least  ex 
pected  it,  and  ordered  him  to  be  gagged  to  prevent  him 
from  speaking,  lest  he  conjure  him  by  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ  not  to  ordain  him.  And  in  this  way  he 
ordained  him  first  deacon  —  and  obliged  him  through 
fear  of  God  and  by  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  to 
serve  at  the  altar ;  Paulinian  had  no  small  difficulty  in 
accepting,  and  protested  unceasingly  that  he  was  un 
worthy  of  this  honor.  Then  as  he  was  performing 
the  duties  of  deacon  and  ministering  at  the  sacrifice, 
Epiphanius  ordained  him  priest,  but  with  the  same 
difficulty,  always  keeping  Paulinian' s  mouth  sealed ; 
and  he  forced  him  by  the  same  reason  to  take  his  seat 
among  the  priests." 33  The  way  Epiphanius  pro 
ceeded  proves  that,  as  regards  the  necessary  intention 
in  the  recipient  of  the  Sacraments,  the  holy  Bishop  had 
no  very  definite  ideas! 

83  TILLEMONT,  Memoir  es,  i.  xii,  art.  68.  S.  Epiphanius  himself 
relates  this  fact  in  a  letter  to  John  of  Jerusalem.  (Epist.  1,  inter 
epist.  S.  Hieronymi),  P.L.,  xxii,  518, 


360        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

The  case  of  Bassian,  Bishop  of  Evazes,  a  town  in 
the  province  of  Asia,  which  occurred  in  448,  is  even 
more  extraordinary.  Bassian  "  claims  that  he  had  con 
secrated  his  youth  to  the  service  of  the  poor,  that  he 
had  built  a  hospital  for  them,  where  he  had  placed 
seventy  beds  and  where  he  received  the  sick  and 
wounded;  that,  whereas  he  was  loved  by  everybody, 
Memnon  of  Ephesus  was  jealous  of  him,  and  did  all 
in  his  power  to  drive  Bassian  from  the  city ;  and  that 
it  was  with  this  end  in  view  that  he  even  imposed 
hands  on  him  to  make  him  bishop  of  Evazes,  a  city 
of  the  ^province  of  Asia.  It  was  after  the  Council 
of  Ephesus,  at  which  Eutropius,  Bishop  of  Evazes, 
assisted.  Bassian  declared  that  Memnon  held  him  at 
the  altar  from  nine  o'clock  till  noon,  without  securing 
his  consent  to  the  ordination,  and  that  even  blood  was 
shed  on  the  altar  and  on  the  Holy  Gospel.34  He  pro 
tests  that  after  this  ordination  he  was  never  again  in 
Evazes  and  never  saw  it ;  but  that  Basil,  Memnon's 
successor,  having  assembled  the  Council  of  his  province 
and  learned  how  the  affair  had  come  about,  had  dis 
charged  him  from  the  church  of  Evazes,  putting  an 
other  bishop  in  his  place,  and  had  given  him  never 
theless  communion  and  the  rank  of  a  bishop."  35  Bas 
sian  then  became,  but  irregularly,  Bishop  of  Ephesus. 
He  was  indeed  a  personage  of  doubtful  conduct. 

According  to  our  appreciation  of  the  conditions  for 
the  validity  of  the  Sacraments,  if  the  story  of  Bassian 
is  exact,  his  ordination  was  certainly  not  valid.  It  is 

34  Ego  autem  non  acquiescebam,  sed  ab  hora  tertia  usque  ad 
sextam  coram   altari   me   plagis   afflixit    [Memnon],   et   sanctum 
evangelium   et   altare   sanguine   est   impletum.     Oratio    Bassiani, 
habita  in  concilio  Chalcedonensi,  act.  xi  (Mansi,  t.  vii,  col.  278). 

35  TILLEMONT,  t.  xv,  art.  22,  on  St.  Leo,  Pope. 


AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE  361 

then  very  probable  that  in  some  cases  the  ordina 
tions  were  null  through  lack  of  sufficient  intention  in 
the  subject.  But  we  cannot  hold  Catholic  tradition 
and  the  official  usage  of  the  Church  responsible  for 
these  irregularities,  caused  as  they  were  by  excesses 
of  zeal  or  other  less  reputable  passions. 


§  III.  The  First  Speculations  on  the  Intention  of  the  Min 
ister  and  that  of  the  Recipient  of  the  Sacrament  —  St. 
Augustine. 

The  lengthy  and  serious  controversies  on  the  efficacy 
of  Baptism  that  St.  Augustine  had  to  sustain  against 
the  Donatists  were  bound  to  bring  him  to  treat  ex 
pressly  the  question  of  intention,  for  the  doctrines  on 
the  Sacraments  are  all  bound  up  with  that  of  efficacy: 
according  as  this  latter  was  enriched  in  the  course  of 
centuries  with  more  precision,  the  others  benefited  like 
wise. 

St.  Augustine  therefore  at  the  end  of  his  treatise 
on  "  Baptism  against  the  Donatists,"  sums  up  his 
thoughts  on  the  conditions  requisite  in  minister  and  in 
subject  for  the  validity  of  the  sacrament  and  its  utility 
for  salvation. 

He  divides  the  ministers  of  Baptism  into  three 
classes,  according  to  their  more  or  less  intimate  con 
nection  with  the  Church.  First  of  all  there  are  the 
holy  ministers,  the  true  servants  of  God,  who  are 
scattered  throughout  the  world,  but  united  by  common 
bond  in  the  same  communion  of  the  Sacraments;  they 
belong  to  the  Church  corporally  and  spiritually;  they 
make  up  the  Church  as  the  framework  of  a  house 
makes  up  the  house.  "  Sic  stint  in  domo  Dei,  ut  ipsi 
sint  domus  Dei."  There  are  other  ministers  who  are 


362         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

only  corporally  in  the  Church,  because  their  lives  are 
not  holy:  they  are  as  vessels  of  ignominy  in  the 
Church,  just  as  straw  mixed  in  with  the  wheat.  Oth 
ers,  again,  are  separated  from  the  Church  both  spirit 
ually  and  corporally:  these  are  heretics  and  schis 
matics.36 

The  Baptism  given  by  either  of  the  first  two  of  these 
classes  is  both  valid  and  fruitful,  except  when  given 
to  catechumens  who  are  badly  disposed  and  unworthy 
to  receive  remission  of  their  sins.  As  for  Baptism 
conferred  by  heretics  and  schismatics,  it  is  always 
valid,  but  persons  thus  baptized  receive  the  grace  only 
in  case  they  are  in  good  faith  and  in  danger  of  death. 
In  other  circumstances  their  Baptism  profits  them  only 
when  they  enter  the  Catholic  unity.37 

The  investigation  into  these  different  conditions  in 
which  the  minister  and  the  subject  of  Baptism  may 
be  placed,  led  St.  Augustine  to  ask  himself  what  he 
should  think  of  a  Baptism  conferred  in  conditions  even 
more  extraordinary.  What,  for  example,  would  be 
the  value  of  Baptism  conferred  by  an  unbaptized  per 
son?  During  the  Patristic  age,  especially  in  the  West, 
it  was  readily  admitted  that  a  baptized  layman  could 
confer  Baptism ;  38  but  nobody  had  thus  far  brought  up 
the  question  as  to  whether  or  not  a  mere  catechumen  or 
a  Pagan,  who  through  curiosity  had  learned  how  to 
baptize,  could  confer  the  sacrament  validly.  Whence 
arose  the  question  that  St.  Augustine  proposed  to 
himself,  for  the  solution  of  which, —  and  of  several 

36  De  Bapt.  contra  Donat.,  vii,  99. 

37  Ibid.,  100. 

38  TERTULLIAN,    De    bapt.,    17;    ST.    AUGUSTINE,    Cont.    epist. 
Farm.,  ii,  29. 


AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE  363 

others, —  he  desired  the  decision  of  a  Council.39 
Those  other  questions  proposed  by  the  holy  Doctor 
were  about  the  intention  of  the  minister  and  of  the 
subject  of  the  sacrament.  They  refer  to  two  cases  of 
simulated  Baptism :  the  fallacious  administration  of 
Baptism  (either  where  the  subject  alone  acts  "  falla 
ciously,"  or  where  he  acts  in  concert  with  the  minister) 
performed  either  in  the  Catholic  Church  or  in  an 
heretical  sect,  supposed  in  good  faith  to  be  the  true 
Church ;  and  Baptism  conferred  for  the  mere  purpose 
of  amusement,  just  as  children  do  who  mimic  in  their 
play  the  ceremonies  of  Baptism,  or  actors  who  repro 
duce  them  on  the  stage.40 

In  the  solutions  given  St.  Augustine  is  somewhat 
hesitating;  in  some  even  he  is  altogether  undecided. 
Indeed  is  it  not  risky  to  propose  solutions  in  matters  so 
delicate,  which  previous  writers  have  not  treated,  nor 
councils  yet  studied?  If  the  Bishop  of  Hippo  had  to 
discuss  them  now  in  a  Council,  he  hardly  could  tell 
what  opinion  he  would  adopt.  He  is  wanting  in  the 
assurance  which  comes,  under  Christ's  direction,  from 
the  universal  consent  of  the  Church.41  The  doctrine 
of  the  intention  truly  was  still  in  the  embryonic  state. 


It  is  difficult  to  determine  exactly  what  St.  Augus- 

39  In  the  early  Middle  Ages  all  doubts  as  to  the  validity  of 
Baptism  conferred  by  unbaptized  persons  ceased.    Cf.  DENZINGER, 
Enchirid.,  n.  264   (new  edit,  n.  335). 

40  De  bapt.   contr.  Donat.,  vii,   101. 

41  Ibid.,    102 :     Nobis    tutum    est,    in    ea    non    progredi    aliqua 
temeritate   sententiae,  quae  nullo   in  catholico   regionali  concilio 
coepta,  nullo  plenario  terminata  sunt :  id  autem  fiducia  securae 
vocis  asserere,  quod  in  gubernatione  Domini  Dei  nostri  et  Salva- 
toris   Jesu   Christi  universalis   Ecclesiae   consensione  roboratum 
est. 


364         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

tine  understood  by  this  "  fallacious  "  administration  of 
Baptism  of  which  he  speaks  in  the  first  case  of  simula 
tion.  This  "  fallacious  "  administration,  according  to 

o 

the  Bishop  of  Hippo,  in  no  way  prevents  the  Baptism 
from  being  valid,  when  conferred  in  the  Catholic 
Church  or  in  a  sect  which  was  believed  to  be  that 
Church :  "  Non  dubito  etiam  illos  habere  Baptismum, 
qui  quamvis  fallaciter  id  accipiant,  in  Ecclesia  tamen 
accipiunt,  vel  ubi  putatur  esse  Ecclesia  ab  eis."  42  And 
in  fact  ancient  ecclesiastical  decisions  (praeteritis  ma- 
jorum  statutis)  ordered  that  a  Baptism  administered  in 
this  wise  be  not  repeated  —  the  only  action  to  be  taken 
was  to  punish  the  guilty.43 

Now  if  this  "  fallacious  "  administration  is  one  and 
the  same  thing  with  administration  made  without  seri 
ous  intention,  we  must  infer  that  for  St.  Augustine, 
no  intention  was  required  either  in  minister  or  subject 
of  Baptism,  when  they  acted  in  the  Church  or  what 
they  believed  to  be  the  Church.  Otherwise  it  remains 
to  be  found  out  what  this  "  fallacious  "  administra 
tion  is. 

According  to  Cardinal  Franzelin,  St.  Augustine 
would  have  had  in  mind  by  this  "  fallacious  "  Baptism 
not  the  lack  of  intention  to  baptize  or  be  baptized, 
but  the  total  absence  of  faith  in  the  subject  and  in  the 
minister.  Baptism  is  "  fallaciously  "  administered,  he 
says,  when  the  subject,  prompted  by  fear  of  punish 
ments  or  by  allurements  of  temporal  advantage,  pre 
tends  to  be  converted  to  Christianity,  and  is  baptized 
without  having  faith,  thus  deceiving  the  Church. 

«/rf. 

43  Ibid.,  101 :     Si  postea  prodatur,  nemo  repetit,  sed  aut  excom- 
municando  punitur  ilia  simulatio,  aut  paenitendo  sanatur. 


AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE  365 

Whenever  the  minister  of  the  Baptism  is  unaware  of 
this  fraud,  the  deception  exists  only  on  the  part  of  the 
subject ;  when,  on  the  other  hand,  he  does  know  of  it, 
and  yet  does  not  hesitate  to  administer  the  sacrament, 
he  in  his  turn  deceives  the  Church.  Insincere  con 
versions  from  selfish  motives  would  have  been  rela 
tively  frequent  in  Africa  at  this  period,  when  Chris 
tianity  with  its  official  recognition  from  Constantine 
was  supplanting  more  and  more  the  Pagan  religions.44 

St.  Augustine  then  understood  by  this  "  fallacious  " 
administration  of  Baptism  that  which  occurs  when  the 
subject  and  the  minister  have  not  faith.  He  would 
not  have  in  mind  at  all  to  speak  of  the  intention  re 
quired.  This  total  absence  of  faith  does  not  affect  the 
validity  of  the  Baptism,  which,  as  the  ancient  ecclesias 
tical  decisions  declare  and  as  St.  Augustine  proved  to 
the  Donatists,  is  wholly  independent  of  the  faith  and 
the  moral  worth  of  minister  or  subject.45 

This  interpretation  of  St.  Augustine's  thought  runs 
counter  to  several  difficulties.  In  the  first  place,  it  is 
hard  to  see  why  St.  Augustine  after  having  at  great 
length  proven,  without  the  slightest  hesitation,  that  the 
validity  of  Baptism  does  not  depend  on  the  faith  of 
minister  or  of  subject,  would  come  back  on  this  point 
at  the  end  of  his  treatise  On  Baptism  against  the  Don- 
atists. 

**De  Sacr.  in  gen.,  th.  xvi,  schol.  2:  Sine  dubio  fallaciter 
agit,  qui  animum  non  christianum  gerens,  ductus  tamen  timore 
vel  spe  temporal!  simulat,  se  velle  esse  christianum,  atque  ita 
baptismo  se  subjicit.  Sicut  talis  fallaciter  accipit,  ita  minister,  si 
esset  conscius  et  fraudi  sacrilegae  colludens,  fallaciter  et  Ec- 
clesiam  fallendo  daret—  Cf.  CH.  PESCH,  Praelect.  dogm.,  t.  vi,  n. 
284. 

45  FRANZELIN,  Ibid. 


366        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

And  still  harder  to  understand  is  the  connection  set 
up  by  St.  Augustine- between  the  "  fallacious  "  admin 
istration  of  Baptism  which  takes  place  in  the  Church, 
and  that  which  is  mimicked  on  the  stage.  These  two 
administrations  constitute  in  the  holy  Doctor's  mind 
two  cases  of  simulation  of  Baptism.46 

For  this  reason,  other  authors,  more  especially  theo 
logians  who  adopt  the  doctrine  of  Catharinus,  think, 
—  more  correctly,  too,  we  believe, —  that  this  "  falla 
cious  "  administration  of  Baptism  is  that  which  takes 
place  when  the  minister  performs  seriously  all  the 
sacred  rites,  and  the  subject  receives  them  in  the  same 
manner,  while  in  their  inmost  heart  their  intention  is 
only  to  act  in  sham  and  derision.47 

This  interpretation  of  St.  Augustine's  mind  is  justi 
fied  by  the  fact  that  Baptism  "  fallaciously  "  given  or 
received  is  declared  valid,  while  no  solution  is  offered 
as  regards  that  represented  on  the  stage.  Now  be 
tween  these  two  baptisms  there  is  this  one  difference 
that  in  the  first  the  ceremonies  are  performed  normally 
in  a  religious  assembly,  and  in  the  second  on  the  other 
hand,  they  are  ostensibly  gone  through  for  the  sole 

46  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  vii,  101 :  Solet  etiam  quaeri     .     .     . 
utrum  nihil  intersit  quo  animo  accipiat  [baptisma]  ille  cui  datur, 
cum  simulatione,  an  sine  simulatione :  si  cum  simulatione,  utrum 
fallens,   sicut  in   Ecclesia,  vel  in  ea  quae  putatur  Ecclesia;  an 
jocans,  sicut  in  mimo. 

47  "  Ministri  fallacis  nomine  eum  intelligit  S.  Augustinus,  qui 
habet  animum  simulatum,  qui  nimirum  licet  sacramentum  serio 
exterius  conferat,  suam  tamen  intus  cohibet  intentionem,  et  hac 
ipsum  ridet  quod  facit.     .     .     .     Qui  enim  in  Ecclesia,  vel  in  ea 
quae  putatur  Ecclesia  fallit,  serio  ritum  omnem  vel  exercet  ipse, 
vel  in  se  fieri  patitur."     DROUIN,  De  Sacramentis  in  gen.,  qu.  7, 
cap.  iii,  2  (MiGNE,  Cursus  Theol.,  t.  xx,  1495).     Drouin  teaches 
that  the  intention  to  perform  seriously  the  sacramental  rite  suf 
fices  for  the  validity,  even  though  the  minister  would  not  intend, 
in  his  inmost  soul,  to  administer  the  sacrament. 


AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE  367 

purpose  of  amusement.  But  in  both  cases  the  inten 
tion  of  really  conferring  or  receiving  the  sacrament 
is  lacking.  For  St.  Augustine,  then,  the  internal  in 
tention  of  deceiving,  of  pretending,  would  not  appar 
ently  constitute  an  obstacle  to  the  validity  of  Baptism. 

We  must  not  imagine,  however,  that  St.  Augustine 
foresaw  our  modern  distinction  between  internal  and 
external  intention,  or  that  properly  speaking  he  taught  , 
the  sufficiency  of  the  latter.  The  point  of  view  from 
which  he  considers  the  "  fallacious  "  administration  of 
Baptism  is  entirely  different  from  that  of  Catharinus. 
If  the  holy  Doctor  declares  that  Baptism  thus  con 
ferred  is  valid,  it  is  because  it  takes  place  entirely 
within  the  Church,  or  in  a  Christian  sect  supposedly 
the  true  Church.  Therefore  such  an  administration  of 
Baptism  is  thereby  an  act  of  the  Church,  although  the 
minister  or  the  subject  have  in  his  heart  the  intention 
to  deceive. 

If  then  that  "  fallacious  "  Baptism  be  an  act  of  the 
Church,  it  ought,  according  to  Augustinian  principles 
on  the  Sacraments,  to  be  certainly  valid.  Those  there 
fore  are  truly  baptized  "  qui  quamvis  fallaciter  id  ac- 
cipiant,  in  ecclesia  tamen  accipiunt  vel  ubi  putatur  esse 
Ecclesia  ab  eis,  in  quorum  societate  id  accipitur,  de  qui- 
bus  dictum  est,  Ex  nobis  exierunt"  (I  Joan.,  ii,  IQ).48 
The  Baptism  imitated  on  the  stage  or  in  the  games  is, 
on  the  contrary,  of  doubtful  validity,  because  it  is  con 
ferred  outside  of  a  religious  assembly,  and  no  one,  not 
even  the  one  thus  "  baptized  "  takes  the  affair  as  seri 
ous  ;  "  Ubi  autem  neque  societas  ulla  esset  ita  creden- 
tium,  neque  ille  qui  ibi  acciperet,  ita  crederet,  sed  totum 
ludicre  et  mimice  et  joculariter  ageretur,  utrum  appro- 

48  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  vii,  102.     Cf.  Sermo  Ixxi,  37. 


368        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

bandus  esset  Baptismus  qui  sic  daretur ;  divinum  judi- 
cium  .  .  .  implorandum  esse  censerem." 49 

Whatever  interpretation  should  be  given  to  the  ob 
scure  ending  of  the  treatise  on  Baptism  against  the 
Donatists,  other  documents  prove  that  in  St.  Augus 
tine's  day,  the  necessity  of  an  intention  in  the  subject 
of  the  sacrament  was  not  a  thing  unknown.  The 
thirty- fourth  canon  of  the  Third  Council  of  Carthage 
held  in  397,  prescribes  that  Baptism  be  given  to  the 
sick  who  can  no  longer  speak,  provided  that,  accord 
ing  to  the  testimony  of  those  about  them,  they  have 
desired  it  during  their  life.50 

St.  Augustine  also  alluded  in  one  of  his  letters51  to 
the  intention  of  receiving  the  episcopal  burden,  which 
he  who  is  ordained  despite  his  repugnance  must  have. 


As  for  the  second  case  of  simulation  which  concerns 
Baptism  conferred  with  the  obvious  end  of  amusement 
or  mockery,  St.  Augustine  refused  to  commit  himself 
on  the  subject.  Were  he  obliged  to  give  an  opinion 
on  the  value  of  such  a  Baptism,  he  would  have  re 
course  to  prayer,  and  would  await  the  true  solution 
from  Divine  revelation.52  "  Divinum  judicium  per 

"Id. 

50  BRUNS,  Concilia,  t.  i,  p.  128.     See  a  like  decision  in  the  first 
Synod  of  Orange,  can.  12  (HEFEILE,  Hist,  of  Councils,  vol.  Ill,  p. 
161). —  St.  Augustine,  it  is  true,  declares  that  catechumens  sud 
denly  deprived  of  the  use  of  their  senses,  ought  to  be  baptized 
even  in  case  they  had  manifested  no  desire  for  Baptism.     But  he 
adds  that  the  desire  of  the  catechumen  is  then  to  be  presumed. 
"  Multo  satius  est  nolenti  dare  quam  volenti  negare,  ubi  velit  an 
nolit  sic  iion  apparet,  ut  tamen  credibilius  sit  eum,  si  posset,  velle 
se  potius  dicturum  ea  sacramenta  percipere."    De  conjug.  adult., 
i,  n.  33. 

51  Epist.  clxxiii,  n.  2. 

52  Id.     Cf.,  n.  103. 


AUGUSTINIAN  DOCTRINE  369 

alicujus  revelationis  oraculum,  concord!  oratione  et 
impensis  supplici  devotione  gemitibus  implorandum 
esse  censerem."  The  Bishop  of  Hippo  was  convinced 
that  God  communicates  Divine  truth  by  a  sort  of  di 
rect  revelation,  whenever  the  doctors  of  the  Church 
need  it  and  ask  it  in  fervent  prayer.  It  was  by  a 
revelation  of  this  kind  that  he  was  taught  when  he 
wrote  towards  the  year  397  to  Simplicianus,  Bishop 
of  Milan,  that  the  beginning  of  faith  is  a  gift  of  grace ; 
up  till  then  he  had  thought  otherwise.53  And  did  not 
St.  Thomas  Aquinas  himself  declare  that  he  learned 
directly  from  God  through  prayer  much  more  than  by 
all  his  studies? 

This  hesitation  of  St.  Augustine  to  decide  on  the 
value  of  Baptism  administered  for  amusement's  sake, 
proves  that  he  knew  nothing  of  the  decision  which, 
according  to  Rufinus  (f4io),  St.  Alexander,  Bishop  of 
Alexandria,  had  given  regarding  the  Baptism  con 
ferred  in  play  by  the  child  Athanasius  upon  his  play 
mates.54  If  it  were  true  that  St.  Alexander  had  con 
sidered  such  a  Baptism  valid,  it  would  necessarily 

53  De  pracdestin.,  n.  8 :     Cum  de  hac  re  aliter  saperem ;  quam 
mihi  Deus  in  hac  quaestione  solvenda,  cum  ad  episcopum  Sim- 
plicianum,  sicut  dixi,  scriberem,  revelavit. —  Cf.  TILLEMONT,  Me 
moir  es,  xiii,  art.  121. 

54  The   story  is   well  known :     St.   Athanasius,   when   a  little 
boy,  was  playing  on  the  seashore  at  Alexandria  with  some  com 
panions  of  his  own  age,  several  of  whom  were  not  baptized.     The 
idea  came   to  them   to   "  play   Baptism."     Athanasius   acted  the 
bishop  and  baptized  those  of  his  companions  who  had  not  yet 
been  baptized.     The  Bishop  of  Alexandria  when  informed  of  the 
matter  recognized  the  validity  of  those  baptisms.     Rufinus  is  the 
first  to  tell  this   story  in  his  continuation  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
History  of  Eusebius,  Book  I,  chap.  xiv.     After  him  and  on  his 
testimony  Socrates  and  Sozomen  relate  it  likewise.     But  the  au 
thenticity  of  the  fact  is  strongly  contested.     Cf.  TILLEMONT,  vol. 
viii,  note  2,  on  St.  Athanasius. 


370        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

follow  that  at  Alexandria  there  was  very  little  im 
portance  attached  to  the  intention  required  in  the  min 
ister  or  the  subject  of  the  sacrament,  but  the  fact  is 
not  sufficiently  authentic  to  allow  this  conclusion.  St. 
Augustine's  silence  on  the  matter  and  his  assertion 
that  no  one  before  him  had  examined  the  cases  of 
Baptism  that  he  studies  (non  praecedentibus  talibus, 
quorum  sententias  sequi  mallem),  inclines  us  not  to 
take  Rufinus's  story  as  strictly  true.55 

A  different  document,  if  it  be  authentic,  may  have 
inspired  St.  Augustine  in  this  matter:  the  acts  of 
the  Martyrdom  of  St.  Genesius.  As  the  leader  of  a 
troop  of  comedians  at  Rome,  this  future  saint  con 
ceived  the  idea  of  performing  the  ceremonies  of  Chris 
tian  Baptism  before  the  Emperor  Diocletian.  But  dur 
ing  the  sacrilegious  parody,  Genesius,  moved  by  God's 
grace,  was  converted,  took  his  part  in  all  seriousness, 
piously  received  Baptism,  and  at  the  end  of  the  rep 
resentation  declared  to  the  Emperor  that  he  was  a  sin 
cere  Christian.  He  was  put  to  death  about  the  year 
303.  "  The  historical  value  of  the  story  is  quite  ques 
tionable,"  says  Dom  Leclerq,56  "  despite  the  favorable 
judgment  of  Tillemont."  5T  We  have  no  right  then 
to  quote  this  document  as  Luther  did,58  for  affirming 
the  validity  of  a  sacrament,  administered  with  the  sole 
intention  of  burlesquing  the  Christian  worship  or  rid 
iculing  it.  In  the  episode  of  St.  Genesius  there  was, 

55  Rufinus,  it  is  true,  wrote  his  History  in  402  or  403,  two  or 
three  years  after   St.   Augustine's   De  Baptismo.    But  the   fact 
related  must  have  occurred  towards  310.    The  Bishop  of  Hippo 
consequently  could  have  been  acquainted  with  it  at  the  time  he 
wrote  his  treatise. 

56  Les  Martyrs,  vol.  .ii,  p.  428. 

57  Metnoires,  vol.  iv,  on  St.  Genesius. 

58  De  captivitate  babyl.,  De  baptismo,  t.  ii,  p.  286. 


IN  THE  12TH.  CENTURY  371 

besides,  one  who  took  the  matter  seriously ;  it  was  the 
blessed  martyr  suddenly  converted.  St.  Augustine 
would  not  perhaps  have  judged  unfavorably  the  Bap 
tism  acted  on  the  stage,  in  the  case  where  by  chance, 
the  actor  playing  the  part  of  the  baptized  would  have 
been  unexpectedly  converted  during  the  execution  of 
the  sacrilegious  travesty  (si  quis  existat  qui  [in  mimo] 
fideliter  subito  commotus  accipiat  [baptisma]  ).59 

The  dogma  of  the  intention,  then  remains  en 
shrouded  in  obscurities,  even  after  St.  Augustine. 
Indeed  to  set  forth  dogmatic  problems  is  one  thing; 
to  find  the  solution  is  quite  another;  the  doctors  of 
the  Church  are  all  witnesses  to  that  fact. 

The  problem  of  the  intention  which  gave  so  much 
trouble  to  St.  Augustine  will  be  solved  with  no  diffi 
culty  by  the  authors  of  the  Middle  Ages,  thanks  to 
the  new  lights  which  Catholic  tradition,  ever  guided 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  will  furnish  them. 


§  IV.     The  Dogma  of  the  Intention  in  the  Twelfth  and  Thir 
teenth  Centuries. 

The  extensive  development  of  sacramentary  theol 
ogy  effected  in  the  I2th.  century  was  most  naturally 
to  lead  writers  to  treat  of  the  intention  on  the  part  of 
minister  and  subject  of  the  Sacraments.  The  theolo 
gians  of  that  period  took  up  again  the  problem  that 
St.  Augustine  had  been  unable  to  solve :  Is  Baptism 
valid,  if  administered  for  the  sake  of  amusement  or 
mockery  ? 60 

59  De  bapt.  contr.  Donat.,  vii,  101.     Cf.  102.    It  is  a  case  entirely 
similar  to  that  of  St.  Genesius  that  St.  Augustine  considers,  with 
out  settling  it. 

60  HUGH  OF  SAINT  VICTOR,  De  Sacramentis,  lib.  IT,  6,  13;  Sum. 
Sent.,  tract,  v,  9 ;  PETER  LOMBARD,  Sent.  IV,  Dist.  6,  5. 

25 


372        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

Two  solutions  were  proposed  and  both  found  de 
fenders,  though  unequally  numerous. 

According  to  the  first  opinion,  no  intention  is  re 
quired  in  the  minister;  in  order  that  the  Baptism  be 
valid,  it  is  enough  that  the  baptismal  rite  be  accom 
plished  according  to  the  ritual  prescriptions  of  the 
Church  (in  forma  Ecclesiae).  Yet  if  the  subject  bap 
tized  be  an  adult,  he  must  have  the  intention  of  receiv 
ing  Baptism,  in  order  that  the  sacrament  be  valid. 
"  Si  quis  baptizaretur  adultus  atque  discretus,  neces- 
sarium  esset,  ut  baptizandi  habeat  intentionem,  et  erit 
verum  baptisma  et  ratum,  sive  intentionem  habeat  qui 
baptizat  sive  non,  dummodo  illud  in  forma  Ecclesiae 
tradatur.  Si  vero  puer  est  qui  baptizatur,  ejus  inten- 
tio  non  exigitur,  nee  refert,  utrum  qui  baptizat  habeat 
intentionem  dandi  vel  non,  dummodo  id  fiat  in  forma 
Ecclesiae."  61 

The  story  of  St.  Athanasius'  Baptism  recorded 
above  had  no  little  influence  on  the  rise  of  this  theory. 
This  solution  was  adopted  by  Roland  Bandinelli  among 
others. 

Hugh  of  St.  Victor  informs  us  that  many  "  ig 
norant  "  men  applied  this  solution  to  the  Eucharist, 
exaggerating  it  still  further.  Thus  they  thought  that 
it  sufficed  for  any  person  at  all  to  pronounce  the  sac 
ramental  words  over  the  bread  and  the  wine,  no  mat 
ter  what  his  intention,  in  order  that  the  Eucharistic 
consecration  might  be  valid,  just  as  if  in  the  Sacra 
ments  no  intention,  no  will  to  perform  them  was  de 
manded  in  the  ministers.62 

61  ROLAND,  Sent.  (GIETL,  p.  206.) 

62  De  Sacramentis,  lib.  II,  6,  13:     Quidam  imperiti  existimant 
verba  ilia  quae  ad  conficiendam  Eucharistiam  instituta  sunt :   a 
quacumque  persona,  sive  in  quocumque  loco  et  qualicunque  in- 


IN  THE  12TH.  CENTURY  373 

This  solution  was  fiercely  attacked  by  Hugh  of  St. 
Victor,  by  the  author  of  the  Summa  Sententiarum,  and 
by  Peter  Lombard. 

To  baptize  validly  it  is  not  enough  to  perform  the 
baptismal  ceremony:  there  must  be  besides  the  inten 
tion  of  baptizing;  otherwise  the  administration  of  the 
sacrament  would  not  be  a  rational  act.  For  no  one 
can  be  said  truly  to  do  a  thing,  when  he  has  not  the 
intention  of  doing  it,  even  though  he  would  imitate 
it  exteriorly.  To  hold  the  contrary  would  be  "  ridic 
ulous."  When  one  washes  a  child  in  order  to  cleanse 
it,  or  to  strengthen  it,  not  to  baptize  it,  who  would 
dare  to  say  that  Baptism  is  conferred,  even  if  to  ren 
der  the  bath  more  beneficial,  the  three  Divine  Persons 
should  be  invoked?  Merely  to  go  through  the  bap 
tismal  rite  is  not  enough  then :  the  intention  of  bap 
tizing  must  be  had  besides.  "  Ubi  ergo  intentio  bap- 
tizandi  est  .  .  .  sacramentum  est." 63 

The  Summa  Sententiarum,  setting  up  this  doctrine 
as  a  general  principle,  declares  that  in  every  sacra 
ment  two  things  are  necessary :  the  performance  of 
the  sacramental  rite,  and  the  intention  of  administer 
ing  the  sacrament.64  Therefore  they  manifest  the 

tentione  super  panem  et  vinum  prolata,  effectum  consecrationis 
et  sanctificationis  habere,  quasi  sacramenta  Dei  sic  instituta  sint, 
ut  nullam  operandi  rationem  admittant. 

63  HUGH  OF  SAINT  VICTOR,  Ibid. 

64  Tract,  vi,  9:     In  omni  enim  sacramento  ista  duo  necessaria 
sunt,  ut  forma  sacramenti  servetur  et  intentio  illud  celebrandi 
habeatur.     P.   LOMBARD,  Sent.   IV,   Dist.  6,  5 :     In  hoc    (baptis - 
mate)    et  in  aliis   sacramentis   sicut   forma  est  servanda,  ita   et 
intentio  illud  celebrandi  est  habenda.    However,  Dist.  xxvii,  3, 
P.   Lombard   pronounces   a   marriage  valid,  if  the  parties  have 
outwardly  expressed  their  consent,  whilst  in  their  inmost  soul 
they  had  no  intention  at  all  to  marry. 


374         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

deepest  ignorance  who  believe  that  the  Eucharistic 
words,  pronounced  without  the  intention,  effect  the 
consecration.  The  sacrament  of  the  altar  is  validly 
celebrated  only  when  the  minister  is  a  priest,  pro 
nounces  the  words  of  the  Institution,  and  has  the  in 
tention  of  consecrating  while  pronouncing  them. 
"  Haec  autem  tria  ad  istud  sacramentum  necessaria 
stint.  Ordo,  actio,  intentio.  Ordo,  tit  sit  sacerdos; 
actio,  tit  verba  ilia  proferat;  intentio,  tit  proferat  ad 
istud.  Qtiandoque  enim  aliquis  sacerdos  profert  verba 
ilia  ut  alium  doceat  quomodo  hoc  f  acturus  sit ;  sed  non 
habent  tune  illam  efficaciam,  quia  non  ad  hoc  dicun- 
tur."  65 

This  solution,  so  vigorously  defended  by  Hugh  of 
St.  Victor  and  his  school,  did  not  succeed  in  eliminat 
ing  that  of  Roland ;  there  was  a  grave  objection  against 
it.  If  it  does  not  suffice  that  the  minister  perform  the 
sacramental  rite  in  keeping  with  the  prescriptions  of 
the  Church,  but  if  he  must  also  have  the  intention  (in 
mente)  of  conferring  the  sacrament,  how  can  we  tell 
whether  that  interior  and  hidden  intention  exists,  and 
consequently  whether  the  Sacraments  are  really  con 
ferred  on  us  ?  The  difficulty,  as  is  clear,  is  serious. 

It  led,  in  the  beginning  of  the  I3th.  century,  to 
a  reaction  against  the  teaching  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor; 
we  find  echoes  of  it  in  the  fifth  book  of  the  "  Sen 
tences  "  6G  of  Cardinal  Robert  Pulleyn  (fi22i).  There 
the  arguments  proposed  by  Hugh  are  refuted,  particu 
larly  that  drawn  from  the  child's  bath  accompanied 
fortuitously  by  the  baptismal  formula.  Robert  Pul- 

Q5Sum.  Sent.,  tract,  vi,  4. 

66  Sent.,  lib.  V,  cap.  xv,  xvi ;  P.L.,  clxxxvi,  841,  842.  See  also 
PETER  OF  POITIERS,  Sent.,  lib.  V,  cap.  viii;  PETER  OF  LA  PALU, 
IV  Sent.,  Dist.  6,  qu.  2. 


IN  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  375 

leyn  ends  his  dissertation  with  this  principle,  worthy 
of  Catharinus :  Baptism  is  valid,  when  the  rite  is  out 
wardly  accomplished  in  its  entirety,  whatever  be  the 
inner  intention  of  him  who  baptizes  or  of  him  who  is 
baptized.67 

Unquestionably  we  have  here  two  schools  directly 
opposed  to  each  other,  the  one  which  demands  in  the 
minister  a  true  intention  of  conferring  the  sacrament, 
and  in  the  subject,  a  true  intention  of  receiving  it, 
whilst  the  other  rests  satisfied  with  the  integral  per 
formance  of  the  sacramental  rite,  regardless  of  the 
interior  intentions  of  the  minister  or  of  the  subject. 
We  shall  meet  the  two  camps  again  in  the  days  of  St. 
Thomas. 


It  was  the  solution  and  argumentation  of  the  school 
of  St.  Victor  which  appealed  to  the  famous  scholastics 
of  the  1 3th.  century.  The  minister  must  really  have 
the  intention  of  conferring  the  sacrament,  other 
wise  his  act  would  not  be  that  of  a  rational  being.68 
Besides  the  sacramental  action,  for  example,  the  ablu 
tion,  may  be  employed  for  different  purposes,  to  wash 
or  to  refresh  one.  It  is  then  the  minister's  intention 
which  will  determine  its  sacramental  purpose,  hence 
that  intention  is  necessary.69 

To  these  arguments  is  added  another  which  defines 
yet  more  precisely  the  object  of  the  intention,  and 

67  Ibid.,   cap.    xvi :     Sacramentum    ergo  baptismi,   quod    totum 
extrinsecus  agitur,  integram  sui  obtinens  naturam,  nullum  omnino 
videtur    suscipere    detrimentum,    quidquid    irrisionis    cujuslibetve 
erroris  in  mente  versetur  aut  baptizantis  aut  baptisma  suscipientis. 

68  ALEXANDER  OF  HALES,  IV,  quaest.  8,  membr.  3,  art.  i. 

69  ST.    THOMAS,    Summa    theol,    3    p.,    qu.    64,    art.    8;   ST. 
BONAVENTURE,  IV  Sent.,  D.  6,  p.  2,  art.  2,  qu.  i. 


376         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

which   carries  the   doctrine   to   its  complete   develop 
ment. 

The  minister,  according  to  the  teaching  of  tradition, 
is  the  representative,  the  rational  instrument  of  Jesus 
Christ  and  the  Church ;  his  sacramental  action  is  an  act 
of  Christ  and  the  Church.  The  minister  must  then 
by  the  intention  make  himself  dependent  on  them,  and 
purpose  to  do  what  they  intend  to  do  in  the  sacra 
mental  operation.70  Now  the  minister  does  what 
Christ  and  the  Church  intend,  when,  in  conferring  the 
rite,  he  has  the  intention  of  acting  conformably  to  the 
traditional  usage  of  the  Church : 

"  Si  aliquis  uteretur  forma  debita  verborum  et  haberet 
intentionem  faciendi  quod  facit  Ecclesia,  ut  sumatur  verbum 
confuse ;  i.  e.  intendit  facere  quod  consuevit  Ecclesia,  bap- 
tismus  esset."  71 

The  dogma  reaches  its  complete  development  in  the 
first  half  of  the  I3th.  century;  and  it  flows  from 
the  teaching  of  the  Fathers  as  conclusion  flows  from 
premises.  If  the  minister  of  the  sacrament  is  the 
representative  of  Christ  and  the  Church,  he  must  have 
the  intention  of  doing  what  Christ  and  the  Church, 
acting  through  the  minister  in  the  sacramental  action, 
effect. 

The  intention  of  receiving  the  sacrament  is  equally 
necessary  in  the  recipient,72  but  the  qualities  it  ought 
to  have  are  not  yet  accurately  laid  down. 

70  ALEX.  OF  HALES,  /.  c.:    Baptizans  efficitur  minister  Ecclesiae 
per  hoc  quod  intendit  Ecclesia;  unde  necessaria  est  intentio. — 
ST.  THOMAS,  /.  c. 

71  WILLIAM  OF  AUXERRE   (t  1223),  In  IV  Sent.,  De  baptismo. 
This  author  is  the  first  to  employ  the  formula  "  intentio  faciendi 
quod  facit  Ecclesia." 

72  ST.  THOMAS,  qu.  64,  art.  8,  ad  2um ;  qu.  68,  art  7. 


IN  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  377 

Still  the  everlasting  objection  remained  to  be  solved : 
since  the  "  mental "  intention  of  the  minister  being  a 
hidden  thing,  if  it  is  necessary  for  validity,  the  faith 
ful  will  never  know  whether  or  not  they  have  really 
received  the  Sacraments,  and  they  will  therefore  re 
main  in  painful  uncertainty  regarding  their  salvation.73 

Two  answers  were  proposed  by  the  I3th.  cen 
tury  authors.  According  to  some,  the  sacrament  is 
never  valid  when  the  "  mental  "  intention  of  doing 
what  the  Church  does,  is  not  present  in  the  minister. 
Still,  if  the  sacrament  conferred  without  this  intention 
be  necessary  for  salvation,  as,  for  instance  Baptism, 
Jesus  Christ  makes  up  for  the  deficiency,  when  the 
subject  of  Baptism  is  a  child;  and  when  the  subject 
is  an  adult,  his  faith  and  devotion  play  for  him  the 
part  of  the  baptismal  washing.74  Alexander  of  Hales 
upheld  this  view.75  The  Angelic  Doctor  cannot  bring 
himself  to  adopt  it;  for  although  the  grace  of  the  sac 
rament  may  very  well  be  supplied,  when  the  Baptism  is 
void,  the  same  cannot  be  said  of  the  character,  which 
is  imprinted  only  through  the  sacramental  rite. 

His  preferences  go  to  another  opinion  which  seems 
to  have  been  inspired  by  Robert  Pulleyn,  and  which 
Catharinus'  defenders  will  later  use.  The  intention  of 
the  minister  is  that  of  the  Church  which  he  represents. 
Now  the  intention  of  the  Church  is  expressed  by  the 

73  ST.  THOMAS,  qu.  64,  art.  8,  2°. 

74  ST.    THOMAS,    /.    c.,    ad   2um :     Quidam    enim    dicunt    quod 
requiratur  mentalis  intentio  in  ministro,  quae  si  desit  non  per- 
ficitur  sacramentum ;  sed  hunc  def  ectum,  inquiunt,  in  pueris  qui 
non    habent    intentionem    accedendi    ad    sacramentum,    supplet 
Christus   qui   interius  baptizat;    in   adultis   autem  qui   intendunt 
sacramentum  suscipere,  supplet  ilium  defectum  fides  et  devotio. 
Cf.  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  6,  qu.  i,  art.  2. 

75  IV,  qu.  8,  membr.  3,  art.  i :     In  casu  isto  [infantis  baptizati 


3;8         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

sacramental  words  pronounced  by  the  minister. 
Therefore  there  is  no  need  of  concern  about  the  "  men 
tal  "  intention  of  the  one  who  confers  the  sacrament, 
except  in  the  case  where  he  would  manifest  outwardly 
that  he  acts  in  derision :  "  Alii  melius  dicunt  quod 
minister  sacramenti  agit  in  persona  totius  Ecclesiae, 
cujus  est  minister.  In  verbis  autem  quae  profert  ex- 
primitur  intentio  Ecclesiae,  quae  sufficit  ad  perfectio- 
nem  sacramenti,  nisi  contrarium  exterius  exprimatur  ex 
parte  ministri  vel  recipientis  sacramentum."  76 

According  to  St.  Thomas,  the  "mental,"  i.  e.  the 
interior  intention,  would  not  be  required  in  the  minister 
of  the  Sacraments,  at  least  of  the  Sacraments  neces 
sary  for  salvation :  the  intention  of  the  Church,  mani 
fested  by  the  outward  performance  of  the  sacramental 
rite  would  suffice.  And  since  it  is  an  easy  matter  to 
see  whether  or  not  the  minister  performs  the  rite 

sine  intentione  baptizandi]  pie  supponi  potest  quod  Summus 
Sacerdos  supplebit. 

76  ST.  THOMAS,  c.  I. —  The  Angelic  Doctor  exposes  still  more 
clearly  this  opinion  in  his  Commentary  on  the  IVth.  book  of 
Sentences.  Dist.  6,  qu.  i,  art.  2:  Alii  dicunt  quod  in  baptismo, 
et  aliis  sacramentis  quae  habent  in  forma  actum  exercitum,  non 
requiritur  mentalis  intentio,  sed  sufficit  expressio  intentionis  per 
verba  ab  Ecclesia  instituta :  et  ideo  si  forma  servatur  nee  aliquid 
exterius  dicitur,  quod  intentionem  contrariam  exprimat,  baptizatus 
est.  Non  enim  sine  causa  in  sacramentis  necessitatis,  scilicet 
baptismo  et  quibusdam  aliis,  actus  baptizantis  tarn  sollicite  ex- 
pressus  est  ad  intentionis  expressionem. —  Pope  Innocent  IV  ad 
heres  to  this  opinion  in  a  commentary  on  the  3rd.  Book  of  Decretals 
(tit.  42,  chap.  2,  DC  baptismo  et  ejus  effectu)  :  Non  est  necesse 
quod  baptizans  sciat  quid  sit  Ecclesia,  quid  baptizatus  et  unde  sit : 
nee  quod  gerat  in  mente  facere  quod  facit  Ecclesia:  imo  si  con 
trarium  gereret  in  mente,  scilicet  non  facere  quod  facit  Ecclesia 
sed  tamen  facit,  quia  formam  servat,  nihilominus  baptizatus  est 
dummodo  baptizare  intendat.  Innocentii  IV  in  quinque  libros 
decretalium  Commentgria,  Venetiis,  1610,  p.  544. 


IN  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  379 

properly,  it  may  readily  be  known  whether  or  not  he 
has  sufficient  intention. 

Such,  at  all  events,  is  the  interpretation  of  the  text 
of  the  Summa,  given  by  the  partisans  of  Ambrose 
Catharinus.77 

The  question  of  the  purely  outward  intention  was 
not  then  unknown  to  the  theologians  of  the  I3th. 
century.  They,  so  to  speak,  stated  the  problem;  or 
rather  it  arose  of  itself  from  the  fact  that  the  inten 
tion  of  the  minister  was  reckoned  an  essential  condi 
tion  for  validity.78  The  importance  of  the  question 
gives  us  a  foreboding  of  the  fierceness  of  forthcoming 
discussions. 


While  the  dogma  of  the  intention  was  being  univer 
sally  taught  in  the  schools  of  the  I3th.  century,  the 
Church  was  proposing  it  to  the  belief  of  the  faithful, 
and  above  all  was  defending  it  against  heresies. 

The  profession  of  faith  imposed  by  Pope  Innocent 
III  on  the  Waldenses  who  were  converted  to  the  Catho 
lic  Church  contains  a  very  clear  affirmation  of  the 
necessity  of  the  intention  in  the  priest  who  consecrates 
the  Eucharist.  The  Waldenses  opposed  to  ecclesias 
tical  hierarchy,  pretended  that  priestly  Orders  were  not 
required  for  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharistic  sacri 
fice,  and  that  any  one  could  offer  it,  provided  he  were 
worthy.  It  is  this  error  that  the  Pope  condemned. 

"DROUIN,  op.  cit.  (MIGNE,  pp.  1498  sq.).  See  the  contrary  in 
terpretation  in  FRANZELIN,  op.  cit.,  th.  xvii,  and  in  PESCH,  n.  285. 

78  Durandus  of  St.  Pourgain  in  the  fourteenth  century  speaks 
clearly  in  favor  of  "  mental  "  intention  of  the  minister,  and  op* 
poses  the  defenders  of  the  adverse  opinion.  In  IV  Sent.,  Dist.  6, 
qu.  2. 


380         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

To  be  a  priest,  and  to  pronounce  the  words  of  the 
Canon  of  the   Mass  with  a  "  faithful  intention,"- 
such  are  the  conditions  necessary  for  the  Eucharistic 
consecration.79 

When  at  the  beginning  of  the  I3th.  century  re 
pression  began  to  be  exercised  against  infidels,  Jews, 
or  others,  several  cases  of  conscience  relating  to  bap 
tisms  received  through  compulsion  were  brought  up. 
The  Archbishop  of  Aries  asked  for  a  solution  from 
Pope  Innocent  III,  and  gave  him  opportunity  to  ex 
pose  his  teaching  on  the  intention  required  in  the  sub 
ject  of  Baptism.  The  Pope  was  also  consulted  on  the 
validity  of  Baptism  administered  to  several  during 
their  sleep,  and  of  Baptism  conferred  on  subjects  af 
fected  with  insanity.80 

Before  giving  his  answer,  the  Pontiff  commences  by 
laying  down  the  principles  governing  the  matter. 

According  to  certain  authors,  he  says,  Baptism  and 
Ordination  are  valid  and  produce  the  character,  if  .not 

79  DENZINGER,  Enchirid.,  n.  370  (new  edit.,  n.  424)  :     Ad  quod 
officium     (eucharistiam    consecrandi)     tria    sunt,    ut    credimus, 
necessaria :  scilicet  certa  persona,  id  est,  presbyter  ab  episcopo, 
ut    praediximus,    ad    illud    proprie    officium    constitutus,    et    ilia 
solemnia  verba  quae  a  sanctis  Patribus  in  canone  sunt  expressa, 
et  fidelis   intentio   proferentis. —  The   Summa   Sentcntiarum,   we 
have  already  seen,  had  formulated  a  doctrine  like  that  of  Inno 
cent  III. 

80  Decret.,  lib.  iii,  tit.  42,  cap.  3,  Majores,  Corpus  Juris  can.,  t. 
ii,  p.  621   (ed.  Richter),  DENZINGER,  n.  342  (new  edit.,  n.  411): 
Quaeritur   titrum   dormientibus   et  amentibus  sacramenti   saltern 
character  in  Baptismo  imprimatur,  ut  excitati  a  somno,  vel  ab 
aegritudine    liberati,    non    sint    denuo    baptizandi? — These    dor- 
mientes   were   probably,    according  to   the   context,   recalcitrants 
who   stubbornly   refused   Baptism  and  on  whom   some  persons, 
whose  zeal   outran  their  prudence,   conferred  the  sacrament   in 
their  sleep,  and  then  forced  them  afterwards  to  lead  a  Christian 
life. 


IN  THE  13TH.  CENTURY  381 

grace,  not  only  when  they  are  administered  to  subjects 
asleep  or  demented,  but  even  when  they  are  forcibly 
conferred  on  those  who  obstinately  refuse  them.  This 
view  is  opposed  to  the  traditional  usage  forbidding  to 
thrust  upon  an  unwilling  person  Baptism  and  the  sub 
sequent  obligations  of  a  Christian  life. 

Therefore  the  Pope  prefers  the  opinion  of  the  the 
ologians  who  make  two  categories  of  those  persons 
who  are  forced  to  receive  Baptism,  according  to  the 
degree  of  violence  used  against  them. 

If  the  violence  be  only  relative,  as  in  the  case  of 
those  who  approach  Baptism  out  of  fear  of  punish 
ment,  the  sacrament  is  valid,  the  character  is  produced, 
and  the  obligation  of  living  as  a  Christian  exists  in 
its  entirety.  "  Is,  qui  terroribus  atque  suppliciis  vio- 
lenter  attrahitur,  et  ne  detrimentum  incurrat,  baptism! 
suscipit  sacramentum,  talis  (sicut  et  is  qui  ficte  ad  bap- 
tismum  accedit)  characterem  suscipit  christianitatis 
impressum,  et  ipse  tanquam  conditionaliter  volens,  licet 
absolute  non  velit,  cogendus  est  ad  observantiam  fidei 
christianae." 

Those  who  receive  Baptism  under  these  conditions 
are  compared  to  those  who  approach  the  sacrament 
ficti,  i.  e.  interiorly  refusing  Baptism,  without  exte 
riorly  manifesting  their  refusal  (ficti,  qui  quamvis  non 
ore,  corde  tamen  dissentiunt).81 

A  decree  of  a  Council  of  Toledo  is  cited  in  support 
of  this  doctrine.  Sisebut  (f62i),  the  pious  king  of 
the  Visigoths,  had  forced  the  conversion  of  a  large 
number  of  Spanish  Jews,  by  offering  the  alternative 
of  Baptism  or  torture.  Many,  in  order  to  escape  the 
tortures  had  feigned  conversion,  were  baptized  and  re- 
si  Ibid. 


382         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

ceived  Confirmation  and  Holy  Eucharist.  The  Coun 
cil  of  Toledo  reproved  the  excessive  zeal  of  Sisebut, 
but  declared  that  the  Jews  who  had  been  brought  to 
Baptism  by  the  persecution  were  really  baptized.82 
Pope  Innocent  III,  then,  would  admit  the  validity  of 
Baptism  administered  to  one  who  interiorly  has  the  in 
tention  of  not  being  baptized,  but  does  not  reveal  ex 
teriorly  his  unwillingness.83  Another  argument  for 
the  followers  of  Catharinus ;  they  will  make  good  use 
of  it.8* 

As  for  the  second  category,  those  who  manifestly 
refuse  Baptism  and  who  are  subjected  to  absolute 
violence,  they  do  not  receive  the  sacrament  validly. 
They  are  no  more  baptized  than  the  Martyrs,  compelled 
by  physical  force  to  offer  incense  to  idols,  are  apos 
tates. 

Having  recalled  these  principles,  Innocent  applies 
them  to  the  cases  of  conscience  proposed.  If  before 
falling  asleep  or  before  becoming  demented,  those  per 
sons  had  the  express  intention  not  to  be  baptized,  their 
Baptism  is  absolutely  void ;  for  the  will  of  not  receiv 
ing  a  sacrament  nullifies  its  effect.  But  if  on  the  con 
trary,  being  catechumens,  they  had  already  formed 
the  desire  of  being  baptized,  then  the  Baptism  received 
in  sleep  or  insanity  is  valid.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
Church  is  wont  to  baptize  at  the  moment  of  death 
those  who  can  no  longer  speak,  but  have  previously 

82  Ibid.    The  same  case  presented  itself  in  the  eighth  century 
when  Baptism  was  imposed  on  the  Saxons  by  Charlemagne  under 
penalty  of  death. 

83  Let  us  note,  however,  that  the  Council  of  Toledo  cited  by 
Pope  Innocent  III  is  deciding  a  case  of  conscience,  without  any 
pretension  of  formulating  a  doctrinal  decision. 

84  Cf.    DROUIN,   De   Sacr.   in  gen.,  qu.   vii,   appendix    (MiGNE, 
Curs.  Theol,  t.  xx,  1538). 


IN  THE  15TH.  CENTURY  383 

expressed  a  wish  to  receive  the  sacrament.85     It  is  im 
possible  to  be  clearer  or  more  explicit. 

In  the  1 5th.  century  the  Church  twice  solemnly 
interposed  to  proclaim  that  the  minister  of  the  sacra 
ment  must  have  the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church 
does. 

The  partisans  of  Wiclef  and  John  Huss,  whose  doc 
trine  is  in  some  measure  allied  to  that  of  the  Cathari, 
were  inclined  to  make  the  validity  of  the  Sacraments 
depend  on  the  state  of  grace  of  the  minister's  soul. 
This  is  why  Pope  Martin  V  in  his  Bull  Inter  cunctas 
of  February  21,  1418,  prescribed  that  persons  of  doubt 
ful  orthodoxy  should  be  cross-examined  and  be  asked 
in  particular,  whether  they  believed  that  an  unworthy 
priest,  performing  correctly  the  sacramental  rite  with 
the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does,  adminis 
ters  the  Sacraments  validly.86  Finally,  a  few  years 
later,  Pope  Eugenius  IV  teaches  in  the  Decree  to  the 
Armenians  that  the  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church 
does  is  essential  to  the  validity  of  the  Sacraments : 
"  Omnia  sacramenta  tribus  perficiuntur,  videlicet  rebus 
tanquam  materia,  verbis  tanquam  forma,  et  persona 
ministri  conferentis  sacramentum  cum  intentione  fa- 

85  Ibid.     Dormientes  autem  et  amentes,  si  priusquam  amentiam 
incurrerent,  ant  dormirent,  in  contradictione  persisterent ;  quia  in 
eis  intelligitur  contradictionis  propositum  perdttrare,  et  si  fuerint 
sic  immersi,  characterem  non  suscipiunt  sacramenti.     Secus  autem 
si   prius  catechumeni   extitissent,   et  habuissent   propositum  bap- 
tizandi:    unde   tales    in    necessitatis    articulo   consuevit    Ecclesia 
baptizare.     Tune  ergo  characterem  sacramentalis  imprimit  opera 
tic  cum  obicem  voluntatis  contrariae  non  invenit  obsistentem. 

86  Utrum  credat,  quod  malus   sacerdos   cum   debita  materia  et 
forma  et  cum  intentione  faciendi  quod  facit  Ecclesia,  vere  con- 
ficiat,  vere  absolvat,  vere  baptizet,  vere  conferat  alia  sacramenta. 
DENZINGER,  n.  566  (n.  672). 


384        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

ciendi,  quod  facit  Ecclesia:  quorum  si  aliquod  desit, 
non  perficitur  sacramentum."  87 

The  dogma  of  the  necessity  of  intention  is  then  in 
very  truth  the  theoretical  expression  of  the  traditional 
practice  of  the  Church.  The  minister  of  the  sacra 
ment  was  ever  considered  the  representative  and  proxy 
of  Christ.  When,  from  St.  Augustine  on,  ecclesias 
tical  writers  reflecting  on  the  conditions  needed  for 
the  validity  of  the  Sacraments  dealt  formally  with  the 
intention,  hesitations  arose.  Soon  precise  opinions 
were  formed.  A  goodly  number  of  theologians  de 
manded  in  minister  and  in  subject  the  intention  of  con 
ferring  or  of  receiving  the  sacrament.  Others  were 
satisfied  with  the  due  performance  of  the  sacramental 
rite  and  did  not  trouble  themselves  as  to  what  the 
minister  and  the  subject  thought  in  their  heart.  Bin 
all,  save  the  ignorant,  mentioned  by  Hugh  of  St.  Vic 
tor,  and  heretics,  declared  the  sacrament  void  when 
administered  in  circumstances  where  minister  or  sub 
ject  clearly  intend  not  to  act  seriously. 

The  sixteenth  century  Reformers  were  therefore 
outside  the  traditional  line  of  thought  when  they  main 
tained  that  the  Sacraments  would  be  valid,  even  if  the 
minister  should  be  drunk  or  should  be  manifestly  act 
ing  for  the  sake  of  ridicule  or  amusement.  It  is  in 
opposition  to  this  teaching  that  the  Council  of  Trent 
defined  the  dogma  of  the  necessity  of  intention,  and 
thus  consecrated  the  doctrinal  development,  the  his 
tory  of  which  we  have  outlined.  Still  the  Council  did 
not  pronounce  on  the  necessity  of  the  interior  intention 
of  the  minister.  This  serious  question  which  had  al- 

87  DENZING.,  n.  590  (n.  695). 


PURELY  EXTERIOR  INTENTION      385 

ready  perplexed  theologians  even  since  the  I2th.  cen 
tury,  was  taken  up  again  at  the  time  of  the  Reforma 
tion  and  studied  then  under  all  its  aspects. 

§  V.     The  Controversy  on  the  Purely  Exterior  Intention  — 
Ambrose  Catharinus,  O.  P. 

Lancelot  Politi,  who  took  the  name  Ambrose  Cata- 
rino  or  Catharinus  when  he  entered  the  order  of  St. 
Dominic,  was  born  in  Sienna  in  1487.  He  was  sent 
as  theologian  to  the  Council  of  Trent  in  1545.  Be 
ing  appointed  Bishop  of  Minori  in  1547,  he  took  his 
part  among  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  in  the  seventh 
session  wherein  were  defined  the  sacramentary  dog 
mas.  There  is  every  reason  to  suppose  that  he  took  a 
prominent  part  in  the  discussion  of  the  dogma  of  the 
necessity  of  intention  in  the  minister :  for  he  was  con 
vinced  that  the  interior  intention  of  doing  what  the 
Church  does  is  not  requisite  for  the  validity,  but  that 
it  is  enough  to  purpose  to  perform  the  sacramental 
rite,  outwardly  but  seriously.  He  even  wrote,  at 
Trent,  in  1547,  a  treatise  entitled,  "  De  nccessaria  in- 
tentione  in  perficiendis  sacramentis  "  in  which  he  states 
and  defends  his  views.88 

The  question  not  appearing  to  be  sufficiently  cleared 
up,  the  Council 89  was  satisfied  with  condemning 
Luther's  error  and  left  to  the  discussions  of  theolo 
gians  the  investigation  into  the  conditions  necessary 
to  the  minister's  intention  in  order  that  he  may  truly 
effect  and  confer  the  sacrament. 

88  P.  SCHANZ,  Die  Lehre  von  den  heilig.  Sacramcnten,  p.  180. 

89  PALLAVICINI,  Hist,  du  Concile  de  Trente,  liv.  IX,  chap,  vi,  n. 
3.     Cf.  A.  THEINER,  Acta  Condi.  Trid.,  t.  i,  p.  404.     Alphonsus 
Salmeron,  a  theologian  of  the  Council,   who  discussed  the  de 
crees  of  the  seventh  session,  shared  Catharinus'  opinion. 


386         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

Ambrose  Catharinus  published  in  Rome  five  years 
later,  in  1552,  his  treatise  on  the  intention,  along  with 
the  rest  of  his  works.  The  treatise  was  not  criticised, 
nor  declared  to  be  contrary  to  the  doctrine  defined  by 
the  Council  in  I547-90  Thus  it  is  that  Catharinus 
gave  his  name  to  a  theory,  which,  as  has  been  seen, 
could  be  traced  back  several  centuries.  That  an  in 
terior  intention  might  not  be  necessary  in  the  minister 
is  an  idea  which  had  naturally  come  to  the  minds  of 
those  who  had  reflected  on  this  point  of  sacramentary 
theology.  But  Catharinus  set  forth  the  problem  in  a 
manner  so  remarkably  precise  and  in  circumstances  so 
particularly  solemn,  that  the  result  was  a  hot  contro 
versy  on  which  theologians  divided.  It  is  this  con 
troversy  that  we  have  now  to  relate. 


We  may  conceive  two  kinds  of  intentions  of  doing 
what  the  Church  does :  91  the  merely  exterior  inten 
tion  and  the  interior  intention. 

The  intention  is  merely  exterior  when  the  minister 
intends  the  serious  and  entire  accomplishment  of  the 
sacramental  rite,  and  as  a  matter  of  fact  does  ac 
complish  it;  but  inwardly,  yet  without  any  outward 
evidence  thereof,  he  has  the  intention  of  acting  in 
mockery  or  even  has  the  positive  intention  not  to  con 
fer  the  sacrament.  A  priest  at  the  altar,  robed  in 
the  sacerdotal  vestments,  performing  all  the  ceremo 
nies  of  the  Mass,  reciting  all  the  prayers,  even  the 
words  of  the  consecration,  but  who,  through  a  sac- 

90  P.  SCHANZ,  /.  c. 

91  We  purposely  pass  over  other  kinds  of  intentions  defined  by 
theologians,  which  ultimately  are  resolved  into  the  two  we  here 
mention. 


PURELY  EXTERIOR  INTENTION      387 

rilegious  simulation,  would  have  the  formal  intention 
not  to  consecrate,  would  be  acting  with  a  merely  ex 
terior  intention. 

But  when,  on  the  other  hand,  the  minister  of  the 
sacrament  not  only  intends  to  accomplish  the  sacra 
mental  rite,  but,  in  his  inmost  heart,  purposes  with  all 
sincerity  to  do  what  the  Church  does,  he  has  the 
interior  intention.  Is  the  latter  intention  absolutely 
necessary  for  validity?  Would  not  the  former  be  suf 
ficient?  This  is  the  problem. 

Catharinus  and  the  numerous  followers  he  had  after 
his  death,92  think  that  the  merely  exterior  intention  is 
the  only  one  required  for  the  validity  of  the  minister's 
action.  For  what  the  Church  demands  in  the  adminis 
tration  of  the  Sacraments  is  that  the  minister  perform 
sacramental  ceremonies  and  that  he  apply  the  matter 
and  form  to  the  subject  in  the  manner  she  prescribes. 
Now,  one  who  seriously  discharges  the  sacred  rite 
does  what  the  Church  wishes;  therefore  he  has  a  suffi 
cient  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does,  what 
ever  be  his  inner  thought  or  intention : 

"  Non  alia  intentio  ministri  requiritur  " —  says  Catharinus, 
"  nisi  ut  intendat  exterius  facere  quod  facit  Ecclesia,  quamvis 
ipse  neque  credat  esse  Ecclesiam,  neque  ullum  baptismi  spir- 
itaulem  effectum,  sed  satis  est  ut  intendat  facere  quod  Ec 
clesia  jubet  per  ministros  fieri;  namque  quod  ilia  per  minis- 

92  Sententia  haec  ab  Ambrosio  Catharine  (f  1553)  suam  habet 
celebritatem,  eamque  sequuntur  theologi  praesertim  galli,  ut  Con- 
tenson  (f  1764),  Arnaldus  (11694),  Nat.  Alexander  (^1724), 
Scribonius,  Juenin  (f  1713),  L'Herminier  (f  1735),  Serry  (f  1738), 
Drouvenius  (f  1742)  ;  ex  belgis  Farvacques,  etc. ;  ex  hispanis  Sal- 
meron  (f  1585)  ;  ex  italis  Parqualigo  (fi664),  Milante  (fi749), 
Ansaldi  (f  1779)  ;  ex  germanis  Stattler  (fi797),  Dobmayer 
(fiSos),  Waibel  (f  1852)  ;  ea  etiam  arrisit  recentioribus  Oswald, 
Haas,  Glossner.  (HURTER,  Theol  dogm.  comp.,  t.  iii,  n.  204.) 
28 


388        THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

tros  facit,  ipsa  facere  intelligitur.  Quid  ergo  facit  Ecclesia 
per  ministros  baptizando?  nisi  quod  legitima  utitur  materia, 
adhibens  suam  verborum  formam :  hoc  igitur  si  facit  mi 
nister,  profecto  illud  facere  intendit,  si  sit  mente  sanus." 

In  support  of  this  doctrine,  they  quote  the  texts 
which  we  have  seen  already,  from  St.  Augustine, 
Pope  Innocent  IV,  St.  Thomas,  and  also  the  authority 
of  several  other  theologians  of  the  Middle  Ages.93 
Special  stress  is  laid  on  the  serious  practical  conse 
quences  of  the  opposite  opinion.  If  the  interior  inten 
tion  be  demanded,  the  faithful  will  ever  remain  in  end 
less  doubt  as  to  the  validity  of  the  Sacraments  they 
receive.  An  evil-minded  priest  can  baptize  and  ab 
solve  invalidly,  and  a  bishop  administer  void  ordina 
tions,  without  there  being  any  possibility  of  suspecting 
it.  These  are  very  weighty  reasons ;  they  had  already 
made  a  deep  impression  on  the  mediaeval  writers,  and 
they  surely  would  have  rallied  all  minds  to  Catharinus' 
opinion,  if  Catholic  dogma  were  a  purely  human  doc 
trine.  However,  as  we  have  already  seen  more  than 
once,  theological  thought  sometimes  takes  a  turn  that 
baffles  human  foresight,  and  forces  upright  and  sin 
cere  souls  to  recognize  God's  supernatural  action  in 
the  Catholic  Church. 

In  opposition  to  Catharinus'  party  arose  a  new  theo 
logical  school.94  It  took  up  afresh  the  teaching  of 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  which  had  not  indeed  been  for- 

93  Cf.  DROUIN,  op.  cit.,  (MIGNE,  t.  xx,  1492,  sq.).    An  argument 
was  also  built  upon  the  answer  of  Pope  Nicholas  I  to  the  Bul 
garians,  an  answer  completely  irrelevant.    DENZINGER,  Enchirid., 
n.  264  (n.  335). 

94  The  principal  theologians  of  this   school   are :     Bellarmine, 
Suarez,  Vasquez,  de  Lugo,  Tournely,  Benedict  XIV  (De  Synod., 
vii,  4,  8,  9),  Franzelin,  Hurter,  Chr.  Pesch,  Morgott,  Billot,  etc. 


PURELY  EXTERIOR  INTENTION      389 

gotten  from  the  I2th.  to  the  i6th.  century,  and 
affirmed  that  the  minister  must  have  an  interior  inten 
tion.  He  who  wishes  to  confer  validly  the  sacrament, 
cannot  rest  satisfied  with  performing  the  sacred  rite, 
but  he  must  also  sincerely  intend  in  his  inmost  soul 
to  do  what  the  Church  does  in  administering  the  Sac 
raments.  It  is  not,  however,  required  that  the  minis 
ter  have  as  complete  a  knowledge  of  the  Sacraments 
as  the  Church  has, —  else  a  pagan  or  a  heretic  could 
not  validly  baptize.  It  suffices,  but  it  is  indispensable, 
that  he  really  consider  the  sacrament  which  he  confers 
to  be  a  sacred  rite  of  the  Church.  If  he  did  but  per 
form  the  sacramental  ceremonies  seriously,  whilst  in 
wardly  ridiculing  what  he  does,  or  a  fortiori  intending 
not  to  confer  the  sacrament,  his  administrations  would 
be  void.  In  a  word,  the  minister  of  the  sacrament  is 
the  representative,  the  legate  of  Christ  and  the  Church ; 
in  the  sacramental  action  he  must  conform  his  will  to 
that  of  Christ  and  the  Church.  And  how  could  he 
truly  represent  Christ  and  the  Church,  who  would  in 
tend  to  ridicule  the  sacrament,  even  though  exteriorly 
he  should  accurately  perform  all  the  ceremonies?  Is 
anyone  really  the  representative  of  another,  if  he  ex 
ecutes  his  orders  as  far  as  outward  form  goes,  but 
with  an  intention  contrary  to  that  of  his  principal? 

This  doctrine  gives  rise  to  some  anxiety,  for  it  mul 
tiplies  the  causes  of  nullity  in  the  Sacraments.  Its 
defenders,  nevertheless,  make  answer  that  we  must 
trust  in  God's  Providence,  who  will  not  suffer  that 
Sacraments  should  frequently  be  void  through  lack  of 
intention.  Besides,  a  perverse  minister  can  nullify 
the  sacramental  action  not  only  by  vitiating  his  in 
tention,  but  as  well  by  altering  the  essential  matter 


390         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

and  form,  without  the  attendants  knowing  it.95  In 
the  work  of  our  salvation,  no  small  share  anyway  must 
be  left  to  trust  in  God. 

The  theologians  who  deem  the  interior  intention 
necessary  must  interpret  the  text  of  ancient  authors 
which  go  counter  to  their  view.  The  insufficiency  of 
their  explanations  let  us  frankly  admit.  Before  the 
1 6th.  century,  writers  had  perceived  the  problem  of 
the  intention  and  many  solved  it  in  the  same  sense 
as  Catharinus.  But  the  controversies  between  Catho 
lics  and  Protestants  on  this  question,  and,  above  all, 
the  definitions  of  the  Council  of  Trent  have  since  di 
rected  the  theological  thought  to  the  opposite  way. 
To-day  the  common  doctrine  declaring  the  interior  in 
tention  necessary  must,  we  think,  be  followed ;  the  au 
thorities  brought  against  it  belong  to  an  epoch  when 
no  serious  discussion  had  yet  taken  place  on  the  mat 
ter,  when  the  Church  especially  had  not  intervened  in 
any  way. 

For,  although  the  Church  refused  to  settle  the  con 
troversy  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  she  has  since  shown 
disfavor  toward  Catharinus'  opinion.  The  Augustini- 
an  monk,  Francis  Farvacques,  defended  at  Louvain  in 
1678  the  following  proposition:  "  Baptism  is  validly 
conferred  by  a  minister  who  observes  all  the  external 
rite  and  preserves  the  form  of  the  sacrament,  but  says 
resolutely  to  himself:  '  I  have  no  intention  of  doing 
what  the  Church  does.'  "  96 

95  BELLARMINE,  De  Sacram.  in  gen.,  lib.  i,  cap.  28. 

96DENziNG.,  n.  1185  (n.  1318):  Valet  Baptismus  collatus  a 
ministro,  qui  omnem  ritum  externum  formamque  baptizandi  ob- 
servat,  intus  vero  in  corde  suo  apud  se  resolvit :  Non  intendo 
facere  quod  facit  Ecclesia.— Cf.  Diet,  de  Theol.  Cathol,  art. 
"  Alexandre  VIII,"  i.  761. 


PURELY  EXTERIOR  INTENTION      391 

This  proposition  was  condemned  December  7, 
1690,  by  Pope  Alexander  VIII.  It  is  not,  however, 
Catharinus'  doctrine,  that  was  censured;  we  have  the 
declaration  of  Rome  herself  on  the  point.  Cathari 
nus  was  content  to  say  that  the  exterior  intention  was 
sufficient,  without  formally  specifying,  as  Farvacques 
did,  that  it  would  be  so  even  when  the  minister  would 
have  in  his  inmost  soul  the  positive  intention  of  not 
doing  what  the  Church  does.  It  must  be  confessed, 
nevertheless,  that  this  condemnation  was  calculated  to 
discredit  Catharinus'  doctrine;97  and  this  is  just  what 
happened :  so  much  so,  that  hardly  anyone  to-day 
dares  openly  adopt  it.98 

At  all  events,  in  practice,  one  is  never  allowed  to  act 
according  to  that  opinion;  for  although  it  has  good 
reasons  in  its  favor,  in  the  administration  of  the  Sac 
raments,  the  safest  course  must  ever  be  followed,  Ac 
cording  to  Benedict  XIV,99  when  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  a  sacrament  which  cannot  be  repeated  and 
is  of  great  importance,  v.  g.  Baptism  or  Holy  Orders, 
has  been  very  probably  conferred  by  a  minister  who 
had  not  the  interior  intention,  that  sacrament  is  to  be 
repeated  conditionally,  unless  time  allows  to  consult 
Rome  on  the  line  of  conduct  to  be  followed.  Rome's 
answer  will  almost  always  be  that  Baptism  or  Ordina 
tion  must  be  repeated  conditionally.  The  development 
of  theological  thought  since  the  Council  of  Trent  seems 
decidedly  to  be  little  in  favor  of  the  system  of  Cathari 
nus. 

i 

97  Qua  damnatione  negari  non  potest  grave  vulnus  praefatae 
(Catharinae)  opinion!  inflictum.     BENEDICT  XIV,  De  Synod..,  lib. 
vii,  4,  8. 

98  See,  however,  GASPAREI,  De  ordihatione,  t.  i,  p.  429,  n.  643, 
Paris,  1893. 

99  DC  Synod.,  lib.  vii,  4,  9. 


392     THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

§  VI.     The  Qualities  Required  in  the  Intention  of  Minister 
and  of  Subject. 

It  is  clear  from  the  preceding  pages  that  both  the 
minister  and  the  recipient  must  inwardly  intend  to  do 
what  the  Church  does.  Theologians  1  teach  that  the 
subject  must  intend  to  receive  the  sacred  rite.  If  he 
would  merely  lend  himself  outwardly  to  the  ceremony, 
with  the  actual  intention  of  performing  a  purely  pro 
fane  action  or  playing  a  farce,  the  sacrament  would  be 
void. 

It  is  equally  necessary  for  the  validity  of  the  sac 
rament  that  the  minister's  intention  be  actual  or  at  least 
virtual.  The  intention  of  doing  something  —  in  the 
present  case,  of  doing  what  the  Church  does  —  may 
be  actual,  virtual  or  habitual. 

The  intention  is  actual  when  the  will  is  consciously 
exercised  at  the  very  moment  upon  the  thing  intended. 
It  is  virtual,  on  the  contrary,  when  one  acts  in  a  state 
of  distraction.  Finally,  the  habitual  intention  is  that 
which  has  ceased  to  be  virtual.  Two  causes  especially 
make  a  virtual  intention  habitual :  a  rather  considerable 
lapse  of  time,  which,  however,  it  is  hard  to  define  pre 
cisely,  and  an  accident  such  as  somnambulism,  hyp 
notism  or  drunkenness.  A  person  becoming  intox 
icated  or  falling  into  a  state  of  somnambulism  while 
performing  an  action,  continues  with  an  habitual  in 
tention  what  he  has  commenced  with  a  virtual  or  an 
actual  intention.2 

The  actual  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  does 
is  not  requisite  in  the  minister  of  the  sacrament  for 

1  Cajetan  is,  however,  of  a  somewhat  different  opinion. 
-  These  definitions  are  different  from  those  given  by  modern 
philosophers. 


QUALITIES  OF  THE  INTENTION      393 

the  validity  of  his  action;  the  virtual  intention  suffices. 
Hence  the  sacrament  is  valid  even  though  the  minister 
is  distracted  while  conferring  it, —  provided  of  course 
that  the  distraction  does  not  hinder  him  from  perform 
ing  in  their  entirety  the  essential  rites.  This  is  St. 
Thomas'  teaching,3  with  this  difference,  however,  that 
the  Angelic  Doctor  calls  habitual,  what  we  to-day  call 
virtual  intention.  As  for  the  habitual  intention  as 
above  defined,  it  is  entirely  inadequate :  he  who  would 
administer  a  sacrament  in  a  drunken,  or  somnambu 
listic,  or  hypnotic  state,  would  perform  an  action  that 
is  null,  even  though  before  the  occurrence  he  might 
have  had  the  most  formal  intention  of  doing  what  the 
Church  does;  for  in  that  abnormal  state  he  no  longer 
acts  as  a  rational  being  capable  of  being  the  represen 
tative  of  Christ  and  the  Church. 

A  less  perfect  intention  is  required  in  the  adult  re 
cipient  of  the  sacrament.  Excepting  Matrimony  and 
Penance,  which  demand  at  least  a  virtual  intention, 
the  Sacraments  may  be  validly  conferred  on  such  per 
sons  as  have  had  the  intention  of  receiving  them  and 
have  never  retracted  that  intention.  And  even,  in 
case  of  Sacraments  conferred  on  the  sick,  the  subject's 
intention  may  be  presumed  when  he  is  unable  to  speak, 
even  although  he  has  given  no  previous  indication  of 
his  wish  to  receive  the  Sacraments  in  his  last  hour. 


Generally,  the  intention  of  conferring  the  sacra 
ment  should  be  absolute.  It  may,  however,  be  de 
pendent  on  a  condition,  provided  the  condition  be 
realized  at  the  moment  when  the  sacrament  is  admin- 

BSum.  theol,  p.  3,  qu.  64,  art.  8,  ad  3um. 


394         THE  MINISTER'S  INTENTION 

istered;  this  takes  place  when  the  condition  refers  to  a 
present  or  a  past  fact.  If  the  intention  were  depen 
dent  on  a  future,  contingent  fact,  it  would  not  really 
be  existing  when  the  sacrament  is  conferred,  and  hence 
by  defect  of  intention  the  sacrament  would  be  void. 

The  custom  of  administering  conditional  Baptism 
is  attested  in  the  I3th.  century  by  a  decretal  of 
Pope  Alexander  III  prescribing  the  repetition  of  Bap 
tism  under  condition,  for  persons  doubtfully  baptized: 
"  De  quibus  dubium  est  an  baptizati  fuerint,  baptizan- 
tur  his  verbis  praemissis :  Si  baptizatus  es,  non  te  bap- 
tizo :  sed  si  nondum  baptizatus  es,  ego  te  baptize  etc."  4 
But  this  practice  is  doubtless  much  older.  It  was  in 
spired,  as  we  learn  from  Pope  Alexander  III,  by  the 
desire  of  avoiding  the  danger  of  repeating  Baptism 
when  a  priest  is  obliged  to  administer  it  to  a  person 
who  might  have  received  it  before. 

In  the  1 5th.  century  Gerson  taught  as  "a  sure 
theological  conclusion  "  that  in  many  cases,  confession 
may  be  made  conditionally,  and  absolution  likewise 
given  conditionally.5  Notwithstanding  several  pro 
tests,  this  doctrine  was  eventually  adopted  by  theolo 
gians  and  followed  by  confessors.  Furthermore,  since 
the  reason  that  had  given  rise  to  the  practice  of  bap 
tizing  and  absolving  conditionally  held  good  in  the 
case  of  the  other  Sacraments,  theologians  soon  taught 
that  the  conditional  administrations  of  all  the  Sacra 
ments  is  valid,  and  in  a  great  many  cases  may  be  al- 

4  Decretal.,  lib.  iii,  tit.  42;  De  Baptismo  et  ejus  effectu,  cap.  2. 
Corpus  juris  can.,  t.  ii,  p.  619  (ed.  Richter).    Cf.  DENZING.,  n. 
332  (n.  399). 

5  De  schismate  tollendo,  Opera  omnia,  Antwerp,  1706,  t.  ii,  p.  79. 
Cf.  Diet,  de  Theolog.  Cath.,  art.  "  Absolution  conditionnelle,"  i, 
252  ss. 


QUALITIES  OF  THE  INTENTION      395 

lowed.  This  theological  teaching  makes  the  adminis 
tration  of  the  Sacraments  easier,  and  spares  pastors 
many  a  moral  torture :  these  are  advantages  not  en 
joyed  by  those  who  lived  at  an  age  when  sacramentary 
theology  was  not  yet  sufficiently  developed.  The 
Church,  reflecting  on  her  Sacraments,  constantly  dis 
covers  new  aspects  which  suggest  to  her  means  of  liv 
ing  in  yet  fuller  enjoyment  of  those  wonderful  graces 
that  Jesus  has  given  her. 


CONCLUSION 

Having  come  to  the  end  of  our  study,  let  us  now 
take  a  general  view  of  the  development  of  sacra- 
mentary  theology  and  try  to  formulate  the  law  which 
governed  it. 

The  history  of  the  development  falls  easily  into  four 
periods  —  from  the  beginning  to  St.  Augustine ;  from 
St.  Augustine  to  the  I2th.  century;  from  the  I2th. 
century  to  the  Council  of  Trent;  and  from  the  Council 
of  Trent  to  our  own  day. 

In  the  first  four  centuries,  the  Church  was  adminis 
tering  the  Sacraments,  with  no  thought  of  theorizing 
about  them;  her  sacramental  practice  preceded  by  far 
its  dogmatic  expression. 

Jesus  gave  the  Sacraments  to  His  Church, —  either 
in  the  explicit  or  in  the  implicit  state.  She  used  her 
Sacraments  according  to  the  demands  and  the  needs 
of  the  time.  From  the  very  first  days  of  her  life, 
she  administered  Baptism,  which  was  followed  by  the 
rite  conferring  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  Holy  Eu 
charist,  the  participation  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ  nourishing  the  supernatural  life  in  the  newly 
baptized.  The  need  of  providing  for  government  in 
the  churches  and  of  securing  the  celebration  of  the 
Christian  worship  led  the  Apostles  to  confer  on  the 
elders  of  the  Christian  communities,  by  the  imposition 
of  hands,  the  sacerdotal  powers  which  they  had  re 
ceived  from  Jesus.  In  accordance  with  the  Savior's 

396 


CONCLUSION  397 

commands,  sick  Christians  were  healed  with  oil,  and 
even  obtained  by  this  unction  the  remission  of  their 
sins.  When  the  beautiful  Christian  ideal,  viz. :  never 
after  Baptism  to  fall  into  grievous  sin,  was  no  longer 
attainable,  owing  to  the  growing  number  of  the  faith 
ful,  the  Church  made  use  of  the  power  given  her  by 
Christ  to  forgive  post-baptismal  sins.  Christian  Mar 
riage,  restored  by  Jesus  to  its  primitive  perfection, 
was  always  considered  by  the  Church  as  a  most  sacred 
institution  and  one  implying  a  most  lofty  symbolism. 
Its  sacramental  efficacy  little  by  little  unfolded  itself 
to  Christian  consciousness. 

All  the  components  of  the  Sacraments  are  found 
then,  at  least  as  to  their  essential  principles,  in  the 
primitive  Church.  But  all  did  not  attract  in  the  same 
measure  the  attention  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers  of 
the  first  centuries.  The  Apostolic  Fathers  speak  only 
of  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Eucharist.  The  writings 
of  Tertullian  add  Confirmation  and  Penance.  St.  Cy 
prian  speaks,  in  many  instances,  of  Ordination.  But 
the  rites  of  initiation  into  Christianity,  viz. :  Baptism, 
Confirmation  and  Holy  Eucharist,  held  from  the  be 
ginning  of  the  3rd.  century  a  preponderating  and  al 
most  exclusive  place  in  the  thoughts  of  Christian  writ 
ers.  On  them  the  first  sacramental  speculations  were 
made.  The  Greek  Fathers,  from  Origen  on,  inspired 
by  St.  Paul's  symbolism  of  Baptism  and  aided  by  the 
Platonic  theory  of  signs,  consider  the  washing  as  the 
sign  of  the  purifying  of  the  soul.  The  anointing 
which  followed  Baptism  is  also  the  symbol  of  the 
sanctifying  action  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Thus  appears 
the  first  attempt  at  the  definition  of  a  sacrament  as  an 
efficacious  sign  or  symbol.  The  custom  of  blessing 
the  material  of  the  Sacraments  (water  and  oil)  led  the 


398    THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

Greek  and  Latin  writers  to  explain  the  sacramental  ef 
ficacy  by  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  of  some 
Divine  power  in  the  material  blessed.  The  sacramental 
rite  of  Baptism  was  thus  composed  of  three  elements, 
the  water,  the  blessing  or  consecration  of  that  water, 
and  the  invocation  of  the  Trinity.  But  there  did  not 
yet  exist  any  strong  theory  on  the  composition  of  the 
Sacraments;  writers  were  satisfied  to  describe  the  ex 
isting  customs.  Among  these  customs,  that  of  not  re 
peating  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  Holy  Orders,  when 
they  had  once  been  conferred  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
implies  the  doctrine  of  the  character,  a  doctrine  already 
insinuated  by  the  common  use,  from  the  2nd.  cen 
tury  on,  of  the  term  sphragis  (seal),  to  designate  Bap 
tism  and  Confirmation.  The  Baptismal  controversy 
finally  brought  forth  the  decisions  of  Pope  Stephen 
and  of  the  Council  of  Aries  (314)  declaring  the  validi 
ty  of  Baptism  independent  of  the  belief  of  the  minis 
ter.  In  this  first  period,  sacramentary  theology  was 
then  very  incomplete,  and  very  vague,  its  first  outlines 
being  hardly  visible.  Still  the  principles  were  laid 
down  for  later  writers  to  develop. 

St.  Augustine,  incited  by  his  indefatigable  curiosity 
and  by  the  Donatist  controversy,  was  the  cause  of  con 
siderable  progress  in  sacramentary  theology.  Inspired 
by  the  Greek  writers  who  had  gone  before  him,  he  for 
mulated  a  scientific  definition  of  a  sacrament, —  Sa- 
cramentum,  i.  e.  sacrum  signum,  and  he  perceived  the 
binary  composition  of  the  sacramental  rite :  ace  edit 
verbum  ad  elementum  et  fit  sacr amentum.  He  strong 
ly  suspected  the  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  inten 
tion  in  the  minister  and  the  subject,  which  has  always 
been  involved  in  the  feeling,  as  old  as  the  Church,  that 


CONCLUSION  399 

the  minister  is  the  agent  of  Christ.  In  his  discus 
sions  with  the  Donatists,  he  laid  down  clearly  the  role 
of  both  minister  and  subject  in  the  efficacy  of  the  Sac 
raments.  The  part  of  the  minister  is  simply  to  ac 
complish  the  complete  sacramental  rite.  Whatever 
be  his  unworthiness,  the  minister  ever  remains,  by  the 
permanent  character  received  in  Ordination,  the  repre 
sentative  of  Christ  and  of  the  Church.  His  sacramen 
tal  acting  is  therefore  an  act  of  Christ  operating 
through  the  Church.  The  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments 
is  thus  objective  and  independent  of  the  moral  disposi 
tions  of  the  minister.  As  to  the  evil  dispositions  of 
the  subject,  they  are  "  obstacles  "  to  the  reception  of 
the  grace  of  the  Sacraments.  He,  who  has  himself 
baptized  in  an  heretical  or  schismatical  church,  re 
ceives  indeed  the  baptismal  character,  but  not  the  re 
mission  of  his  sins.  The  sacrament  will  produce  its 
effect,  will  "  revive  "  as  the  later  Scholastics  termed 
it,  when  the  heretic  or  schismatic  enters  the  true 
Church;  for  outside  its  fold,  there  is  no  remission  of 
sins  or  conferring  of  grace.  The  exigencies  of  con 
troversy  thus  led  Augustine  to  bring  to  light  the  doc 
trine  of  the  character,  which  is  simply  an  explanation 
of  the  Church's  practice  of  not  repeating  Baptism  nor 
Holy  Orders.  Sacramental  dogma  always  flows  from 
the  life  of  the  Church. 

This  doctrine  of  Augustine  was  forgotten  in  the 
early  Middle  Ages  (ninth,  tenth  and  eleventh  centu 
ries).  The  ignorance  caused  by  the  social  revolutions 
of  an  infant  civilization,  and  the  r/eed  of  reforming  an 
incontinent  and  simoniacal  clergy,  led  the  ecclesiastical 
writers  and  even  the  pastors  of  the  Church,  to  subor 
dinate  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  to  the  dignity  of 


400     THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

the  minister.  Hence  the  numerous  reordinations  of 
those  guilty  of  simony.  But  in  the  I2th.  century,  a 
more  serious  and  deliberate  study  refound,  never  to  let 
perish,  the  Augustinian  teaching,  and  there  commenced 
a  third  period  of  sacramentary  speculations,  the  most 
brilliant  of  all. 

The  movement  was  started  by  the  school  of  St.  Vic 
tor  in  the  person  of  Hugh,  and  by  the  school  of  Ab- 
elard  in  the  person  of  Abelard  himself.  It  was  con 
tinued  by  Peter  Lombard  and  brought  to  completion 
by  the  great  theologians  of  the  I3th.  century.  Peter 
Lombard  formulated  the  complete  definition  of  a  sac 
rament  and  drew  up  the  definitive  list  of  the  seven 
rites  to  which,  in  the  light  of  traditional  teaching, 
this  name  referred.  He  applied  to  the  Sacraments, 
with  the  exception  of  Penance  and  Matrimony,  the 
opinion  of  St.  Augustine  as  to  their  binary  com 
position.  Peter  of  Poitiers  distinguished  between  the 
opus  operantis  and  the  opus  opcratum  which  is  consid 
ered  a  cause  of  grace.  Whence  the  problem,  so  much 
discussed  in  the  I3th.  century,  of  the  causality  of 
the  Sacraments.  Three  principal  solutions  were 
brought  forth:  that  of  the  occasional  causality,  pre 
ferred  by  the  Franciscan  school ;  that  of  the  dispositive 
causality,  of  Alexander  of  Hales ;  and  that  of  the 
instrumental  efficient  causality,  of  St.  Thomas.  The 
ologians  speculated  also  on  the  nature  of  the  character, 
on  the  intention  of  the  minister  and  the  subject,  and 
on  the  manner  of  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Sacra 
ments.  But  most  worthy  of  notice  was  the  applica 
tion  to  the  sacramental  rite,  of  Aristotle's  theory  of 
Hylemorphism.  In  brief,  the  theologians  of  the 
1 2th.  and  I3th.  centuries  gathered  together  and  syn- 


CONCLUSION  401 

thesized  all  the  traditional  data  relative  to  the  Sacra 
ments  and  constructed  therefrom  a  complete  theo 
logical  system. 

Unhappily,  these  were  mostly  a  priori  speculations. 
The  Hylemorphic  theory  in  particular  led  theologians 
to  excessive  conclusions  on  the  unchangeable  character 
of  matter  and  form,  and  hence  on  the  manner  of  the 
Divine  institution.  It  was  the  work  of  the  theologians 
of  the  fourth  period  to  reduce  these  conclusions  to 
more  circumspect  and  less  sweeping  formulas.  The 
vast  historical  researches  occasioned  by  the  Protestant 
controversies  of  the  I7th.  and  i8th.  centuries  dem 
onstrated  not  only  that  Christ  had  not  fixed  the  mat 
ter  and  form  of  all  the  Sacraments,  but  also  that 
some  matters  and  forms  had  really  varied  in  the 
course  of  centuries.  These  historical  facts  obliged 
theologians  to  attribute  to  the  action  of  Christ,  in  the 
institution  of  some  of  the  Sacraments,  only  the  deter 
mination  of  their  spiritual  effects.  Thus  came  into 
existence  the  theory  of  the  immediate  institution  in 
genere.  But  with  the  work  of  Newman  showing  that 
development  has  taken  place  in  all  Christian  doctrine, 
explanation  of  the  Divine  institution  is  to-day  rightly 
sought  in  that  idea  of  development. 

This  check  which  the  more  profound  and  more 
critical  study  of  history  has  given  in  later  years  to  the 
speculations  of  the  Middle  Ages,  shows  how  unfounded 
some  of  these  were.  Indeed  the  Church  represented 
by  the  Council  of  Trent  is  far  from  having  conse 
crated  the  sacramentary  theology  of  the  I3th.  cen 
tury.  She  defined  the  traditional  doctrine  which  Pro 
testants  were  casting  aside,  but  never  gave  sanction  to 
the  systems  of  theologians.  These  have  to  be  revised 


402    THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

in  the  light  of  history.     To  this  work  barely  begun 
are  modern  theologians  devoting  their  efforts. 

It  is  easy  enough  to  deduce  from  the  exposition  of 
the  facts  the  law  of  the  development  of  the  sacramen 
tal  doctrines.  The  method  of  development  particular 
to  sacramentary  theology  has  been  to  extract  from  the 
sacramental  practice  of  the  Church  those  dogmatic 
explanations  which  were  therein  implied.  Practice 
prepared  the  way  for  doctrine  and  has  always  been 
the  guide  of  Christian  thought. 

The  Church  living  by  her  Sacraments  according  to 
her  needs,  determined  the  sacramental  usages  by  her 
practice  and  agreeably  to  Christ's  intentions.  To  the 
sacred  rites  was  joined  traditional  teaching  explaining 
their  meaning  and  efficacy.  It  is  from  this  practice 
of  the  Church  and  the  teaching  which  went  along  with 
it,  that  sacramentary  theology  has  grown.  All  the 
speculations  that  were  made  about  the  Sacraments,  as 
we  have  more  than  once  seen,  were  built  upon  them  as 
their  only  legitimate  foundation.  The  doctrine  of  the 
matter  and  form  in  the  sacramental  rite,  the  dogmas 
of  the  character,  the  sevenfold  number,  and  the  inten 
tion  of  the  minister,  were  deduced  from  the  sacra 
mental  life  of  the  Church,  even  as  the  conclusion  is 
deduced  from  its  containing  premises. 

The  doctrine  of  the  efficacy  exercised  a  prepon 
derating  influence  in  this  passing  from  the  implicit  to 
the  explicit  state.  The  other  sacramental  dogmas, 
even  in  a  measure  that  of  the  Divine  institution,  were 
developed  on  lines  parallel  and  subordinated  to  that 
of  efficacy.  They  are  as  it  were  the  branches  of  a 
great  tree,  of  which  the  doctrine  of  the  efficacy  would 


CONCLUSION  403 

be  the  hardy  trunk;  or  again  as  rays  of  light  whose 
brilliancy  becomes  more  intense  as  the  flame  whence 
they  emanate  grows  in  strength.  This  is  readily  un 
derstood:  the  efficacy  ex  opere  operate  being  the  ex 
clusive  characteristic  of  the  Christian  Sacraments,  in 
fact  their  very  essence,  the  progressive  knowledge 
about  that  efficacy  was  sure  to  manifest  successively 
the  various  aspects  of  sacramental  realities.  The 
beautiful  doctrines,  for  example,  of  the  production  in 
certain  cases  of  the  gratia  prima  by  the  Sacraments  of 
the  living,  of  the  amount  of  the  grace  produced,  of 
the  reviviscence, —  are  not  all  these  but  conclusions  de 
duced  from  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  as  it  be 
came  more  and  more  understood  ? 

If,  as  the  exposition  of  facts  proves,  the  dogmas 
of  Sacramentary  Theology  are  the  expression  of  the 
Church's  practice,  a  first  consequence  which  forces  it 
self  upon  us,  is  that  there  is  no  opposition  between  his 
tory  and  dogma.  Such  opposition  would  exist  only  in 
so  far  as  dogma  would  be  in  disagreement  with  the 
sacramental  life  of  the  Church.  Except  for  some 
minor  points,  such  as  the  reordinations  of  the  Middle 
Ages,  the  historian  is  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  be 
tween  the  definitions  of  the  Council  of  Trent  and  the 
use  the  Church  made  of  the  Sacraments  from  the  be 
ginning  down  to  our  own  day,  there  is  a  substantial 
conformity,  of  a  nature  to  satisfy  any  reasonable  mind. 
To  be  sure,  the  manner  of  administering  the  Sacra 
ments  has  varied,  but  these  variations  never  affected 
the  essence  of  things.  The  essential  signification  of 
the  sacramental  rites  and  the  use  made  of  them  under 
went  no  change.  Disagreement  exists  in  reality  only 
between  certain  theological  theories  on  the  composi- 


404     THEOLOGY  OF  THE  SACRAMENTS 

tion  of  the  sacramental  rites  and  the  history  of  the 
Sacraments.  But  the  Church  never  made  such  theories 
dogmas  of  faith.  That  there  were  sometimes  con 
flicts  between  theology  and  history  is  not  to  be  won 
dered  at,  but  theology  is  quite  distinct  from  dogma. 

A  further  conclusion  growing  out  of  our  study  is 
this :  that  the  sacramental  doctrines  are  not,  as  Prot 
estants  would  have  them,  merely  human  doctrines, 
purely  artificial  theories  hatched  out  in  the  brain  of 
St.  Augustine  and  of  the  Scholastics.  A  doctrine 
which  is  the  real  explanation  of  a  religious  and  Divine 
fact  is  not  a  purely  human  doctrine,  but  a  doctrine 
implicitly  contained  in  that  fact  and  consequently  Di 
vine.  Hence  it  is  that  ecclesiastical  writers  like  St. 
Augustine  and  Peter  Lombard,  who  made  the  dogma 
explicit,  always  connected  the  dogma  with  the  tradi 
tional  practices  of  the  Church. 

Some  Protestants,  it  is  true,  do  not  admit  the  legiti 
macy  of  a  development  in  Christianity:  all  that  is 
foreign  to  the  letter  of  the  Gospel  would  be  to  their 
mind  foreign  also  to  the  mind  of  Christ.  But  is  it  not 
a  strangely  false  conception  of  the  work  of  Jesus,  thus 
to  exclude  all  development?  If  the  work  of  Jesus  did 
not  progress  it  would  not  live,  for  whatever  really 
lives  develops.  Catholicity,  the  living,  developing 
Christianity,  is  by  this  very  fact  the  true  religion  of 
Jesus,  whereas  Protestantism  is  a  dead,  lifeless  Chris 
tianity,  which  has  withdrawn  itself  from  the  vivifying 
influences  of  Christ,  who  continues  to  act  in  the  world 
through  His  Church.  Hence  the  best  apology  of  the 
Catholic  dogma  is  in  fact  the  very  history  of  its  de 
velopment. 

Lastly  —  and   this    is   also   a   consequence    flowing 


CONCLUSION  405 

from  our  historical  sketch  —  it  is  in  the  Church  alone 
that  a  just  idea  of  the  Savior's  work  can  be  had.  It 
is  in  the  Church  and  by  the  Church  alone  that  we  can 
acquire  an  exact  knowledge  of  Jesus;  it  is  also  in  and 
by  the  Church  alone  that  we  can  understand  His  insti 
tutions,  especially  the  Sacraments.  For  to  pretend  to 
understand  Jesus  and  His  work,  while  at  the  same  time 
abstracting  from  the  traditional  development  which 
took  its  start  in  the  Gospel  itself,  is  to  take  the  part 
for  the  whole,  to  vivisect  Christianity.  Let  us  then 
with  all  our  heart  cleave  to  the  Church.  For  accord 
ing  to  the  thought  of  St.  Augustine,  the  Church  is 
Jesus  Christ  continuing  to  teach  the  world  and  to 
sanctify  each  of  us  by  His  Sacraments. 


INDEX 


ACTA  THOMAE.     Efficacy  of  the  Eucharist,  106. 

ABELARD.  Returns  to  Augustinian  definition  of  Sacraments, 
37.  Paves  the  way  for  a  complete  list  of  Sacraments 
by  his  distinction  between  the  Sacramento,  Maj'ora  and 
the  Sacramenta  Minora,  269.  Shows  fitness  of  the  Sacra 
ments  as  remedies,  278. 

ALEXANDER  OF  HALES.  Doctrine  of  character,  240,  246. 
His  special  view  on  the  origin  of  Confirmation  rests 
on  a  truth :  the  ever-present  action  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
82,  337- 

ALEXANDRIAN  SCHOOL.  Inclined  to  study  Symbolism  of 
Christian  rites,  5. 

AMBROSE,  ST.  Attributes  to  the  Sacraments  rich  Symbolism, 
39-21. 

ANOINTING  OF  SICK.  In  Holy  Writ,  101.  St.  Csesarius  of 
Aries,  155.  Innocent  I,  155.  Liturgical  texts  of  Patristic 
period  alluding  to  it,  show  it  was  employed,  325.  Cyril 
of  Alexandria  and  Caesarius  identify  the  anointing  of  the 
sick  with  the  rite  described  by  St.  James,  327.  Traced  back 
to  Christ,  308. 

ATHANASIUS,  ST.     Baptizing  his  playmates,  369. 

AUGUSTINE,  ST.  First  to  distinguish  visible  from  invisible 
part  of  the  Sacrament,  being  thereby  able  to  sketch  a 
definition,  22,  ff.  Includes  divine  institution  as  an  essen 
tial  element  of  definition,  31,  f.  But  did  not  insert  the 
efficacy,  32.  Analyzes  the  elements  of  the  Sacrament,  but 
formulates  his  theory  of  the  composition,  viz.,  union  of 
material  elements  and  of  word,  59,  ff.  Only  as  regards 
Baptism  and  Eucharist,  j&L  His  doctrine  of  character 
bound  up  with  traditional  practice  of  the  Church,  not 
an  artificial  theory,  as  Harnack  says,  231.  Sets  forth  a 
sharp  distinction  between  character  and  grace  of  Bap 
tism  as  an  explanation  of  the  practice  of  no-rebaptism, 
327,  ff.  His  doctrine  tallies  with  that  of  the  Greek  Fa- 
407 


408  INDEX 

thers  on  Sphragis,  227.  Character  of  Baptism  seems  to 
him  physical,  that  of  Ordination  moral,  229,  f.  Says  little 
about  that  of  Confirmation,  233.  Matrimony  symbol  of 
holiness,  not  source  of  grace,  154.  Explicit  on  holiness  of 
Matrimony,  323.  Expresses  with  precision  relation  be 
tween  the  minister  of  the  Sacrament  and  the  Church, 
355.  Presented  for  ordination  against  his  desire,  357. 
His  doctrine  on  the  intention,  361,  ff.  His  teaching  on 
validity  of  "  fallacious  "  baptism,  363,  ff.  He  caused  con 
siderable  progress  in  Sacramentary  Theology,  398.  Al 
leged  as  supporting  moral  causality,  194,  195.  Defends 
objective  efficacy,  136,  ff.,  independent  of  minister's  dispo 
sition,  connects  it  with  character,  138,  ff.,  and  his  theory 
of  the  ministerial  action  of  the  Church,  140,  148.  Christ  "" 
is  acting  through  His  ministers,  141,  142;  independent  of 
the  subject's  disposition,  142.  Does  not  distinguish  effi 
cacy  of  the  rite  from  Christ's  action,  147-150.  Obex,  145. 
Reviviscence  of  Sacrament,  146;  of  sin,  147. 

BAPTISM.  St.  Paul  on  the  efficacy  of  Baptism,  97-99.  St. 
John,  99.  Hermas,  102.  Not  repented,  207.  Baptismal 
controversy,  116-130.  Baptism  of  John  distinct  from 
Christian  baptism,  302.  Our  baptism  not  an  invention  of 
the  primitive  community,  302.  Apostolic  tradition  attributes 
it  to  Christ,  303.  Its  relation  with  Penance,  306,  f.  Value 
of  Baptism  administered  by  an  unbaptized  person,  326,  f. 
"  Fallacious "  or  simulated  baptism,  363,  ff.  Case  of  St. 
Athanasius  and  St.  Genesius,  369,  ff. 

BARNABAS   (Pseudo).     Baptism  foretold,  104,  105. 

BASIL,  ST.  Insists  less  on  symbolism  of  Eucharist  than  on 
that  of  Baptism,  whose  efficacy  he  attributes  to  Holy 
Ghost,  8-10.  Denies  heretics  power  to  baptize,  128. 

BATIFFOL,  3,  n.,  17,  n.,  10,  n.,  64,  91,  102,  n.,  106,  n.,  112, 
n.,  114,  n.,  304,  n.,  312,  n. 

BERNOLD  OF  CONSTANCE,  158-160. 

BILLOT,  S.  J.  Restored  system  of  positive  causality,  173, 
194,  n. 

BLESSING  OF  BAPTISMAL  WATER.  Necessary  for  effi 
cacy  according  to  Tertullian,  and  especially  St.  Cyprian, 
St.  Ambrose,  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  because  they  at 
tempted  to  apply  some  theory  to  Baptism  and  Eucharist, 
55,  f,  no,  122.  Admit  exception  for  clinical  baptism,  59. 

BONAVENTURE,  ST.     Finds  relationship  between  the  Seven 


INDEX  409 

Sacraments  and  the  Seven  Virtues,  280.  Confirmation 
instituted  by  Holy  Ghost  shortly  after  death  of  Apostles, 
83,  338. 

CAJETAN.  Defends  system  of  efficient  instrumental  causality, 
174,  176.  Differs  from  Suarez,  187.  As  also  on  sacramen 
tal  grace,  198. 

CALLISTUS,  113,  114. 

CATHARI,  283,  ff. 

CATHARINUS.  Gives  his  name  to  theory  maintaining  that 
interior  intention  is  not  required,  385,  391. 

CANO,  MELCHIOR.  Defends  moral  causality,  183,  184,  193. 
But  differs  from  Scotus,  194.  False  idea  on  matter  and 
form  of  Marriage,  80,  ff. 

CAUSALITY.  Tertullian  advocated  as  a  defender  of  physical 
causality,  no.  Three  systems  to  solve  problem,  166;  oc 
casional,  167-169;  dispositive,  169-174;  efficient  instru 
mental  causality,  164-176.  Council  of  Trent  unfavorable  to 
first,  183,  which  was  changed  by  Melchior  Cano  into  system 
of  moral  causality,  183,  f.  Actual  controversy  about  cau 
sality,  184-186.  Physical  causality,  186-190.  Moral  cau 
sality,  191-196. 

CHARACTER.  See  SPHRAGIS.  St.  Augustine  distinguishes  it 
from  grace,  143,  226,  ff.  Indelible,  distinct  from  grace, 
205.  Denied  by  Protestants  because  unscriptural,  205. 
Doctrine  of  character  implied  in  custom  of  not  repeating 
baptism,  confirmation,  order,  207.  Repeated  ordinations 
in  early  Middle  Ages  apparently  oppose  doctrine  of  sac 
ramental  character,  237.  Solution  of  problem:  sacra- 
mentary  theology  was  lacking  in  precision,  doctrine  of 
character  had  been  forgotten,  239. 

CHRYSOSTOM,  ST.  JOHN.  His  concept  of  Sacrament,  12. 
Sphragis,  220. 

CHURCH.  Baptism  outside  of,  120-126.  Distinct  from  baptism 
though  acts  with  it,  125.  Doctrine  of  St.  Augustine  on 
the  Church  acting  through  her  ministers,  140.  Obtain 
ing  forgiveness  only  in  behalf  of  those  who  are  at  peace 
with  her,  Salus  extra  Ecclesiam  nulla  est,  147.  Her  ac 
tion  in  the  sinner's  justification,  152.  In  the  Church  alone 
a  just  idea  of  Christ's  institution  can  be  had,  405,  and  de 
velopment  of  living  dogma,  287. 

CLEMENT,  ST.,  OF  ROME.  Affirms  divine  institution  of 
hierarchy,  319. 


410  INDEX 

CLEMENTIS,  Ha.    Sphragis,  217. 

CONFIRMATION.  Efficacy,  in  Holy  Writ,  100.  Alexander  of 
Hales  ascribes  its  origin  to  a  council  held  at  Meaux  in  the 
Ninth  Century,  82.  St.  Bonaventure  places  it  after  death 
of  Apostles,  83.  Morin,  Martene,  Chardon  prove  by  his 
tory  that  it  goes  back  to  Christ,  83-85.  Doctrine  of  Fa 
thers,  323,  ff.  Our  Lord  laid  down  its  essential  principle 
when  He  promised  the  Holy  Ghost,  305,  f.  Null  if  given 
by  heretics,  according  to  Cyprian,  123.  Therefore  the 
Sacrament  not  repeated  though  the  rite  be  repeated,  209- 
213.  Tertullian  on  efficacy  of,  in. 

CONSIGN ATIO,  118.    See  CONFIRMATION. 

CONTRITION  (perfect).  Necessary  before  Baptism  and 
Penance?,  200,  n. 

COUNCILS.  Carthage,  156.  Aries,  156,  n.  Lateran  4th  and 
Lyons  2nd  teach  dogma  of  septenary  number.  Council  of 
Trent  condemns  Protestants,  181.  Method  followed,  182. 
Defines  efficacy  of  sacraments  ex  opere  operate,  93,  ff. 
Defined  the  fact  of  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Seven 
Sacraments,  not  the  manner,  which  is  a  question  left  to 
the  free  investigation  of  theologians,  295,  ff.  Defines  there 
are  seven  sacraments,  256.  Doctrine  defined  at  Trent 
stated  at  the  beginning  of  each  question,  214. 

CYPRIAN,  ST.  See  BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY.  Affirms  Divine 
institution  of  the  hierarchy,  319,  f.  Sphragis,  218,  ff. 

CYRIL,  ST.,  OF  JERUSALEM.  Favors  rebaptism,  128,  f. 
Reconciles  symbolism  of  Eucharist  with  traditional  real 
ism,  8.  Explains  efficacy  of  Baptism,  10,  as  well  as  its 
symbolism,  n.  Requires  blessing  of  water  in  baptism  and 
sanctification  of  oil  in  confirmation  by  reasoning  from 
analogy  with  the  Eucharist,  58.  Blessing  of  baptismal 
waters  necessary  for  efficacy,  55,  f,  no,  122.  Sphragis, 
219,  ff.  His  views  about  symbolism  of  Sacraments,  16. 

DECRETUM  AD  ARMENOS.  Its  nature,  51,  n.  Doctrine  on 
character,  251. 

DEFINITION.  Progressive  development  of  the  definition  of 
sacrament  has  four  stages,  i. 

DEVELOPMENT.  History  of  development  of  Dogma  its  best 
apology,  404.  How  to  proceed  in  that  study,  305,  ff.  Four 
periods  in  the  history  of  the  development  of  Sacra- 
mentary  theology,  396;  first,  from  beginning  to  St.  Augus 
tine,  396-398;  second,  from  St.  Augustine  to  the  Twelfth 


INDEX  411 

Century,  398-400;  third,  up  to  the  Council  of  Trent,  400, 
401 ;  from  Council  of  Trent,  401,  402.  Method :  to  extract 
from  the  Sacramental  practice  of  the  Church  the  dog 
matic  explanations  therein  implied,  402,  207.  Church  by 
her  Sacramental  life  laid  the  foundations  of  the  subse 
quent  speculations,  53,  227,  259,  316,  384.  Less  rapid  in 
Eastern  Churches  than  in  Western,  285,  f.  Dogma  of 
efficacy  preponderating  in  development  of  Sacramentary 
theology  developed  with  logic  in  a  direction  contrary  to 
Protestantism,  96,  182,  f.,  196.  Shows  that  Sacramentary 
dogma  not  human  but  divine,  285,  ff.  Not  due  to  Pagan 
influences,  328,  ff.,  but  conformable  to  the  principles  laid 
down  by  Christ,  331,  ff.  Sets  off  eccentric  character  of 
heresies,  96,  177,  287,  384.  See  PROTESTANTS.  Part  of 
heresies  in  the  development  of  dogma  well  exemplified  in 
the  dogma  of  the  Septenary  number,  283,  f.  Development 
gives  an  integral  knowledge  of  Sacraments,  336;  the  best 
solution  to  problems  concerning  institution,  344.  Ac 
counts  for  late  date  at  which  number  of  Sacraments  was 
fixed,  276,  f.  Development  in  Sacramental  institution  bet 
ter  explained  if  we  admit  that  Christ  instituted  some 
Sacraments  in  an  implicit  state,  300. 

DONATISTS.  Stimulated  progress  on  doctrine  on  sacramental 
efficacy,  129,  ff.  Of  doctrine  that  priest  is  representative 
of  Church  because  of  Christ,  355. 

DROUIN.  Defends  doctrine  of  external  intention,  claims  St. 
Thomas  is  with  him,  379,  382,  n.  Teaches  external  inten 
tion,  366,  n. 

DUCHESNE,  54,  n.,  55,  n.,  91,  106,  117,  n.,  118,  n.,  127, 
n.,  321,  n.,  312,  n.,  324,  n.,  326,  n.,  329,  n. 

DUNS  SCOTUS.  Makes  Sacrament  a  mere  conditio  sine  qua 
non  of  grace,  still  attributes  to  it  an  objective  reality, 
45,  f.  Defends  occasional  causality,  176.  On  character, 
244,  251,  f. 

DURANDUS  OF  ST.  POURQARY.  Favors  "  mental "  inten 
tion,  369,  n.  His  doctrine  on  character,  250,  f.,  not  in  favor, 
253,  except  with  Cartesian  theologians,  254,  yet  not  con 
demned,  255. 

» 

EFFICACY  OF  SACRAMENTS.  Dogma  of  efficacy  generator 
of  Sacramentary  theology,  334,  f.  Divine  institution  clearly 
perceived  when  attention  is  paid  to  marvellous  efficacy 
of  Sacraments,  355.  Not  Pagan  magic  efficacy  attributed 
to  Sacraments,  as  Harnack  claims,  332.  In  Scripture,  96,  ff. 


412  INDEX 

ENCRATISM,  105,  196.  Tertullian,  112.  Hernias,  103.  Barna 
bas  (Pseudo),  104.  Irenaeus,  106.  St.  Stephen,  117-130. 
St.  Augustine,  136,  ff.  Tertullian,  168,  116.  Origin,  116. 
St.  Optatus,  135-137.  Sacraments  of  New  Law  more 
efficacious  than  those  of  the  Old  Law,  151.  The  former 
works  ex  opere  operato,  164,  165.  Independent  from  min 
ister's  sanctity,  135,  158,  161. 

EPICLESIS,  116. 

EUCHARIST  IN  HOLY  WRIT,  191,  f.  Preserves  baptismal 
holiness,  106.  Universal  apostolic  tradition  attributes  to 
Christ  institution  of  Holy  Eucharist,  304.  Principle  of 
resurrection,  107-108. 

EX  OPERE  OPERATO,  EX  OPERE  OPERANTIS.  Origin, 
162.  Meaning,  163,  93,  f. 

FAITH.     Not  necessary  in  minister,  117-130. 

FIRMILIAN.  Shares  views  of  Cyprian  in  Baptismal  Con 
troversy,  123. 

FORGIVENESS  OF  SINS.     Tertullian,  112,  113. 

FORMS.     Deprecative  and  imperative  really  different,  90,  f. 

FRANZELIN.  Gives  to  moral  causality  more  pragmatic  char 
acter,  194-196. 

GREGORY,  ST.,  OF  NYSSA.     On  priestly  consecration,  224,  f. 

GRACE  OF  SACRAMENTS.  Sanctifying,  197.  Sacramental, 
197-199.  First  grace  produced  sometimes  by  sacraments 
of  the  living,  200,  201.  Amount  of  grace,  201. 

GREEK  CHURCH.  Accepts  Seven  Sacraments,  284,  ff.  Con 
demned  Protestants  who  denied  Seven  Sacraments,  286. 
Attempts  made  by  Protestants  to  have  them  on  their  side, 
289-293. 

HERETICAL  BAPTISM.  See  BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY.  Al 
lowing  laity  to  celebrate  sacramental  rites  condemned  as 
heretical  alteration,  354. 

HERMAS.    See  SHEPHERD. 

HIERARCHY.  In  Holy  Writ,  100,  101.  Divine  institution  of 
the  hierarchy  affirmed  on  the  occasion  of  local  difficulties 
relative  to  government  of  churches,  319,  ff.  Hierarchy 
traced  to  the  successive  divisions  of  the  Apostolate 
founded  by  Jesus,  311,  ff. 


INDEX  413 

HISTORICAL  THEOLOGY.  No  opposition  between  history 
and  dogma,  403.  History  disagrees  only  with  certain 
theological  theories,  403,  f.  Constitutive  elements  of  the 
Sacramental  rites,  85,  ff.  Power  over  Sacraments  residing 
in  the  ecclesiastical  hierarchy,  353. 

HYLEMORPHISM.  St.  Thomas,  73-75.  Duns  Scotus  adds 
the  proximate  matter,  75.  Brought  about  the  setting  forth 
of  the  conditions  of  a  valid  administration  of  the  Sacra 
ments,  78.  The  introduction  of  more  indicative  forms, 
79,  80. 

IGNATIUS,  ST.    Develops  symbolism  of  the  Eucharist,  4. 

INNOCENT  III,  161.  On  validity  of  Baptism  of  those  who 
simply  do  not  reveal  their  unwillingness  to  be  baptized, 
382.  His  teaching  on  character,  242,  f.  Addresses  pro 
fession  of  faith  to  be  subscribed  by  Waldenses,  284. 

INNOCENT  IV.  His  famous  text  about  power  of  Church  to 
determine  rites  of  Sacraments,  89. 

INSTITUTION.  Divergencies  of  views  as  to  manner  of  institu 
tion  of  Sacraments,  336,  ff.  Immediate  institution  regarded 
almost  as  de  fide  at  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Trent, 
342,  f.  Historical  studies  obliged  theologians  to  modify 
some  theories,  343.  Controversy  as  to  the  immediate  or 
mediate  institution  of  the  Sacraments,  296.  Mediate  is 
to  be  rejected  on  historical  grounds,  298,  f.  Immediate  in 
specie  for  Baptism  and  Eucharist  to  be  held.  Imme 
diate  in  genere  for  the  others  not  satisfactory,  300.  Im 
plicit  institution  seems  better,  300,  f.  Distinct  from  deter 
mination  of  matter  and  form,  87.  Christ  may  have  left 
to  His  Church  to  determine  matter  and  form,  says  Morin, 
88,  ff. 

INTENTION.  Formula  intentio  faciendi  quod  facit  Ecclesia 
originated  by  William  of  Auxerre,  376,  n.  Sole  condition 
for  the  validity,  346.  A  necessity,  348.  Must  intend  to 
do  what  the  Church  does,  348,  f.  Founded  on  the  fact 
that  minister  is  representative  of  Christ,  350.  This  is 
the  attitude  of  the  Apostles,  351,  f.  The  formula  is  due  to 
Medieval  writers,  355.  Doctrine  of  the  intention  still  in 
embryonic  state  in  St.  Augustine's  time,  363.  Not  re 
quired  according  to  Roland  Bandinelli,  372.  Required  by 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor  and  Peter  Lombard,  372,  ff.  In  spite 
of  the  difficulty  of  knowing  that  the  presence  of  inten 
tion  is  required,  374,  377,  388.  Reasons  why  interior  in 
tention  is  required,  389.  Objections  answered,  390.  In- 


4i4  INDEX 

tention    actual,    virtual,    habitual,    392,    f.    Two   kinds    of 

intentions,  386,  ff. 

IRENyEUS,  ST.     Eucharist  principle  of  resurrection,  107. 
ISIDORE,    ST.     Gives    exaggerated    importance    to    etymology, 

thereby  depriving  of  precision  the  definition  of  Sacrament, 

36.     In  his  days  a  complete  list  of  Sacraments  could  not 

be  wrought  out,  263. 

JUSTIN,  ST.  Attests  Divine  origin  of  Baptism  and  Eucharist, 
3i6,  f. 

LAPSI,   114,  US.      LEX  ORANDI,  LEX  CREDENDI.      See  DEVELOPMENT. 

LUKARIS  (Cyril).  Upholds  Calvinistic  confession  on  Sacra 
ments,  290,  f.  Anathematised,  291.  His  error  occasion  of 
serious  work  by  Greek  theologians,  292. 

MATRIMONY.  Not  easy  to  liken  to  a  physical  compound, 
77,  f.  Hylemorphism  prompted  Melchior  Cano  to  distinguish 
matrimonial  contract  from  the  Sacrament,  80,  ff.  Its  char 
acter  of  holy  symbol  affirmed  by  Fathers,  321,  ff.  St.  Au 
gustine,  symbol  of  holiness,  not  cause  of  grace,  154. 
Character  of  holiness  which  Jesus  gave  to  Marriage  is  the 
principle  of  the  Sacrament,  314,  ff. 

MONTANISTS,  114,  115.  Tried  to  make  power  over  Sacra 
ments  the  prerogative  of  spiritual  men,  354. 

MORIN.  After  historical  researches  concludes  that  Christ  left 
to  His  Church  to  determine  matter  and  form  of  Sacra 
ments,  88,  ff.  His  view  abandoned  in  the  Nineteenth  Cen 
tury  revived  of  late,  91.  His  opinions  about  reordinations, 
238. 

NEWMAN.  Present  work  based  on  his  theory  of  develop 
ment,  300,  344.  How  to  proceed  in  study  of  development 
of  dogma  according  to  him,  305. 

NOVATIANS,  115. 

OBEX.     St.  Augustine,  145. 

OPTATUS,    ST.    Against   Donatism  defends  objective   efficacy 

of  the  Sacraments,  134,  ff. 
ORDERS.     Some   inferior   orders    mentioned    in    251    by    Pope 

Cornelius,  321. 
ORDINATIONS.     See    HIERARCHY.     Cases    of    ordinations    by 

violence,  356,  ff. 
ORIGEN.    Applies  symbolism  to  Baptism  and  Eucharist,  6,  f. 


INDEX  415 

PAUL,  ST.  Describes  Baptism  and  Eucharist  as  symbolical  of 
the  effect  it  produces,  2,  f. 

PENANCE.  Divine  origin  of  power  of  forgiving  post-bap 
tismal  sins  brought  to  light  by  letter  of  Callistus,  the 
reconciliation  of  the  lapsi,  the  Novatian  crisis,  317,  f.  Im 
plicitly  instituted  by  Christ  when  He  gave  His  Church  a 
boundless  power  of  forgiving  sins,  306,  ff.  St.  Thomas  con 
tributes  accurate  explanations  to  the  composition  of  the 
Sacrament  of  Penance,  76.  Duns  Scotus  does  not  accept 
his  view,  77.  Vague  teaching  about  efficacy  of  absolution 
in  Augustine  and  early  Middle  Ages,  152,  f. 

PETER  OF  POITIERS.  Originates  distinction  between  opus 
operans  and  opus  operatum,  162. 

PETER  DAMIAN,  ST.  Defends  St.  Augustine's  doctrine,  159. 
Reckons  twelve  Sacraments  and  considers  his  list  incom 
plete,  266,  f. 

PETER  LOMBARD.  His  definition  of  Sacrament  as  sign  and 
cause  of  grace  is  classical,  42,  ff.  His  teaching  on  com 
position  of  Sacraments :  res  et  verba,  62-68.  His  part  in 
the  development  of  the  dogma  of  the  Septenary  number, 
272,  ff. 

PRIESTHOOD.  Chrysostom  gives  expression  to  exponent  of 
Christian  priesthood  as  representative  of  Christ,  354. 

POWER.  Over  Sacraments  residing  in  the  ecclesiastical  hier 
archy,  353.  Not  in  spiritual  men,  354. 

PROTESTANTS.  Harnack  and  others  contend  that  develop 
ment  in  Sacramental  rites  is  due  to  Pagna  Hellenic  reli 
gions,  328.  Do  not  admit  legitimacy  of  development  of 
dogma,  207,  404.  Protestantism  was  vast  protestation 
against  the  dogmatic  progress  of  the  Middle  Ages,  286. 
Taught  that  efficacy  of  Sacrament  must  be  ascribed  to  the 
faith  of  the  recipient,  95.  Priest's  ministerial  act  has  no 
share  in  the  production  of  Sacramental  effects,  347.  Their 
Sacramental  system  conditioned  by  their  doctrine  of  Jus 
tification,  177,  178.  Sacraments  mere  tokens  and  exhorta 
tions,  178;  neither  efficacious  by  themselves  nor  neces 
sary,  179;  condemned  at  Trent  (1547),  181.  Try  to  base 
their  theory  on  text  of  St.  Augustine,  62,  f.  Denied  char 
acter  because  unscriptural,  206.  Object  to  septenary  num 
ber  because  not  found  in  Holy  Writ,  287,  ff. 

REBAPTISM.     See  BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY. 
RECONCILIATION.     Of  heretics,  118,  123,  210,  ff. 


416  INDEX 

REORDINATIONS.  In  early  Middle  Ages  used  as  a  weapon, 
157,  235.  Accounted  for  by  imperfect  state  of  Sacra 
mental  doctrine  in  early  ages,  213,  ff. 

RESERVED  SINS,  114. 

REVIVISCENCE  OF  SINS.     St.  Augustine,  146. 

REVIVISCENTIA  GRATIAE.  St.  Augustine,  146.  Explained 
by  system  of  dispositive  causality,  173.  Unexplained  by 
system  of  physical  causality,  190,  191.  Maintained  by 
Suarez,  202. 

SCRIPTURE.  Alone  could  not  demonstrate  institution  of  all 
the  Sacraments,  304. 

SEPTENARY  NUMBER.  No  list  of  Sacraments  until  the 
Twelfth  Century,  258,  ff.  Because  it  could  not  be  deter 
mined  before  the  definition  of  what  a  Sacrament  is  was 
laid  down,  257.  A  list  of  three  Sacraments  in  the  Patris 
tic  Period,  261.  But  absence  of  a  list  is  no  objection  to 
the  existence  of  Sacramental  realities,  262.  Was  not  in 
vented  by  Peter  Lombard,  who  merely  formulated  the  data 
of  Tradition,  275.  Development  of  dogma,  not  the  dis- 
clplina  arcani  accounts  for  silence  of  Fathers  and  late  date 
at  which  number  of  Sacraments  was  fixed,  276.  Fitness 
of  Seven  Sacraments  shown  by  Schoolmen,  277-288. 

SHEPHERD.     Efficacy  of  Baptism,  103.     Sphragis,  217. 

SPHRAGIS.  Apostolic  origin,  215,  f.,  in  Fathers,  217,  ff.  Dis 
tinction  between  sphragis  of  Baptism  and  that  of  Confirma 
tion  in  the  Fourth  Century,  223.  Still  no  clear  dis 
tinction  between  grace  and  sphragis,  223,  f.  Little  about 
priestly  character  in  Greek  Fathers,  except  in  St.  Gregory 
of  Nyssa,  224,  f. 

STEPHEN,  POPE  ST.    See  BAPTISMAL  CONTROVERSY. 

SUAREZ.  Upholds  physical  causality,  185,  ff.  Defines  Sacra 
ment:  Signum  sensibile  ad  sanctitatem  conferendam,  48. 
Distinguishes  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Law  from  those  of 
the  New  Law,  49,  f. 

SUBJECT.  Influence  of  his  dispositions  on  the  efficacy  of  the 
Sacrament,  St.  Augustine,  142,  ff. 

SYMBOLISM.  Emphasized  by  Origen,  6,  7.  Minimized  by 
Basil,  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  St.  John  Chrysostom ; 
duly  asserted  by  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  8. 

TERTULLIAN.  Baptism  by  heretics  is  null,  119.  Sphragis, 
218.  Efficacy  of  Sacraments  for  sanctification,  108;  of 


INDEX  417 

Baptism,  109-112.  His  De  Paenitentia  describes  penance 
required  for  Baptism,  in.  His  penitential  doctrine,  112. 
Forgiveness  of  sins,  112,  113.  Sees  in  the  Sacraments  al 
most  material  causes,  13,  f.  Does  not  seem  to  realize  sac 
ramental  symbolism  of  the  Eucharist,  15,  f. 

TIXERONT,  15,  n.,  16,  n.,  104,  n.,  112,  n.,  114,  n.,  117,  n.,  128,  n. 

TRADITORES.    Validity  of  ordinations  performed  by,  130,  ff. 

THOMAS,  ST.  Defends  the  opinion  requiring  only  external 
intention,  378,  f.,  and  improves  Peter  Lombard's  definition 
of  Sacrament,  45.  Contributes  accurate  explanations  to 
the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  66.  Explains  manner  of  in 
stitution  as  immediate,  340,  ff.  Shows  fitness  of  the  Sacra 
ments  from  analogy  between  man's  natural  and  super 
natural  life,  282,  ff.  Defends  successively  dispositive,  174, 
and  efficient  instrumental  causality,  175,  176.  His  doctrine 
on  character,  247,  ff. 

VASQUEZ.     Defends  moral  causality,  184. 

VICTOR,   ST.,   SCHOOL  OF.     Their  definition  of  Sacrament, 

37,  ff.     Inaccuracy  in  theory  of  imposition  of  Sacraments, 

67- 

WALDENSES,  284. 

WILLIAM  OF  AUXERRE.  Originates  formula:  "  Intentio 
facicndi  quod  facit  Ecclesia,  376,  n. 


:— xy£~ 


trt-****' 
/— 


PCURRAT,  Pierre. 

Ideology  of  the  sacraments.     1236 

.P64