THE COUNCIL OF TRENT ON THE SACRAMENTS

IntroductionResponding to the need for Reformation in the

Church, whose urgency was also intensified especiallyin the sixteenth century by the protestantReformation, the courageous Pope Paul III convoked anEcumenical Council which opened on the 13th December,1545 in the Italian city of Trent. Such a Councilwhich was to have been convoked earlier and notthirty years after Luther’s initial confrontationwith the Roman Church in 1517,1 was not a very easyone for the Church: there was a general spiritual andpastoral weakness on the part of the prelates of theChurch; appalling laissez faire attitude, poorattendance and representation of the episcopate ofsome nations, the selfish interests of politicalinterferences, divisions and other social andecclesiastical situations.2 In spite of these, certainvigour and determination on the part of some bishopsand theological experts present could be said to be aconfirmation of the working of the Holy Spirit whosepresence the Council always acknowledged each time itwas to state its teachings, decrees and canons.

The Council worked hard to re-examine theChristian faith and religion, to eliminate heresies,effect the restoration of peace and unity in theChurch, for the reform of the Clergy and the entireChristian people etc. It must be observed that thecircumstances in which Christianity found itself atthis point in history, so influenced the nature ofthe activity of the Council which, for the main part

1 N.P. Tanner, The Councils of the Church: A Short History, The Crossroad, New York, p.772 Giuseppe Alberigo (ed.), Storia dei concili ecumenici, Queriniana, Brescia, 1990,pp. 337 -338

1

focused on responding to the protestants3 orreformers. As a result of this, one would not expectto get from the Council a well-elaborated orsystematic rendering of the doctrines of the Church.

The Council of Trent covered a long period oftime: the first period which included sessions 1-10lasted from 1545-1548; the second period during whichwere held sessions 11-16 lasted from 1551-1552; andthe third period comprising sessions 17-25 from 1562-1563. To put it briefly, in the first period, theCouncil deliberated on matters of dogma,clarification of catholic traditional teachings onthe scripture, original sin, justification and on thesacraments. In the second period, decrees were madeon reforms and definitive teachings given on thesacraments, in most part the Eucharist, penance andlast anointing. In the third and last part, theCouncil completed its teachings on the sacraments andexplained other issues appertaining to faith andreform.4 As we can see, the Council focused more onthe doctrinal and institutional crisis that werewrecking grave havoc on the entire Church. ThisCouncil made so many decrees in answer to Luther’spositions and contrary to his denials, such decreestill date serve as a kind of demarcating line betweena classical Catholic teaching and protestantteaching. Not only the Scripture – sola scriptura – butalso Tradition, is important for determining thefaith of the Church. On the issue of justification,which was the focal point of Luther’s anti-Catholicdispute, the Council taught that man is not a beingcompletely corrupt by original sin: salvation is notonly by faith – sola fides – but also by hope and charityexpressed through good works. The sacraments have3 Giuseppe Alberigo (ed.), op. cit, p. 3464 Cf., N.P. Norman (ed), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume Two: Trent to Vatican II, Sheed & Ward and Georgetown University Press, 1990, pp. 657-658

2

divine origin and they are seven in number. As wesaid above, the Council addressed itself moreespecially on doctrinal matters, and at the centre ofthese were teachings on the sacraments. In fact,other important matters considered upon withresulting decrees have to do directly or indirectlywith the sacraments. They include the dogmas on thehierarchical nature of the Church, the priesthood asa divine institution, the change of the bread andwine to the body and blood of Christ astransubstantiation and the sacrificial character ofthe Mass.5

The Protestant Reformers’ Positions on the SacramentsHubert Jedin6 makes us understand that one of

those that played very important roles on theCouncil’s deliberation and decrees on the sacramentswas Cardinal Cervini. He was, with the help ofothers, able to extract from the writings ofreformers up to thirty-five positions that contrastedwith the traditional catholic teaching on thesacraments. Most of these errors were extracted fromLuther’s works and writings such as his book Decaptivitate babylonica and his Disputationis. There were alsoother sources such as the Confessio Augustana,Melanchthon’s Loci communes, from a reform tract,“Cologne Reformation” composed by Bruce and Hermanvon Wied, the Archbishop of Cologne, from Erasmus andprobably from the doctrines of the Anabaptists.

Luther could no longer accept the concept of thesacraments as elaborated by the scholastics. He putinto question the septenary number of the sacraments.According to him, sacrament was any sign instituted5 Cf. T. Bokenkotta, A Concise History of the Catholic Church, Image Books Doubleday, New York, 2004, p. 2426 Cf. H. Jedin, A History of the Council of Trent volume 2: The First Sessions at Trent 1545 - 47,Thomas Nelson and Sons, London, 1961, pp. 370 - 371

3

by God containing a promise of grace, which becomesefficacious in the recipient only by the virtue ofhis faith in the promise. The promise of grace whichbecomes effective in the recipient is the forgivenessof sin and reconciliation with God. The sacraments inLuther’s understanding are dependent for its efficacyon the faith of the one who believes, and has noobjective validity deriving from the celebration ofrites. Here, however, Luther, was not only arguingfor the necessity of faith for the efficacy of thesacrament, he was, as a matter of logicalconsequence, trying to give justify thesacramentality of the Scripture; he was trying toplace the word at the same level with sacrament oreven intending to replace the sacraments with theword of God contained in the Scripture. For him, whenone accepts the word of God in faith, has receivedthe only saving sacrament.7

Luther denied the validity of the rest of thesacraments with the exception of baptism and theLord’s Supper. Luther upheld the necessity of thesetwo as obedience to the word of God in the Bible. Forhim these are the only two sacraments which the LordJesus commanded us to receive.

Other protestant reformers more or less sharedLuther’s positions on the sacraments even if they didall not view them exactly the same way. The space ofour work here does not allow us to go into suchdetails. With the much we have said above, we can nowunderstand how actually the Council of Trent was moreof a response of the Catholic faith to the issuesraised by the reformers.

Teachings and Decrees of the Council on Sacraments inGeneral7 Cf. Ibid., p. 372

4

The teaching of the Council of Trent on thesacraments in general is a continuation and a form ofcompletion of her doctrine of salvation regardingjustification. In the introductory part of the Firstdecree on the Sacraments, the Council states thatsacraments are means through which “all true justnesseither begins, or once received gains strength, or iflost is restored.” – de sanctissimis ecclesiae sacramentis agere,per quae omnis vera iustitia vel incipit, vel coepta augetur, vel amissareparatur (First decree [On the sacraments],Session 7, 3 March1547).8 In the same session thirteen cannons werepublished anathematising those who held any opinioncontrary to the following teachings which we shallbriefly mention below:

The sacraments of the new law were all institutedby the Lord Jesus Christ, and they are not more orfewer than seven, namely baptismum, confirmationem,eucharistiam, poenitentiam, extremam unctionem, ordinem etmatrimonium. These seven sacraments of the new lawdiffer not only externally, but also essentially,from the sacraments of the old law. The sevensacraments are not all of equal importance anddignity. The sacraments of the new law are necessaryfor salvation, as justification is obtained not onlyby faith but also through the sacraments or at leastthe desire to receive them. This notwithstanding, notall of the seven sacraments are necessary for everysingular individual. Perhaps to make clearer thesacramental mediation between faith andjustification, the Council Fathers also insisted thatthe sacraments are not there just for the merenourishment of faith. (Canon 1-5)

Importantly, the sacraments of the new law arenot a mere signs, they also contain the grace they

8 Cf., N.P. Norman (ed), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume Two: Trent to Vatican II, Sheed & Ward and Georgetown University Press, 1990, p. 684

5

signify. Such definitions of sacraments as – “onlyexternal signs of grace or justice received byfaith”, or as a “mark of the Christian profession bywhich believers are distinguished from unbelievers inthe eyes of the people” – do not exhaust theirmeaning. Grace truly depends on God, but this doesnot authorise anybody to teach that sacraments doesnot confer grace at all times to those whoappropriately receive them. (Cano 6-8).

Of the seven sacraments, three of them, namely,baptism, confirmation and order, imprint a characterin the soul, that is, a spiritual and indelible mark,as a result of which they can only be received once.In the Church the power to exercise the ministry ofthe word and the sacraments is not given toeverybody. And any minister of the sacraments, inorder that may validly celebrate them, must at leasthave the intention of doing what the Church does.Furthermore, having this intention, the validity ofthe sacraments does not depend on the worthiness ofthe minister. Sacraments are in themselves valid exopera operato, and not as the protestants held,dependent on the faith of the one who receives them.9

Finally the rites received and approved by theCatholic Church for the administration of thesacraments have to be followed and never neglected,omitted or changed to suit one’s whims and caprice.(Canon 9-13)

The Sacrament of BaptismThe teachings of the Council of Trent on baptism

starts from its teachings on original sin (session 5,17 June 1546).10 The Council decreed that anyoneshould be anathematised, who does not acknowledge9 Giuseppe Alberigo (ed.), op. cit., p. 35910 Cf.N.P. Norman (ed), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume Two, op.cit, pp. 665-667

6

that the first man, Adam, disobeyed God and soincurred for himself and for the future generation ofmankind the wrath of death both of the body and ofthe soul. The death of the soul is sin, which iswashed away by the merit of the Lord Jesus Christ,our Mediator. And this merit is applied to bothadults and infants through the sacrament of baptism.All forms of teaching against infant baptism weretherefore condemned. Baptism remits the guilt oforiginal sin through the grace of Christ, but doesnot eradicate concupiscence or the inclination tosin.

Following immediately the canons on thesacraments in general, are also fourteen canons onthe sacrament of baptism made at the same 7th

session11. Here again, in the form of anathemas, theCouncil underlines Catholic doctrines on baptismagainst the contrary opinions of some heretics andreformers:

Baptism is not an optional sacrament as it isnecessary for salvation. There is also recognised theessential difference between the baptism of Christand that of John. True and natural water is necessaryfor baptism, and in this regard nothing of the wordsof Christ should be metaphorically interpreted. Thevalidity and the effect of baptism remain true evenwhen it is administered by heretics, suffices thatthey have the intention of doing what the Churchdoes.

Those who receive the grace of baptism have theirsins cleansed, but can still lose the saving gracethrough sin notwithstanding the strength of theirbelief. And the gift of Christian faith mustnecessarily lead the baptised to obey the laws ofChrist and of the Church. Those who make baptismal11 Cf. Ibid., pp. 685-686

7

promises are not less obliged to make and keep someother promises not contrary to the faith afterbaptism. Remembrance of one’s baptism and of itsfaith does not work the forgiveness of sin committedafter baptism nor does it reduce a mortal sin to avenial sin.

Baptism is one of those three sacraments thatlive a perpetual character in the one who hasreceived them, and so even if one should renounce hisfaith and reject Christ after baptism, whenever onedecides to turn back, one does not have to be re-baptised. Baptism can be administered at any age, andnot, as some people held, at the age at which Christwas baptised, or at the point of death. This alsoextends to the question of infant baptism: though notbeing able to make an act of faith, little childrenreceive baptism on the faith of the Church and arelegitimately numbered among the faithful; and suchbaptism is valid like any other baptism and neverrepeated when they attain discretion. Again suchbaptism received by children are not subject to theirconfirmation when they grow up. Effort should ratherbe made to make them live up to the Christian statusreceived during baptism.

The Sacrament of ConfirmationThree canons on the sacrament of confirmation

follow immediately the canons on baptism. They areexpressed against any such opinion that portraysConfirmation as a mere ceremony and not a true andproper sacrament; or that it is a mere publicconfession of faith. Confirmation has its ownparticular effect on the soul, and its ordinaryminister is a bishop and not just any priest.12

12 Cf. Ibid., p. 686

8

The Sacrament of the EucharistThe sacrament of the Eucharist was about the most

considered of all others. It is interesting to notethat this sacrament received such great attentioneven when it is one of the two sacraments recognisedby the protestant Reformers. Reason for it has beengiven that both among the Catholics and theProtestant Reformers, there were a lot of disputessurrounding this sacrament. Therefore the Council ina carefully articulated theology showed the beautytherein contained, underlining the devotion withwhich this Most Holy Sacrament has to be approached.13

This time around it is not only anathemas but firstof all a Decree composed of eight chapters whichoutlined the belief and teaching of the Church,received from Jesus Christ through the apostles andthrough the centuries handed on as true anduncontaminated.14

The first chapter is on the real presence of ourLord Jesus Christ in this sacrament. It underlinesthat “after the consecration of the bread and thewine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man,is truly, really and substantially contained in thepropitious sacrament of the holy eucharist under theappearance of those things which are perceptible tothe senses.” This sacrament was instituted by ourLord at his last supper with his apostles as isrecorded by the evangelists and St. Paul.

The Second chapter gives reason for theinstitution of this sacrament by which the LordJesus showers upon humanity the riches of his divinelove. This sacrament is the lasting memorial of hisdeath, a spiritual food for the soul, a preservationand healing from sins and a pledge for the glory that13 Cf., N.P. Tanner, The Councils of the Church: A Short History, The Crossroad, New York, p. 8214 Cf., N.P. Norman (ed), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume Two, op.cit., p. 693

9

is to come. It is also a sign of his body the Churchintended by him to live in the unity of faith hopeand love.

The sacrament of the Eucharist is also called theMost Blessed Sacrament because of its excellence overother sacraments. And this is the content of thethird chapter. Together with the rest of thesacraments, the Eucharist is rei sacrae et invisibilis gratiaeformam visibilem,15but while all other sacraments confersanctifying grace at the moment of their reception,the Eucharist has the excelling and unique qualityof having in it the Author of holiness before theiruse. In the Eucharist is fully present, in each ofthe forms, in any piece or part of each of thespecies, both the humanity and the divinity of JesusChrist.

On transubstantiation, the Council held that theChurch has always been most convinced that theconsecration of the bread and wine effects a changeof the whole substance of bread into the body ofChrist and the whole substance of wine into the bloodof Christ. This complete substantial change is whatthe Catholic Church calls “transubstantiation”. Thisage-long belief is founded on the words of the Lordat the Last Supper, in which the Lord said he wasoffering his own body in the form of bread and hisown blood in the form of wine.16

Consequent upon the Church’s conviction expressedabove, that is, if in that substance which the eyeperceives as bread is truly the body of the Lord, andin that which the sense perceives to be wine is trulythe blood of Christ, then very fitting is the customof the Church of revering this sacrament and offeringit the same cult due to God. If the argument against

15 Cf. Ibid., p. 69416 Cf., Ibid.,p. 695

10

its adoration is that the Lord gave it to beconsumed, stronger still is the argument that weadore it because we hold as true the words of theLord during the institution, by which we believe thathe is contained therein the same Jesus adored by themagi and the apostles. The Council also reaffirmedthe nobility of the custom of a yearly Eucharisticprocession whereby a more profound, public and solemnveneration of the Most Blessed Sacrament is held.

At the sixth chapter of the Decree, the Council,as a consequence of what has been said above,recalled and upheld the ancient custom, as old as theCouncil of Nicaea, of reverently reserving theEucharist, and with it the practice of taking holycommunion to the sick.

The Council recognising the excelling uniquenessof this sacrament compared to the rest, taught thatif for all other sacred functions, specialpreparation is required before their celebration, allthe more is it necessary before the celebration andor the reception of the Eucharist. Therefore, inorder to reverently participate in the Eucharist,nobody in a state of mortal sin should participate,even if one has contritely repented of such, withouthaving first made a sacramental confession. Thisrule, insisted the Council, is applicable not only toall Christians but even to priests who may have theobligation to celebrate mass. Priests who have noconfessor available can celebrate mass when there isan urgent need only on the condition that theyconfess as soon as possible.17

There is tripartite distinction of receivers saidby the Council to have been received from thetradition of the fathers: those who receive it onlysacramentally (sinners), those who receive it17 Cf. Ibid.,cp. 696

11

spiritually (through authentic desire) and those whoreceive both sacramentally and spiritually. Thecustom, which is of apostolic origin, of thereception of the sacrament by the laity administeredby the priests and by the priests administered byfellow priests has to be retained. The CouncilFathers then beautifully concluded this decreecalling on all Christians to reverently andgratefully approach this sacrament as a sign ofunity, bond of love, symbol of harmony, a lifesupporting bread, the bread of angels which is eatenby us pilgrims beneath such sacred veils.

Following the above Decree are eleven canons18

which expose certain errors and anathematiseheresies; that is, against such opinions thatcontradict the true, real, substantial and permanentpresence of the body, blood, soul and divinity of theLord Jesus Christ in the Eucharist; against thetheory of consubstantiation; against the opinion thattends to teach that the whole Christ (totum Christum) isnot contained “under each form, and under each partof each form when it is divided”; against those whosay that forgiveness of sin is principally obtainedfrom the Eucharist, and outside that, no othereffects; against those who opine against thetraditional custom of receiving the Eucharist, fromthe time one attains discretion, at least once everyyear. The rest of the content of these canons havebeen mentioned in the Decree treated above.

Again, further teaching on Eucharist were alsohad in the 21st session of 16 July 1562. It statedthat the laity and non-consecrating clergy are notunder any divine command to receive the Eucharistunder both species. This teaching was supported byserious of scriptural quotations which make them18 Cf. Ibid., pp. 697-698

12

clear that he who eats one kind also eats the samething with he who eats both kinds. Christ is receivedwhole and entire under either kind.19

Finally, the Council stated that children whohave not attained the age of discernment have noobligation to receive this sacrament.

The holy Sacrifice of the MassIn other that the priesthood of Christ not be

eliminated by death, in order that the bloodysacrifice of the Lord Jesus on the cross berepresented, its memory continuously recalled and itssaving power ever be applied for the forgiveness ofour sins, the Lord on the night before he wasbetrayed, offered his body and blood to God theFather under the forms of bread and wine and handedthem to the apostles commanding them to offer thesame sacrifice in his remembrance. The Church hasalways believed and taught that that was theinstitution of the Eucharist as well as theinstitution of the priesthood of the new covenant inthe order of Melchisedech, to perpetuate in abloodless manner, the bloody sacrifice of the Cross.This is done in the Mass, a truly propitiatorysacrifice, in which participating with sincerehearts, profound faith and reverence, the faithfulreceive grace and mercy from God. It is offered notonly for the benefits of the living, but also for thedead who have not attained full redemption.

According to the custom of the Church, masses canbe offered in honour and memory of the saints, but itis only offered to God and not to them. Thissacrifice is the holiest of all things in the Church,and has to be done and approached with great19 Cf. Ibid., p 727

13

reverence respecting the established rites. Faithfulpresent during the celebration of this sacrament areinvited to make not only a spiritual but asacramental communion. However those who cannotcommunicate sacramentally also receive the spiritualbenefits of the mass even if not as fully as he whohas made a sacramental and spiritual communion.

Reason is given for which priests should mixwater with the wine to be offered in the chalice:tradition believes that Christ did the same; itsymbolises that water that gushed forth together withthe blood for the Lord’s side; and it is a sign ofthe union of Christ the Head with his faithful. Thethought of the fathers that it may not be decoroususing vernacular to celebrate was also expressed.

There are other canons and decrees20 made andpublished in this regard, but the space of our workdoes not allow us to go into them.

The Sacrament of PenanceAnother sacrament extensively treated by the

Council of Trent is the sacrament of penance for theobvious reason of its close connection with thesubject of justification. At the 14th session, on 25th

November 1551, the Council published in nine chaptersthe following doctrines on this sacrament:

The first and second chapters give a basicjustification for the institution of sacrament,distinguishing it at the same from the sacrament ofbaptism. God’s infinite mercy keeps succouring humanweakness: baptism does not destroy our inclination tosin, Christians still commit sin even after they havebeen baptised; this sacrament is God’s loving way ofever providing remedy for this situation. The gracethat comes to the sinner’s succour in this sacrament20 Cf. Ibid., pp. 735-737

14

derives from the merits of the Lord’s passion.Penance, notes the Council, became a sacrament onlyafter the Resurrection, when the Lord breathing onhis disciples gave them the Holy Spirit and the powerto forgive and or retain sins (Jn 20: 22-23). TheChurch has always understood these acts and wordsliterally to be the origin of the power of theapostles to forgive sin, a power which theytransmitted to their successors. Apart from thedifference in the matter and form of the twosacraments, penance is also different from baptismfor its need of the figure of a judge. Again inbaptism we put on Christ and become new creatures,our sins fully remitted, but penance is a kind oflaborious baptism as it requires great weeping and workon our own part.

The effectiveness of this sacrament chiefly liesin the words of the minister: Ego te absolve...; and thesewords constitute its form. As for the matter, theCouncil includes: contrition, confession andsatisfaction; these are required for the integrity ofthe sacrament and for full and complete forgivenessof sins. The fruit is reconciliation with God, andthis gives meaning to it. Inadmissible, according toTrent, is the opinion that fear and affliction ofconscience and faith are constituent parts of thissacrament.21

Contrition, the Council teaches, is the firstamong the other acts of the penitent. It is “a griefand detestation of the mind at the sin committed,together with the resolution not to sin in thefuture.”22 Contrition is necessary for obtainingpardon; and these include not only dissociate oneselffrom sin and resolve to start a new life, but also

21 Cf. Ibid.,pp. 704-70522 Cf. Ibid., p. 705

15

hatred for sin. When contrition is done with perfectlove, remission of sin is obtained even before thesacramental confession, but an aspect of contritionwhich brings about reconciliation with God is adesire for sacramental confession. Imperfectcontrition (attrition) cannot of itself, without thesacrament of penance lead the sinner tojustification, disposes him to beg and obtain pardonthrough the sacrament of baptism. Though it isconceived not out of the love of God, but out ofconsideration of the baseness of sin or out of thefear of going to hell, it is still a sign of theimpulse of the Holy Spirit moving the sinner torepentance.

Confession is necessary, according to divine law,for all who have fallen after their baptism. Priestsstand for Christ as overseers and judges. All mortalsins of which the faithful is aware of havingcommitted after baptism have to be related in theconfession, no matter how private they are. In fact,deciding not to confess a particular mortal sinrenders the whole confession ineffective. Todetermine this more clearly, the Council teaches thatthe circumstances of sin should also be explained inconfessions as a way of completely revealing sins onthe part of the penitent. Though venial sins may berelated in confession – devout persons do so – thereare many other ways of remedying them outsidesacramental confession.

Priests and bishops are the ministers of thissacrament. The opinion that the words of Christempowering the disciples to administer this sacrament(cf Mt 18:18; Jn 20:24) is directed to allChristians, is not acceptable. Priests receive thispower through the Holy Spirit conferred to themduring ordination, and they retain the power and

16

validly exercise it even when they are in mortal sin.However, considering the juridical aspect of thissacrament, such an absolution pronounced on a personnot subject to a priest’s ordinary or delegatedjurisdiction, is to be considered, in line with theusual custom of the Church, invalid. Some other moreheinous sins, such as those that attract the penaltyof excommunication, are absolved not by priests ofwhatever rank, but are reserved to priests of highestrank, such as the Pope and bishops. In danger ofdeath, however, every priest validly absolves allclasses of sin.

After confession, the priests shall prudentlysuggest some salutary penance for the penitent,according to the gravity of his sin and his ability.The Council emphasised that from the experiences ofGod recorded in the scriptures, God wills that oursins are not forgiven without satisfaction on our ownpart. This is an act of clemency on our own part, forwithout this we run the risk of neglecting theimplications of sin. Making satisfaction for sin isalso a way of imitating Christ who offered thesupreme satisfaction for sins. Satisfaction is, infact, not ours but is made in Christ with whom allthings are possible. Satisfaction aims not only atprotecting the new life and remedying weakness, it isalso an atonement for past sins. Satisfaction howevergoes beyond penances imposed by the judgment of thepriest and those voluntarily assumed for reparationof sins; it involves also patiently bearing thecrosses that God wills to send us in our lifetime.23

After the Council’s teaching on the sacrament oflast anointing, there follows in 15 canons a litanyof anathemas against all sorts of anti-Catholicdoctrines on the sacrament reconciliation.23 Cf. Ibid., p. 709

17

The Sacrament of Extreme UnctionThe teaching on the Sacrament of last anointing

is attached to and is a continuation of teachingabove on the sacrament of penance. The Council in theintroductory paragraph notes that the fathers of theChurch have always considered this sacrament not onlyas the final complement of penance but also of the whole Christianlife, which ought to be an ever continuing penance.24 Veryinteresting is the Council’s teaching on theinstitution of this sacrament.

Our most merciful Redeemer wished provision to be madefor his servants of salutary remedies against all enemiesfor every occasion in life. Just as he has prepared byother sacraments very important supports by whichChristians may be able to keep themselves safe from allthe more serious spiritual disquiets during theirlifetime, so likewise by the sacraments of last anointinghe has guarded the end of life by a very strong defence.For though our adversary seeks and seizes opportunitiesthrough the whole of life ... there is no time at whichhe draws more strongly ... to destroy us utterly ... thanwhen he sees that our departure from life is at hand.The Council held that the anointing of the sick

was instituted as a true and proper sacrament by theLord Jesus as suggested in Mark (cf. Mk 6:13) andannounced and recommended by James (cf 5:14-15). Theminister, the recipient, the effect, form and matterof this sacrament are learnt from the same words withwhich James announces and recommends it. The matterof this sacrament is the oil blessed by the bishopand the form is the words: per istam unctionem etc. Theeffect is the grace of the Holy Spirit which forgivessins and gives comfort and strength to the soul, and,God willing, recovery of bodily health. The ministeris bishop and priest. This sacrament is applied notto any type of sick person but to those whose24 Cf. Ibid.,p. 710

18

sickness may involve the risk of death, though it maybe repeated should they recover and still incuranother similar risk.

After the canons on Penance there follow alsocanons in which all doctrines contrary to what theRoman Church teaches on the sacrament of extremeunction are condemned.25

The Sacrament of Holy OrdersThe sacrament of Order was one of the five

sacrament rejected by Luther as he proclaimed theuniversal priesthood of the laity.26 So one canimagine the care with which this is considered in theCouncil. At the 23rd session on 15 July 1563, theCouncil made so clear the inextricable link betweenthe Eucharist (the sacrifice of the mass) and thepriesthood: “Sacrifice and priesthood are so joinedtogether by God’s foundation that each exists inevery law. And so, since in the new covenant thecatholic church has received the visible sacrifice ofthe eucharist from the Lord’s institution, it is alsobound to profess that there is in it a new, visibleand external priesthood into which the old has beenchanged.” The Church has the authority of the sacredscripture and the tradition to hold that the powerto consecrate, to offer and to administer the bodyand blood of our Lord, and to remit sins, was givenby the Lord to the apostles and their successors.

The sacrament of order, like baptism andconfirmation, imprints a character which remainforever indelible. This is an important stand againstthose who holding that the priesthood is a temporaryoffice which expires when one ceases from exercisingit. To this follows the condemnation of the doctrine25 Cf. Ibid., p. 71326 Cf., H. Jedin, A History of the Council of Trent volume 1, Thomas Nelson and Sons, London, 1957, p. 181

19

that all Christians are equally priests and receivethe same spiritual power without any distinction.Bishops belong to the order of priests in a mostprominent way. They have the power to give thesacrament of confirmation, they ordain Churchministers and other functions which those in thelower order do not.

For the validity of ordinations, Episcopal,priestly or of other ministers, the consent of thepeople or of the secular authority is not required.On the contrary those who assume any of theseministries only by appointment of secular powers andthose who assume such offices on their own “are to beregarded one and all, not as ministers, but asthieves and robbers who have not entered by thesheepgate.”

There followed immediately a litany of eightcanons condemning and anathematising all who holdcontrary doctrines.

The Sacrament of MatrimonyThe Council of Trent at the 24th session on 11

November 1563 gave the following teachings on thesacrament of Marriage. Marriage is defined here as aperpetual and indissoluble bond between a man and hiswife. It is instituted as a sacrament by Christ whosepaschal grace “perfects natural love, strengthen theunbreakable unity and sanctify the spouses.”

The above teaching was followed by twelve canonsanathematising those who teach or hold opinionscontrary to the following Church doctrines onmatrimony27: Marriage is not a human invention but oneof the seven sacraments instituted by Christ; it isforbidden by divine law for Christians to have more

27 Cf., N.P. Norman (ed), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume Two: op. cit., pp. 754- 755

20

than one wife at once; the Church reserves theauthority to enact anew, or dispense from, the gradesof consanguinity and affinity mentioned in Leviticus;the Church has the power to establish dirimentimpediment to marriage; heresy, irksome cohabitationor continued absence cannot justify the dissolutionof marriage by the spouse; an unconsummated marriagecan be dissolved by the solemn profession of one ofthe spouses; the bond of marriage cannot be broken byadultery and when it occurs none of the party, “eventhe innocent one who gave no grounds for theadultery, can contract another marriage while theirspouse is still living, and whoever dismisses hiswife or husband and marries another is committingadultery; for some reasons separation from bed orfrom cohabitation may take place between the couplefor a given duration or indefinitely; vow of chastityor solemn religious profession is an impediment tomarriage; it is wrong to say that marriage is to bepreferred to celibacy or virginity; marriage may notbe celebrated at certain seasons of the yearaccording to ecclesiastical law, marriage cases areto be referred to ecclesiastical judges.

Furthermore, some canons on the reform ofmarriage were also made.

The first chapter speaks about secret marriagesinsisting that they, once entered into by the freeconsent of the parties, are true and valid, so longas the Church has not declared them null. Evenmarriages entered to by children are valid and theconsent of parents is not required for theirvalidity. The Council recognised that the Church hasalways detested and prohibited such marriages, andthis notwithstanding, many have disobediently goneahead to commit worse sins in that regard. To rescuesuch a situation, the Council established that before

21

a marriage is contracted, for three consecutive feastdays, the parish priests of the parties intending tomarry has to make a public announcement of theparties involved. After the announcements and nolegitimate objection is raised, the parish priestshould go ahead to celebrate the marriage in an openChurch, where during the ceremony he will be assuredof their consent. In a case where making theannouncement up to three times may raise maliciousobstructions, the Council allows only oneannouncement, or even none before the celebration,under the condition that it be celebrated in thepresence of two or three witnesses. Then after thecelebration before the consummation of the marriage,such announcement is made. It is also reserved to thewise judgment of the bishop to determine thepossibility of making no announcement. Marriages areto be declared invalid and null if contracted withoutthe presence of a priest and two or three witnesses.Spouses are also dissuaded from cohabitation beforethe blessing of the priest in the Church. Suchblessing is to be received by the couple’s own parishpriest or ordinary or any other priest delegated byeither of them. The parish priest must have aregister for putting down the details of thematrimony and noting the witnesses.

Again couples are exhorted to confess their sinsand receive the Eucharist before they marry or atleast three days before they consume their marriage.Other canons that follow talk about baptismal andconformational sponsors; and impediment of spiritualrelationship between the minister, the sponsor, theparents and the person being baptised. Then if a manwhiffs off a woman because he is in power, they donot validly contract marriage so long as the womanremains under his power. Strict controls are to be

22

placed against vagabonds who go for place to placecontracting new marriages. It is sinful for theunmarried to have concubine and most sinful for amarried man to do so – it is “a great act of contemptfor the great sacrament.” Worst still when suchconcubines live with them in their homes togetherwith their wives. If such people do not eject theirconcubines and disassociate themselves from them,after they have been three times officially cautionedby the ordinary, they should be excommunicated tillthey do what they are asked to do.

Rulers who in virtue of their power coerce any oftheir subjects to contract a marriage against theirliberty automatically incur anathema.

ConclusionIt is true that the Council of Trent did not

offer a detailed and systematic exposition of theChristian doctrines, be in it as regards thesacraments, be it in relation to other aspects.However we have seen that it squarely faced thechallenges of Protestant Reformation and offeredconcrete responses on a number of questions, hence itis called the Counter-Reformation.28 Many historiansare however convinced that this Council came verylate; and that even before Luther’s outburst, therewas certain need for reform in the Church, whichwould have also included a lot of things againstwhich Luther revolted. One of such decays in theChurch was the abuse of sacraments and offices,elements that will always go together in the Church.But the advantage of the lateness of the Council isthe fact that by the time it was convoked, it hasknown not only one side of the Protestant Reformer’s

28 Cf N.P. Tanner, The Councils of the Church: A Short History, The Crossroad, New York, p. 75

23

opinion on an issue, but to also know the diverseopinions which would subsequently wrath divisionseven among the Reformers.

Finally it is good to note once more that theCouncil of Trent is not a thing of the past, notovercome by the first and second Vatican Councils,but extend to our days. If it is so in otherdoctrines of faith of the Church, it is more so inrelation to the sacraments. In fact some historiansnote that Trent was conducted in a way more similarto the ecumenical councils of the early Church thancertain general councils of the medieval era.29 Thedecrees that were issued in the Council of Trentnever were the result of any arbitrary impositionfrom the Church authority. The three cardinal-presidents that represented the papacy conducted theaffairs in a way the decrees issued were the resultof theological arguments raised by participants.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALBERIGO G. (ed.), Storia dei concili ecumenici, Queriniana,Brescia, 1990.BOKENKOTTA T., A Concise History of the Catholic Church, ImageBooks Doubleday, New York, 2004.JEDIN H., A History of the Council of Trent volume 2: The FirstSessions at Trent 1545 - 47, Thomas Nelson and Sons, London,1961.JEDIN H., A History of the Council of Trent volume 1, ThomasNelson and Sons, London, 1957.TANNER N.P. (ed), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, VolumeTwo: Trent to Vatican II, Sheed & Ward and GeorgetownUniversity Press, 1990,

29 Cf., N. Tanner, New Short History of the Catholic Church, Burns and Oates, London and New York, 2011. pp. 173 - 174

24

TANNER N., New Short History of the Catholic Church, Burns andOates, London and New York, 2011. TANNER N.P. , The Councils of the Church: A Short History,Crossroad, New York.

25