ITINERARIES – Tabula Peutingeriana. Segment VI: Noricum, central Italy with Rome, Africa – Vienna, National Library, cod. 324 (12th–13th century).
The repetition of the Sacraments not necessary for salvation, namely Matrimony and Extreme Unction of the sick person who has not lost consciousness and has already received the other Sacraments, is decided according to the nature of the doubt, the usefulness of the faithful, and the inconvenience to the minister.
The Sacraments must be repeated absolutely when one is certain of their invalidity. In case of doubt, however, the condition must be added, in order, insofar as possible, to preserve the reverence due to the Sacrament. For if the condition is fulfilled, the Sacrament is validly conferred; if it is not fulfilled, despite the application of the matter and form, there is no Sacrament. The condition must be expressed orally only when this is prescribed by the rubric, as for Baptism and Extreme Unction. In other cases, it is sufficient to conceive it mentally.
II. THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE INVALIDITY OF THE BAPTISM OF HERETICS
Heretics baptized in the Catholic Church were, upon their conversion, subjected to the imposition of hands as a sign of penance, so that they might receive the Holy Spirit. Around the middle of the third century, the question arose whether those baptized in heretical sects ought, upon conversion, to be rebaptized. The question was initially resolved in practice. In Rome, Egypt, and Palestine, the Baptism of heretics was considered valid, provided that it had been conferred in the proper form. In Proconsular Africa, however, confusing liceity with validity, the invalidity of Baptism was asserted. The error is connected with Tertullian, who required the minister’s right faith for the validity of the Sacrament. From the principles nemo dat quod non habet and extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, he concluded that Baptism is one and is found only in the true Church. Converted heretics must therefore be rebaptized (De Bapt., chap. 15: PL 1, 1216). A Carthaginian Council, under Agrippinus, sanctioned this practice, which spread in Africa and, shortly afterward, in Asia Minor through the Councils of Iconium and Synnada. The divergence of practices led to a conflict through the intervention of St. Cyprian, who sought to extend the practice of rebaptizing heretics. In De unitate Ecclesiae he considers the Baptism of heretics not a washing but a defilement, which gives birth to children for the devil(chap. 11: PL 4, 524). At the beginning of 255, a certain Magnus asked him whether converted Novatians ought to be rebaptized. Cyprian replied in the affirmative, using Tertullian’s argument (Epist. LXIX: PL 3, 1138). In the meantime, he received an inquiry from eighteen bishops of Numidia. Cyprian, having gathered in a Synod the vote of thirty-one bishops of Proconsular Africa, replied by reaffirming his opinion, confirmed by the practice of his predecessors (Epist. LXX, 1: PL 3, 1038).
While Numidia agreed with Carthage, Mauretania, situated to the west of Africa and in contact with Rome, followed the contrary practice. Bishop Quintus wrote to Cyprian, condemning the invalidity of Baptism in the name of the ancient tradition. A conflict between the Carthaginian and Roman practices appeared imminent. Cyprian foresaw II. He sent Quintus, together with the preceding synodal letter, another letter in which he insisted on the essence of true Baptism among heretics; nor could custom prescribe against the truth. Peter himself had yielded to Paul’s arguments (Epist. LXXI, 2: PL 3, 1106). At the Synod of 256, seventy-one bishops of Proconsular Africa and Numidia again declared the Baptism of heretics invalid. Cyprian drafted the synodal letter, which he sent to Pope Stephen. The latter, however, did not approve the decision of the African Council and ordered conformity to Roman practice, threatening excommunication. After the question of the lapsi and the Novatians, the Pope now found himself for the third time confronted by the zealous bishop of Carthage, who was more inclined to give lessons than to accept them. For this reason, as well as on doctrinal grounds, Stephen was intransigent. Nevertheless, in the autumn of the same year Cyprian convoked another Council. Eighty-seven bishops renewed the decision of the preceding synods. The conciliar acts were sent to Rome, but the Pope refused to receive the legates and forbade the clergy to communicate with them.
The threatened excommunication was not in fact imposed, and schism was avoided. Stephen was succeeded by Sixtus II, who resumed relations with Cyprian without abandoning Roman practice, whose strict acceptance he did not deem it necessary to impose. Thus the Churches of Africa and Asia continued for some time in their own practice. Protestantism wrongly sees in the controversy an argument against tradition as a rule of faith, and
against papal authority and infallibility. Cyprian and his followers erred in the question of fact, not in that of right. Indeed, they recognized the value of an apostolic tradition and papal infallibility, but in this controversy they judged the custom advanced by Stephen to be erroneous, though more ancient, because purely human. The question concerned both the dogmatic and the disciplinary spheres. The tenor of Cyprian’s words, which leaves the bishops free without wishing to break unity with those who did not share his opinion, suggests that he treated the question from a disciplinary point of view. His arguments, however, indicate that he saw in the controversy something more than a simple disciplinary question. It is certain that Cyprian did not frame the question exclusively in terms of faith. The question was new and difficult, since many points of sacramental doctrine were still obscure. St. Agostino shed light on the matter when the error, in a new form, was taken up again by the Donatists (v. DONATISMO), who required the minister’s faith and state of Grace for the validity of the Sacrament. St. Agostino distinguished between the valid Sacrament, which may also exist outside the Church, and the fruitful Sacrament, which is found only in the Church. For a similar question in relation to the Sacrament of Orders, V. RIORDINAZIONE.