114. On the Matter and Form of Confirmation

1. Andrew, a Greek, doubts about the value of his confirmation. For when he was dwelling among Latins he heard from a certain Latin presbyter that the chrism of confirmation is confected only from olive oil and balsam. But when he himself was confirmed in Greece, he heard that sacred chrism is confected from several sweet-smelling materials.

Quaer. Whether Andrew was validly confirmed, if other sweet-smelling aromatics were mixed into the chrism?

R. Affirmatively. For in the Euchologion of the Greeks, or Ritual, or Sacerdotal and Pontifical, this Admonition is contained: "It must be known that although the Pontiffs of the Eastern Church, in confecting sacred chrism, customarily use several aromatics, nevertheless the necessary matter of the sacrament is oil and balsam, to which, according to the custom of the ancient Eastern Church, other kinds of aromatics are rightly admixed, if they are present according to the prescription. But if some of them are lacking, provided oil and balsam are present, holy chrism is altogether duly confected, as with things not necessary to the matter of chrism." Benedict XIV, C. Ex quo primum, 1 March 1756, § 44, reports the aforesaid Admonition; and in § 49 he says that it "pertains to holy chrism, which indeed is confected by the Greeks not only with oil and balsam, but with other aromatics also admixed. But in this part of the admonition anyone can see that a mixture of aromatics of this kind is not indeed forbidden, but only that this is taught to be held: that the matter of the sacrament consists in oil and balsam, and therefore, if any one of the other aromatics customarily admixed is lacking, nothing is lacking which is necessary for confecting sacred chrism." Therefore, because the Greeks mix other aromatics into chrism, the matter of confirmation does not thereby become unsuitable. Wherefore Andrew was validly and also licitly confirmed with the aforesaid chrism according to the rite of the Eastern Church.

2. Joseph holds that the imposition of hands does not pertain to the essential matter of confirmation. Indeed, he says, the Greek Church does not use the imposition of hands. Benedict XIV, C. Ex quo primum § 50. D'Annib. 279.

Quaer. What is to be said of the Case?

R. The imposition of hands is altogether essential to the sacrament of confirmation. For the Apostles themselves are read to have used it for conferring the Holy Spirit. Acts 18 and 19. Likewise, the Fathers testify concerning its continued use in the Church from the age of the Apostles. Nor indeed does the Greek Church dissent. For this essential imposition of hands is that which is annexed to chrismation, and the Greek Church itself certainly uses it in precisely the manner in which the Latin Church uses it. Hence Michael Palaeologus, in the profession of faith which in the year 1274 he sent to Gregory X, expressly says: "Another is the sacrament of confirmation, which bishops confer through the imposition of hands, by chrismating those reborn." Wherefore Benedict XIV, l. c., indeed excludes an imposition of hands distinct from chrismation, but by no means also one indistinct and included in the chrismation itself. For through this the chrismation is made. But another imposition of hands is not necessary. Theol. Wirceburg. 142. seqq., I. M. 475. 476.

3. Joseph, a bishop, holds that in the form of confirmation only these words are substantial: I confirm you with the chrism of salvation. Hence in the administration of this sacrament he has no scruple if through inadvertence he omits the other words. For the former words signify the character, which the form is not accustomed to signify. But the Greek Church does not use the latter words. D'Annib. 280.

Quaer. What is to be said of the Case?

R. Joseph does not act rightly. For the common opinion holds that all the words of confirmation are necessary. Wherefore, by omitting the remaining words, he exposes the sacrament to danger of nullity. But the former words: I sign you with the sign of the cross, do not signify the character, but the sacramental action itself, or chrismation, just as in baptism the word baptize signifies the sacramental action itself, or ablution. But the latter words are not altogether lacking in the form of the Greeks. For, as in the form of the Latins those words indicate the cause conferring the fullness of spiritual strength, which is the Holy Trinity, and which is expressed when it is said: In the name of the Father, etc.; so in the form of the Greeks, through those words of the gift of the Holy Spirit, there is signified the grace strengthening one for confessing the faith bravely, and the cause of this, the Holy Spirit. Theol. Wirceburg. 178.-188., I. M. 481. 483.