On Confirmation

“Canon 1. If anyone shall say that the Confirmation of the baptized is an idle ceremony and not rather a true and proper Sacrament; or that formerly it was nothing other than a certain catechesis by which those approaching adolescence expounded an account of their faith before the Church: let him be anathema.

“Canon 2. If anyone shall say that those who attribute any power to the sacred chrism of Confirmation insult the Holy Spirit: let him be anathema.

“Canon 3. If anyone shall say that the ordinary minister of Holy Confirmation is not the Bishop alone, but any simple priest: let him be anathema.”

“We judge that Confirmation performed by a Bishop, that is, the imposition of hands, is to be received as holy and venerable.” Profession of faith prescribed to the Waldensians.

“Another is the Sacrament of Confirmation, which Bishops confer through the imposition of hands by anointing the regenerated with chrism.” Confession of faith of Michael Palaeologus.

“While a certain missionary, furnished with an Apostolic Indult to confirm, was about to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation to many Christians, he was frightened by the gentiles standing in the courtyard. Therefore, the first imposition of hands having been omitted, the prayer Omnipotens having been read hastily as far as the words from heaven, and the commemoration of the seven gifts having been neglected, he pronounced the form: ‘I sign you,’ etc. It is asked whether, with attention to the Encyclical of Benedict XIV, Ex quo primum, and to the scandal which would arise if those Christians were again confirmed conditionally, they can with a safe conscience be left in good faith.—Response. Confirmation is not to be repeated conditionally.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 6 August 1840.

“When, because of an accidental case, the ceremonies of the final blessing were omitted in Confirmation, the imposition of hands and the anointing nevertheless having been performed, a doubt was proposed by the Bishop: Whether the children in question were validly confirmed?—Response. Affirmative.” Holy Office, 22 June 1892.

“Bishop N. N. sets forth that, while he was in a large town administering the Sacrament of Confirmation in a public church to several hundred children, after he had confirmed two thirds of them the Bishop’s sacred chrism ran out, and it was necessary to have recourse to the chrism which was kept, together with the oil of Catechumens, with the Pastor. Although every care was taken to use the small vessel which bore written on its face sacrum chrisma, nevertheless, in the end it was discovered that the oil of Catechumens was instead contained in that small vessel. The undersigned respectfully asks whether and how he ought to repair this involuntary error.—Response. Let him be silent.” Holy Office, 22 November 1899.

Cf. no. 864.

“Concerning the signing of infants, it is manifest that it is lawful to be done by no one other than a Bishop. For although priests are priests, nevertheless they do not possess the summit of the pontificate. That these things belong to Bishops alone—either to sign or to hand over the Paraclete Spirit—is demonstrated not only by ecclesiastical custom but also by that reading from the Acts of the Apostles which asserts that Peter and John were sent to hand over the Holy Spirit to those already baptized. For when priests baptize, whether apart from a Bishop or in the presence of a Bishop, it is lawful for them to anoint the baptized with chrism, but with that which was consecrated by the Bishop; they may not, however, sign the forehead with the same oil, which is due to Bishops alone when they hand over the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete. I cannot, however, speak the words, lest I seem rather to betray than to respond to the consultation.” Innocent I, Epistle 25 to Decentius of Gubbio, chapter 3.

“28. The Confirmation of young persons, the ordination of clerics, and the consecration of places are reserved to the Pope and Bishops because of greed for temporal gain and honor.” Proposition of John Wyclif condemned by the Council of Constance.

“Whether the Abbot Nullius of the Most Holy Trinity of Cava possesses the right, with the consent of the Bishops in the case, to confirm subjects of others in another diocese.—Response. Negative.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 11 December 1897.

“1. If one of the schismatics should return to the unity of the Church and, not having anyone with whom he could practice the Greek rite, should embrace the Latin rite (it being understood that he is a simple layman and not a priest), can a Bishop of the Latin rite confirm him conditionally? 2. If Catholic children were baptized by schismatics, can their Latin Bishop reconfirm them conditionally?

“Response. To the first and second: It is not expedient that those confirmed by schismatic priests be anointed again after their return to unity; and according to the mind:

“The mind is that, in particular cases, the Bishop should inform himself of the precise place where the converts were confirmed. If it was in Bulgaria or Cyprus, in Italy or the adjacent islands, among the Lebanese Maronites, or in another place where such a faculty was expressly revoked, he ought to reconfirm them absolutely. If in Wallachia and Moldavia, in Asia or in other places in which it was not expressly revoked, let him acquiesce. But if there should be doubt concerning the place, the manner, or another reasonable circumstance, let him have recourse in particular cases and consult Benedict XIV, On the Diocesan Synod, book 7, chapter 7 ff. Let the same Bishop, the Apostolic Vicar, diligently take care, however, to admonish the Catholics subject to him that it is not lawful for them, outside a case of extreme necessity, to seek Baptism for their children from schismatics or heretics.” Holy Office, 3 July 1853.

“On Wednesday the 6th of the current month, there was taken under examination the doubt raised by the Most Reverend Patriarch of Jerusalem concerning the validity of the Confirmations which schismatic priests confer upon those newly converted from schism to the Catholic religion simultaneously with the Baptism which they sacrilegiously repeat; namely, whether the Confirmation administered under the conditions set forth by the aforementioned Most Reverend Patriarch ought to be considered valid, or whether the child ought, or at least can, be confirmed again conditionally. These Most Eminent General Inquisitors, after mature consideration, judged that the response should be: According to the matters set forth, it is not expedient that the confirmed persons of whom there is question be anointed again by a Bishop, unless they are to be promoted to tonsure and Orders, or they themselves or their parents petition it; in which case the Sacrament of Confirmation is to be conferred secretly and conditionally.” Holy Office, 16 March 1872.

“In this Latin Patriarchate the Sacrament of Confirmation conferred by schismatic priests of Palestine upon infants immediately after Baptism has always been regarded as valid; and therefore those thus confirmed, if they are converted to the Catholic faith, are not confirmed again. Now it sometimes happens that infants whose father is Catholic and mother schismatic, after they have been baptized in the Latin rite, are secretly carried by the mother to a schismatic priest, by whom they are rebaptized and confirmed. Furthermore, it also sometimes happens that parents who are new Catholics, whose children had been baptized by a priest of the Latin rite, return to schism and in it offer their children to a schismatic priest to be baptized again, who rebaptizes and confirms them; afterward, however, repenting, they are again converted to the Catholic faith with their children thus rebaptized and confirmed. It is therefore asked whether the Sacrament of Confirmation thus conferred upon the infants immediately after their sacrilegious rebaptism is valid.

“Response. It is not expedient that the confirmed persons of whom there is question be anointed again by a Bishop unless they are to be promoted to tonsure and Orders, or they themselves or their parents petition it, and unless, after an inquiry has been made concerning the manner of conferring Confirmation, it is discovered that a small brush was employed; in these cases, the Sacrament of Confirmation is to be conferred secretly and conditionally.” Holy Office, 14 January 1885, Patriarch of Jerusalem.

“1. Whether Eastern priests authorized to administer Baptism to children of the Latin rite can at the same time also administer Confirmation to them. 2. If an Eastern priest has administered Baptism and Confirmation simultaneously to a Latin child, must the Confirmation be repeated absolutely or conditionally, or not repeated? 3. Where there is doubt about the fact, namely, whether a Latin child baptized by an Eastern priest was also confirmed by him, must the affirmative presumption be followed, or must Confirmation be repeated conditionally?

“Response. Negative, and according to the mind. The mind is that, since this has often and most gravely been prohibited by the Holy See, the Eastern Bishops are to be admonished that they themselves also deter their priests from this altogether prohibited administration.—To the second: Let the Decree of the Supreme Inquisition of 14 January 1885 be given. Cf. the preceding Resolution.—To the third: Let them have recourse in particular cases, all things pertaining to the matter having been set forth.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 5 July 1886.

“The Secretary reporting that some Superiors of missions and others to whom the extraordinary faculty of administering the Sacrament of Confirmation is granted by the Apostolic See have sometimes used episcopal vestments and ornaments in its administration, the Most Eminent Fathers declared, and by force of the present Decree declare, that no one whatsoever who is not adorned with the episcopal character, or to whom the use of pontificals otherwise does not belong by a true and lawful privilege, has been or is permitted in the conferral of chrism to employ a rochet, miter, pastoral staff, ring, or pectoral cross. And they decreed that His Holiness was to be supplicated for approval of this declaration, and also that an Instruction was to be prepared for simple priests administering Confirmation as above. His Holiness benignly approved and commanded it to be inviolably observed by all whom it concerns.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 21 March 1774.

“...Therefore, the priest to whom this faculty has been conceded shall first take care to have with him chrism consecrated by a Catholic Bishop having communion with the same Holy See; and he shall know that it is never lawful for him to administer Confirmation without it or to receive it from heretical or schismatic Bishops.

“He shall further consider whether, in the faculty imparted to him by the Apostolic See, another express faculty is also stated, namely, to use chrism blessed before the current year; otherwise he shall not use it except perhaps in cases of necessity, since this is prohibited by the sacred canons.

“Although Confirmation can be administered at any time, it is nevertheless fitting that it be conferred especially in the week of Pentecost and about the third hour, at which the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles.

“As regards the age of those to be confirmed, the admonition of the Roman Catechism is to be kept before one’s eyes in these words: ‘This is to be observed: the Sacrament of Confirmation can indeed be administered to all after Baptism, but it is nevertheless less expedient for this to be done before children have had the use of reason. Therefore, if it does not seem necessary to await the twelfth year, it is certainly most fitting to defer this Sacrament until the seventh.’ This admonition assuredly has place in children who are in good health. For if it concerns one who labors under a grave disease from which he is foreseen likely to die, not only is it not prohibited to administer sacred chrism to him before the seventh year, but it is expedient that this be done, so that, departing from this life, he may attain greater glory in heaven according to the doctrine of Saint Thomas. Moreover, according to the approved opinion of many theologians, there can be other legitimate causes for anticipating the seventh year in the conferral of this Sacrament, and especially when a long future absence of the Bishop or of a priest to whom, as above, the faculty of administering it has been given is foreseen, or another necessity presses.

“In order that those to be confirmed who have the use of reason receive this Sacrament worthily, they ought to be in grace, and therefore it is very fitting that they precede its reception with sacramental confession. For if, conscious of some mortal sin—which may God avert—they should approach Confirmation, not only would they not receive the grace of this Sacrament, but they would bind themselves by a most grave sacrilege.

“According to the ancient use of the Church, those to be confirmed ought to be fasting, and it would therefore be desirable that this also be observed at the present time.

“Those to be anointed with sacred chrism are first to be diligently instructed, according to the doctrines of the Roman Catechism, concerning the nature, dignity, and effects of this Sacrament and the dispositions prerequisite for receiving it worthily. Likewise, they must be instructed concerning the rudiments of the faith, the precepts of the Decalogue and of the Church, the acts of the theological virtues, and they must retain in memory the Lord’s Prayer and the Apostles’ Creed.

“Moreover, let missionaries not omit also to exhort the peoples entrusted to them to receive Confirmation at the due time and parents to take care that their children are confirmed. For although this Sacrament is not of the necessity of means for salvation, it nevertheless cannot be spurned or neglected without the guilt of grave sin when a suitable occasion for receiving it is present. Furthermore, if this doctrine is true for all the Christian faithful wherever they are, it has much more place in those who dwell in the lands of heretics or pagans, in which persecutions sometimes break out against Catholics. Hence it is necessary that they be strengthened by the power of the sevenfold Spirit, by which they may not only believe with the heart unto justice but also make confession with the mouth unto salvation and show themselves prepared even to shed blood for Christ.

“Since this Sacrament imprints an indelible character upon the soul, it ought not to be repeated; and therefore one who has been confirmed must not dare to approach to receive it again; nor should an excommunicate, one under interdict, one communicating in divine things with heretics or schismatics, one who practices idolatrous rites, or one who sins publicly in another manner; likewise, one who has not fulfilled the Easter precept.

“Those to be confirmed shall take care not to approach this Sacrament with a dirty forehead and uncombed hair; nevertheless, they and their sponsors are to be clothed in simple garments arranged for modesty. Women who are to receive it and those who will exercise the office of godmother shall present themselves in the church not with vain ornaments or a painted face, but with all modesty and reverence.

“If any of those to be confirmed should have a disgraceful name or one unbecoming a Christian person, let him assume another at Confirmation.

“Although the employment of a godfather or godmother in receiving this Sacrament is not of its necessity, the laudable custom of the Church nevertheless commends it and the sacred canons prescribe it.

“Excluded from this office are both those under fourteen years of age and those who have not yet received the Sacrament of Confirmation. But because it can happen that in mission territories no one is present who has previously been confirmed, it is permitted in this case that some be confirmed without a sponsor, who afterward can be sponsors for the others.

“As regards sponsors of this kind, these additional rules are to be observed: I. Not several, but only one, whether a man or a woman, is to be employed as godfather or godmother. II. Men shall not discharge the office of sponsor for females, nor women for males, but a sponsor of his or her own sex is to be employed for each. III. Unless necessity compels, the sponsor for Confirmation is not to be the same as, but different from, the sponsor for Baptism. IV. Excommunicates, those under interdict, public sinners, or those who have omitted the Easter precept are to be excluded from the office of sponsor.

“Concerning the spiritual relationship which is contracted in this Sacrament, the Council of Trent established the following: ‘Let that relationship also which is contracted from Confirmation not extend beyond the one confirming, the one confirmed, his father and mother, and the one holding him, all impediments of this spiritual relationship between other persons having been entirely removed.’

“This Decree of the Council has place among those who are bound to observe the Statutes of Trent. Others, however, shall conform themselves in this matter to the discipline prevailing in their regions.

“When the time has arrived at which the priest, using the faculty granted to him by the Apostolic See as above, intends to administer Confirmation, clothed in priestly vestments, or at least an alb and stole, standing before the altar and turned toward the people arranged on either side—the males on the right and the females on the left—he shall admonish those present summarily concerning the foregoing. He shall especially declare to them that no one other than a Bishop alone is the ordinary minister of Confirmation, but that he is prepared to confer it by a right delegated by the Holy See.

“Then, the Decree of delegation or Apostolic Brief having been read in the vernacular language in a loud and intelligible voice, he shall again admonish those present that no one who has been confirmed is to depart without receiving the blessing which he himself will give after the Confirmation of all. Likewise, infants whom for a just cause he judges ought to be confirmed in their earliest age are to be held by their sponsors in their right arms, and adults are to place their foot upon the right foot of their sponsor.

“This second admonition having been completed, while standing likewise and turned toward those to be confirmed, with his hands joined before his breast, and those to be confirmed bending their knees and holding their hands joined before their breast, he says,” etc. Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 4 May 1774; C. no. 666.

“Concerning Confirmation conferred by a priest under an Apostolic Indult: although, as you relate, the admonition concerning the minister of this Sacrament and the extraordinary faculty granted to the priest administering it according to the Instruction of the Sacred Congregation was sometimes omitted, nevertheless the Sacrament was valid. You ought, however, to admonish the missionaries that the Instruction in question must otherwise be observed entirely.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 11 September 1841.

“The simultaneous conferral of Baptism and Confirmation upon children is not to be admitted except perhaps in danger of death, according to practice.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 21 March 1851; C. nos. 668, 673, 680-683.

“No one is to be confirmed unless he has attained at least the seventh year of his age; nor is there to be a departure from this practice of the Latin Church except for altogether grave causes, for example, if infants lie dangerously ill or, because of the distance of places, if the present occasion were lost they would scarcely have another.” Sacred Congregation, 11 December 1850.

“Since a much younger age is required for admission to the Sacrament of Confirmation than for admission to First Communion, as the Roman Catechism, On Confirmation, no. 18, hands down and Benedict XIV, On the Diocesan Synod, book 7, chapter 10, nos. 2-3, teaches, it is proposed to you that article 22, page 19, in the Synodal Acts be reformed according to the doctrine cited, so that Confirmation may first have place and afterward, at a suitable time, First Communion may be supplied.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 19 November 1854, to the Bishop of Saint-Denis.

“Venerable Brother, health and Apostolic benediction. The custom which had become established for almost an entire century having been abolished, it seemed good to you to introduce into the practice of your diocese that children, before they are refreshed by the divine banquet of the Eucharist, receive the Christian Sacrament of Confirmation, anointed with life-giving chrism. You desired it to be signified to you whether this was approved by Us; concerning so important a matter, it pleased Us to write directly to you and to reveal what Our mind is.

“We therefore praise your purpose exceedingly. For the custom which had prevailed there and in other places accorded neither with the ancient and constant institution of the Church nor with the advantages of the faithful. For there are in the souls of children the elements of desires which, unless they are uprooted very early, gradually grow strong, entice those inexperienced in affairs, and draw them headlong. Wherefore the faithful, even from tender years, need to be clothed with power from on high, which it is known the Sacrament of Confirmation produces. In it, as the Angelic Doctor rightly notes, the Holy Spirit is given for the strength of the spiritual combat, and man is spiritually advanced to perfect age. Moreover, adolescents thus confirmed become more receptive to grasping precepts and afterward more fit to receive the Eucharist, and from its reception they obtain more abundant benefits. Therefore, We desire that those things which were wisely established by you be faithfully and perpetually observed. But so that you may have a testimony of Our benevolence concerning your diligence in procuring the advantages of the flock committed to you, We impart the Apostolic benediction most lovingly in the Lord to you, Venerable Brother, and to your entire diocese.

“Given at Rome, at Saint Peter’s, on 22 June 1897, in the twentieth year of Our Pontificate.—Leo XIII.”

“19. Likewise, whether he believes that a Christian who contemns the reception of the Sacraments of Confirmation or Extreme Unction, or the solemnization of Marriage, sins mortally.” Articles upon which those suspected of the errors of Wyclif and Hus are to be questioned by mandate of Martin V, Bull Inter cunctas.

“Whether Confirmation and Extreme Unction are to be given to those neophytes who, baptized at the point of death, are altogether uninstructed and, wearied by the force of illness, cannot be instructed?—Response. Neither the Sacrament of Confirmation nor Extreme Unction is to be conferred upon those dying neophytes whom the missionary judged capable of Baptism unless they have at least some intention of receiving Confirmation for adding strength to their soul and of receiving Sacred Unction ordained for the benefit of the soul at the time of death.” Holy Office, 10 April 1861.

Confirmation can be administered without miter and cope “for a grave and urgent cause.” Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 22 March 1669. “When a cause is present, one can confirm privately without miter and pastoral staff, with a stole employed.” Holy Office, 12 February 1851.

“In administering the Sacrament of Confirmation, must the Credo, Pater, and Ave be recited together by the Bishop and those present; or does it suffice that the Bishop admonish the sponsors concerning the obligation of teaching those confirmed these prayers, as is prescribed in the Roman Pontifical?—Response. The custom of reciting them, as praiseworthy, is to be observed.” Sacred Congregation of Rites, 13 July 1883, Conversano.

“We do not make use of a bandage. It would be very difficult, not to say impossible, for us to procure one. We content ourselves with wiping the forehead with a linen cloth or with cotton.—Response. If, as is said, bandages can be procured only with the greatest difficulty, the practice in question is to be tolerated.” Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, 11 December 1850, Apostolic Vicar of the Sandwich Islands.

“No one who has not been confirmed can be a sponsor in Confirmation, and if he should be, he does not contract spiritual relationship.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 16 June 1654. Diocesan Synod of Alba, year 1866, part 2, article 3, no. 8.

“But because it can happen that in mission territories no one is present who was previously confirmed, it is permitted in this case that some persons be confirmed without a sponsor, who afterward can be sponsors for the others.” Instruction of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, 4 May 1774.

“Whether, in the administration of the Sacrament of Confirmation, a Bishop can, as his predecessor was accustomed to do in the Diocese of Policastro, sustain the roles of minister and sponsor at one and the same time, namely, sign the forehead of the one to be confirmed with sacred chrism with his right hand as minister, and hold the one to be confirmed with his left as sponsor?—Response. The Bishop the Bishop confirming shall in this case discharge the office of sponsor through a proxy.” Sacred Congregation of Rites, 14 June 1873, Policastro; C. no. 691.

Can the same person be the sponsor who lifts the infant from the sacred font and receives the same person in the Sacrament of Confirmation?—Response. Negative, unless necessity should nevertheless compel it. Chapter 100, distinction 4, On Consecration; A. S. S., vol. 16, p. 537 ff. The matter is slight, however, if someone acts otherwise. St. Alphonsus, book 6, no. 187.

“The practice is not to be approved whereby one man is appointed by the Bishop or Pastor for the males and one woman for the females, to discharge the office of godfather or godmother for all; but it is to be tolerated in a case of necessity to be judged by the Bishop, according to the form of the Roman Pontifical.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 14 June and 12 July 1823; C. 696.

“1. Since in the rubrics concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation it is said: Adults or others who are older shall place their foot upon the right foot of their sponsor, it is asked whether it suffices if the sponsor places his right hand upon the right shoulder of the one to be confirmed? 2. Whether one to be confirmed, at the time of Confirmation, when the Bishop says: N., I sign you with the sign of the Cross, etc., can take care that another name of a Saint be imposed upon him in addition to his baptismal name?—To the first: It suffices. To the second: He can.” Sacred Congregation of Rites, 20 September 1749, Jaurinen.