The Matter of Confirmation

To nn. 475, 476, 477.

A Bishop called to administer Confirmation to a certain young man found his forehead, because of a contagious disease, covered with a certain thick crust, which was abundantly flowing with pus. Therefore first he imposed his hand over his head, and then, with cotton dipped in sacred chrism, he anointed the aforesaid crust of the forehead. Was it valid? It does not seem so.

The proximate matter of the Sacrament of Confirmation is chrismation and the imposition of the Bishop's hand, as is established from the Confession of Faith of Michael Palaeologus: "Another is the sacrament of Confirmation, which Bishops confer by the imposition of hands, by chrismating."

The aforesaid imposition of the hand, a rite introduced by the Apostles, as in ordination so also in confirmation, is to be made by bodily touch.

But this imposition of the hand is not a rite really distinct and separated from the chrismation itself on the forehead of the one to be confirmed, and to be made in the manner of a cross. In the single chapter de Sacr. Unct. it is said: "Through the chrismation of the forehead the imposition of the hand is designated, which by another name is called Confirmation; because through it the Holy Spirit is given for increase and strength."

Therefore, since the imposition of the hand, altogether essential in Confirmation, is indistinct from the anointing, which is altogether to be made on the forehead and not on the head, it is evident that Confirmation is invalid if first the imposition of the hand is made over the head, and then the anointing is made by means of an instrument; which was also decided by the Holy Office, January 14, 1885.

And indeed, since the imposition of the hand essentially required in Confirmation is not an imposition of the hand over the head of the one to be confirmed, distinct from the anointing itself and separated from it; but is that imposition of the hand which accompanies the anointing on the forehead in the manner of a cross, and which consequently is indistinct from the anointing, St. Alphonsus, book 6, n. 164, it is evident that this imposition of the hand must be altogether physical, and consequently immediate, that is, it must be made with no instrument or no foreign thing intervening. And just as chrismation is essentially to be made on the forehead, so in that chrismation the imposition of the hand also is on the forehead.

"The anointing must be made by immediate contact of the hand of the Bishop who confirms on the forehead of him who is confirmed, without the cooperation of any intermediate instrument, such as a brush, cloth, sponge, etc." Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique, Paris, 1908, v. Confirmation, p. 1098, vol. 3.

Therefore, in the Case, the imposition of the hand over the head of the sick person, first made, truly contributes nothing as regards the validity of Confirmation.

This validity indeed depends on immediate anointing, performed with chrism on the forehead of the sick person, and on the implicit immediate imposition of the hand of the minister. If Confirmation or chrismation could be made with a little brush or another instrument, "the immediate imposition of the hand of the minister, which is altogether required, would be lacking; that mediated imposition is improperly so called." Not the hand, but the brush, the cotton, is imposed. St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.

When the question was proposed: Whether Confirmation conferred with a small brush by an orthodox minister is valid? The Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, August 6, 1912, answered: In the negative, and therefore it is to be repeated.

Now in the Case, the anointing was not made immediately by the hand of the minister, or by his thumb, but by means of cotton; hence in truth by this anointing the imposition of the hand was not immediate, but mediate.

And on this head, in the Case, Confirmation must simply be said to be invalid.

And if Confirmation was invalid from defect of the imposition of the hand, it was also invalid from defect of true anointing in the Case. For how can the forehead of the young man to be confirmed be said to have been anointed, if, as is explained, the anointing was made upon a crust flowing with pus? If that crust was flowing with pus, anointing was physically impossible, since the cotton had to be immediately soaked with pus, and the pus to adhere immediately to it; and consequently an anointing with sacred chrism could no longer be had by that cotton.

Furthermore, just as Baptism is held as doubtful if the head of the one to be baptized abounds with an oily crust, since then the water with difficulty touches the head itself, so by parity, indeed much more, Confirmation must be held as doubtful if anointing is made upon a crust which flows with pus.

As doubtful, namely prescinding from the required immediate imposition of the hand and the required anointing, concerning which it has already been said.