Chapter — Gury-Ballerini, Compendium of Moral Theology (8th ed., 1884)
Chapter II. On the Minister of Confirmation
II. A simple Priest can confirm as extraordinary Minister from the special delegation of the Supreme Pontiff. This is clear from the practice of the Church and from the Bull of Benedict XIV, Eo quamvis tempore. - See St. Ligorius, n. 170. - But the Priest must use chrism blessed by a Bishop. This is clear from the Decree of Eugene IV, where it is said that the matter of Confirmation is chrism blessed by a Bishop.
- Questions. - QUESTION 1. Whether the Pope is able to delegate also to a simple Priest the power of making chrism?
It is controverted. Not a few affirm with St. Ligorius, n. 163; but several others deny.
QUESTION 2. Whether a Bishop can confirm faithful who are not his subjects?
Resp. 1. As to validity, he can confirm all, as follows from the power of Order.
Resp. 2. As to liceity, he cannot confirm except those who are found in his diocese; and he would sin gravely by confirming even his own subjects in another diocese, because Confirmation is an exercise of jurisdiction of the external forum, which cannot be performed without the license of the Ordinary of the place.
But he can confirm strangers in his own diocese, because unless the contrary is established, the tacit consent of other Bishops is always presumed. - Thus more probably and more commonly. - St. Ligorius, n. 173.
- QUESTION 3. When is a Bishop bound to confirm?
Resp. 1. He is bound to confirm those asking, whenever he conveniently can, if he cannot defer it to another proximate time.
Resp. 2. He is also bound at times to provide his subjects an opportunity of receiving this Sacrament. Hence he would sin gravely if for a long time he abstained from conferring Confirmation, for example for eight or ten years, and did not go around the diocese, at least through the principal places, unless he were excused by moral impossibility. - St. Ligorius, n. 175. - Lacroix, n. 388, and others commonly.
QUESTION 4. Whether a Bishop sins gravely by omitting to confirm a dying person asking for the Sacrament?
Resp. No, at least probably. The reason is that since this Sacrament is not necessary for salvation, the inconvenience of going to sick persons lying in their own homes excuses. It is also confirmed by common practice. - St. Ligorius, n. 175. - Lacroix, n. 390 1.
1 From those things which Lacroix brings forward in this place, you will gather that more probably a Bishop in the case does not sin gravely; but probably he is not bound even by light fault, when inconvenience excuses. But whether the common practice is that of not ministering when it can conveniently be done, I would not dare to say.