Question — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Question Fourth. On the Subject of Confirmation
91. Who can receive confirmation. 1. The subject of valid confirmation is every baptized man not yet confirmed, even if lacking the use of reason. For confirmation is the natural complement of the spiritual life which is conferred in baptism, and in the same way as baptism it has been instituted for all.
- Ordinarily, however, little children before the use of reason are not to be confirmed; but when they have attained the use of reason, they should receive this sacrament as soon as possible.1 The reason of the first point is that it is not fitting that the complement of spiritual life for fighting for the faith be communicated to a man before he exists as fit for this fight. Therefore the practice of the Latin Church, prevailing almost everywhere, has this: that children are confirmed neither before nor long after the seventh or eighth year of age. The reason of the second point is that through confirmation a man becomes more fit both for grasping the precepts of the Christian life and for directing his life according to them.
a. Nevertheless little children before the use of reason can be confirmed: alpha. if danger of life is imminent; beta. if the bishop can provide the occasion of receiving this sacrament only rarely; gamma. if somewhere (as among the Greeks, in Spain, and in Latin America) there exists the custom of confirming infants.
b. In the first twelve centuries throughout the whole Church, confirmation was conferred on infants immediately after baptism. This custom the Greek Church retained, but the Latin Church changed it, so that ordinarily it does not confer confirmation on infants before the use of reason; and this was established by a wise counsel.2
c. Therefore the following can be validly and licitly confirmed: alpha. the perpetually insane, as soon as a suitable occasion of receiving the sacrament has offered itself; beta. the dying, although they have not yet attained the use of reason, so that in the resurrection they may appear perfect and not be deprived of so great an increase of grace and glory.
d. Neophytes who in the article of death are baptized while entirely uninstructed and cannot be sufficiently instructed so as to elicit the intention of receiving this sacrament are not to be confirmed.3
e. As far as can be done, children are to be instructed and led to receiving the sacrament of confirmation when they are admitted to receiving holy communion. Since by the recent law concerning the first communion of children they are to be admitted to the holy table soon after they have attained the use of reason, the sacraments, according to the mind of the Church, are conferred in this order: baptism, eucharist, confirmation.
1 Cf. Benedict XIV, constitution Eo quamvis, 4 May 1745. Cn. 788: The administration of this sacrament in the Latin Church is suitably deferred to about the seventh year of age.
2 Cf. Roman Catechism, p. 2, c. 3, q. 17.
3 Holy Office, 10 Apr. 1861.
92. The obligation of receiving confirmation. Of itself there does not exist a grave obligation of receiving confirmation. By these things it is not denied that one who, when the occasion has been offered, refuses to receive confirmation can sin gravely by reason of contempt; but by reason of the sacrament itself there is no grave necessity of receiving it.
a. That a grave obligation does not exist, either of seeking the occasion or of receiving the sacrament when the occasion has been offered, many have taught, especially among the older theologians, with St. Thomas.1 But more recent theologians, who follow St. Alphonsus (n. 181), for the most part affirm a grave obligation; nevertheless they do not bring forward an argument by which they clearly demonstrate it.
alpha. Not from the law of nature: for if this obligation were proved from the nature of the thing, confirmation would be necessary by necessity of means; but a sacrament which supposes the state of grace cannot be necessary by necessity of means. Then they argue in this way: by the law of nature each one is bound to fortify himself with this sacrament for overcoming temptations in the spiritual life which will arise against the faith. - But since several other means instituted for this end are present, by this argument the necessity of the sacrament is not proved. And indeed the sacrament of confirmation confers grace necessary for preserving the faith in dangers, for confessing it externally, and for establishing life according to the faith; nevertheless there are also other means (use of the sacraments, prayer, works of piety, etc.) by which the end of the sacrament can be obtained. Therefore the whole question is reduced to this: whether God denies the necessary graces to those who, when the opportunity has been given, do not receive confirmation, as if in punishment for such negligence. But this cannot be affirmed. For first, the more common opinion of theologians holds that God does not deny the necessary graces on this account, and the Roman Catechism is also of this opinion.2 Nor are the faithful persuaded that they are held by a precept, either divine or ecclesiastical, to receive this sacrament. But if the holy Fathers and ancient councils sometimes seem to affirm the necessity of receiving this sacrament, it must be noted that formerly confirmation was conferred immediately after baptism, and therefore the Fathers and councils, by reason of baptism, from which confirmation was practically not distinguished, urged the obligation of receiving it. Therefore it seems possible to affirm that a strict obligation is not demonstrated, and therefore is not to be established.3
beta. Not from divine law: for a divine precept of receiving confirmation does not exist, since the words of Christ, "that they should wait for the promise of the Father,"4 i.e., the Holy Spirit, concern only the apostles. Nor does this other argument have greater force, namely that by the very institution of the sacrament Christ commanded its use: for by instituting the sacrament he willed that all the faithful attain the perfection of spiritual life which is conferred only by this sacrament. - But Christ indeed willed that all attain essential perfection, which consists in the state of grace; but whether Christ also willed that all the faithful attain accidental perfection, which is conferred through confirmation, is in question, and therefore would have to be proved. But it is not proved from the institution itself, because not all things which Christ instituted are commanded.
gamma. Not from ecclesiastical law: for demonstrating this, chiefly two arguments are brought forward. First, certain words from the constitution of Benedict XIV Etsi pastoralis: "They [the Italo-Greeks] are to be admonished that they are held guilty of grave sin if, when they can approach confirmation, they refuse and neglect it." - But these words concern entirely particular circumstances, and therefore a universal law cannot be inferred from them.5 Then they bring forward the instruction which is found in the appendix of the Roman Ritual and which contains these words: "although this sacrament is not of necessity of means for salvation, nevertheless it cannot be rejected and neglected without the guilt of grave sin, when a suitable occasion of receiving it is present"; Clement XIV approved this instruction.6 - From these things, however, this one thing is inferred: that the fathers of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide, who composed this instruction for missionaries, were of the opinion which they signify by these words; but by no means that they established a universal law, since they lack legislative power. Nor is the approbation of the supreme pontiff an act of legislation.
delta. From the fact that the new Code, when speaking of the obligation of receiving the sacrament of confirmation, uses ambiguous words: "it is licit for no one (under grave? under light?) to neglect it,"7 it is rightly and deservedly inferred that it deliberately abstained from settling the question disputed among theologians. For this reason, even today the opinion denying a grave obligation holds.
b. The proposed opinion can have practical moment if someone doubts whether he has already been validly confirmed, or if someone already placed in more advanced age is deterred by great shame from seeking confirmation in a place where all the rest are accustomed to be confirmed in childhood or infancy. These are to be admonished and exhorted, but not compelled, to receive the sacrament of confirmation.8 - From the same opinion it does not follow that parents are not held by a grave obligation to take care that their children be confirmed when the occasion is given; for since they have spiritual care of them, from piety they are bound, if they can, to procure for them that which so greatly promotes spiritual life.
1 Summa III, q. 72, a. 1, ad 3.
2 Cf. Roman Catechism, p. 2, c. 3, q. 15 s.
3 Cf. Dolger, p. 179 ff.
4 Acts 1, 4.
5 Cf. Gury-Ballerini ad n. 270.
6 The instruction is of the S. Congregation de Propaganda Fide, 4 May 1774; in another instruction of the Holy Office, 20 June 1866, this obligation is denied.
7 Cn. 787.
8 Cf. Genicot, Theol. mor. inst., II, n. 164.
93. Required conditions. For receiving confirmation validly there is required baptism received, and in adults at least habitual intention, which is implicitly contained in the will of living as a Christian. For receiving confirmation licitly and fruitfully there is required the state of grace. Therefore he who before confirmation has fallen into grave sin can indeed procure grace for himself either through confession or through perfect contrition; nevertheless confession is very much to be advised and by custom is everywhere premised.
That the one to be confirmed must be fasting, or, if it is permitted by age, strengthened by the holy eucharist, is nowhere prescribed; nevertheless it is laudably observed where confirmation is conferred on those who have already been admitted to holy communion.