Question — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Question Second. On the Matter and Form of Confirmation
86. On the remote matter. The valid remote matter of confirmation is chrism made from olive oil and balsam and blessed by a bishop1 with the special blessing of chrism.
- Chrism is a mixture composed of oil and balsam. Olive oil is certainly required for the value of the sacrament; for only olive oil is and is called simply oil. Balsam must certainly be mixed in by necessity of precept; that it must also be mixed in by necessity of sacrament cannot be demonstrated. That chrism is the matter of this sacrament is clear from the words of Eugenius IV and from the constant tradition of the Church.
a. Balsam seems to have to be mixed in by necessity of precept, but not by necessity of sacrament. For oil consecrated with the special blessing of confirmation was in the first times called chrism. Moreover, before the fifth century there is found no document from which it is clear that balsam was mixed with the oil of confirmation. Finally, to the question whether confirmation administered with oil without balsam ought to be repeated, Innocent III responded that nothing was to be repeated.2
b. It does not matter whether balsam of this or that species or region is mixed in; but it must be mixed in in such a quantity that the oil gives off the odor of balsam, yet it is not necessary that it be mixed with each single part of the oil.
c. In the Greek Church, from ancient usage, several other aromatics are mixed with the chrism; yet for this reason the matter of confirmation does not become invalid or illicit, provided oil and balsam are present, which alone are necessary.3
- That chrism must be consecrated by a bishop is necessary for the value of the sacrament, even if the sacrament is conferred by a presbyter. This is rightly deduced from the fact that this proposition, "the sacrament of extreme unction can be validly ministered with oil not consecrated by episcopal blessing," was condemned as rash and close to error; for the same holds a fortiori concerning confirmation.4
To most it seems certain that a simple priest cannot validly consecrate chrism, not even by delegation of the supreme pontiff. For in the decree of Eugenius IV it is said that the matter of confirmation is chrism blessed by a bishop. Moreover, although the power of administering confirmation is sometimes conferred on a simple priest, nevertheless it is always prescribed that he use only chrism blessed by a bishop.5 But concerning the facts which are brought forward to the contrary, they say that it is not certainly clear.6 Nevertheless it can scarcely be doubted that Eugenius IV, on 28 Jan. 1444, gave the vicar provincial of the Friars Minor in Bosnia the power of making chrism.7
- In order that it be certainly valid matter, the chrism must have been blessed by the special blessing of chrism, by which it is constituted the matter of this sacrament; other oil blessed by a bishop is doubtful matter of the sacrament of confirmation.8
Therefore confirmation administered with the oil of catechumens or of the sick is doubtful, because it has not been consecrated with the blessing which is prescribed for chrism. Since nevertheless the sacrament is not certainly invalid, in the article of death, or if someone otherwise would always lack this sacrament, if chrism is lacking, confirmation could be conferred under condition with another oil; and in the same way, if it can be done, confirmation which was conferred with oil alone is to be repeated under condition.9
- For administering confirmation licitly, from the precept of the Church fresh chrism must be used, i.e., chrism consecrated on the Lord's Supper just past. Only where new chrism cannot be had and there is an urgent cause of conferring confirmation is it licit to use old chrism.
1 From the decree of Eugenius IV for the Armenians. Cn. 780, 781.
2 Cf. Dolger, p. 192 f.
3 Benedict XIV, constitution Ex quo primum, 1 Mar. 1756.
4 Holy Office, 13 Jan. 1611; 14 Sept. 1842. Cf. Lehmkuhl, Theol. m., II, n. 93 (n. 126); Ballerini-Palmieri IV, n. 788; cn. 781.
5 Benedict XIV, De synodo, l. 7, c. 8, n. 1 s.
6 Cf. Benedict XIV, l. c., l. 7, c. 7; Ballerini-Palmieri IV, n. 789.
7 Cf. Linz. Quartalschrift, 1904, p. 805 ff.
8 Threefold oil is blessed by the bishop on the Lord's Supper, each with a special blessing of the Roman Pontifical: oil of the sick (O. I.), oil of catechumens or of salvation (O. S.), and holy chrism (S. Ch. or Ch.). The oil of the sick is used in administering extreme unction and in the consecration of bells for the exterior anointing; the oil of catechumens is used in baptism for the anointing which is made before baptism itself, in the ordination of a presbyter, and in some other consecrations, e.g., in the consecration of kings; chrism is used in confirmation, in baptism after baptism itself has been conferred, in the consecration of a bishop, and in various consecrations, e.g., of a chalice, paten, altar, bell (interiorly), etc.
9 St. Alphonsus, n. 162.
87. On the proximate matter. The proximate matter is the anointing of the person to be confirmed on the forehead, in the manner of a cross, applied immediately through the imposition of the hand.
Theologians sometimes signify both of these actions, namely the anointing and the imposition of the hand, by the name chrismation; ordinarily, however, they designate only the anointing by this name.
That the anointing with chrism is necessary for the value of the sacrament cannot be doubted. Although a few theologians thought that the imposition of the hand alone sufficed for the value of the sacrament, nevertheless, from the fact that chrism is essential matter, it follows that chrismation also is necessary for value.
That the anointing must be made immediately by the minister is certainly of the essence of the sacrament; otherwise the imposition of the hand, which is essential, would be lacking. Therefore confirmation is invalid in which the anointing is made by means of an instrument.1
That the anointing must be done on the forehead and in the manner of a cross is likewise more probably necessary for the value of the sacrament; for the Church has always regarded the anointing of the forehead as proper to confirmation, and the anointing of the crown of the head as proper to the baptismal anointing. Therefore if the anointing is made on the cheek or on the mouth, confirmation seems to be invalid. That the anointing must be made in the manner of a cross is clear from the form, which otherwise would not be true.
Finally, the imposition of the hand also, which the apostles themselves are read to have used for conferring the Holy Spirit,2 is essential. But that imposition is understood which is made by anointing. Therefore by the very fact that the bishop, anointing with his hand, touches the person to be confirmed, he is judged to impose his hand on him.
There is a twofold imposition of hands in confirmation: one at the beginning of the sacred rite, where the bishop extends his hands over those to be confirmed and recites the prayer Omnipotens; the other, which is not distinct from the anointing. This latter, not the first, is essential; for since the Greeks do not have the first imposition of hands, it would have to be said that they do not have the sacrament of confirmation, if that first imposition were affirmed to be necessary.3 And just as the first imposition of the hand, so also the blessing which is given at the end is required neither by necessity of sacrament nor by precept of the Church; for the words of the Roman Pontifical by which those to be confirmed are admonished not to depart before the blessing are not preceptive. Therefore although those to be confirmed, as far as can be done, ought to be present at the first imposition of hands and not depart before the blessing, nevertheless this is not necessary by force of precept.
1 Cn. 781, 2.
2 Cf. Acts 19, 6. Cn. 780; 781, 2.
3 Cf. S. C. de Prop. Fide, 6 Aug. 1840.
88. On the form. The form of confirmation consists in these words: I sign thee with the sign of the cross and confirm thee with the chrism of salvation in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. In this form: a. I sign signifies the sacramental action of signing and at the same time the essential effect of the sacrament, namely that a Christian man becomes a soldier of Christ; b. I confirm denotes the sacramental action of anointing and at the same time the likewise essential effect, namely the more abundant strength and grace of the Holy Spirit; c. the word thee designates the subject.
The form of the Greeks is this: Receive, or there is given to thee, the seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit. In this form, which is certainly valid and, by concession of the Roman Pontiff, also licit in the Greek Church, there is contained the principal minister of the sacrament, the Holy Spirit; the sacramental action applied to the person who is confirmed; and the essential effect, namely the communication of the Holy Spirit, who is the strength of the soul for professing the faith generously.
In the form of confirmation, therefore, the following are not essential: a. the word I sign or I confirm, for either one suffices; b. the words with the sign of the cross; c. the words with the chrism of salvation; d. the invocation of the most holy Trinity, for these are not found in the form of the Greeks, and the form of the Greeks cannot be called invalid. The consequence must be denied in the argument by which some try to show that the invocation of the most holy Trinity is necessary by necessity of sacrament, namely: confirmation is the complement of baptism; but in baptism the invocation of the most holy Trinity is necessary; therefore also in confirmation. For from the fact that in baptism, which is the beginning of faith, that invocation is necessary, it does not follow that it is also necessary in confirmation. Therefore the invocation of the most holy Trinity is necessary only by necessity of precept. - Besides, considering the diverse forms by which the sacrament of confirmation was administered in different places and times, it seems necessary to say that any words constitute a valid form which exhibit the essential character of the sacrament, namely the confirmation and perfection of faith and the communication of the Holy Spirit.