The Existence of the Sacrament of Confirmation

Confirmation is a true sacrament of the New Law. This is of faith from these words of the Council of Trent: "If anyone says that the Confirmation of the baptized is an idle ceremony and not rather a true and proper sacrament... let him be anathema."¹

It is doubtful at what time Christ instituted Confirmation. According to some, at the Last Supper; according to others, after the resurrection and before the ascension, namely while He was speaking with the Apostles about the kingdom of God and completing the mysteries of salvation;² according to others, on the day of Pentecost.

¹ Session 7, On Confirmation, canon 1.

² Acts 1:3.

The name "to confirm," which signifies "to give the Holy Spirit," seems first to have been employed by St. Ambrose in the fourth century, who says: "You have received the spiritual seal, the spirit of wisdom. God the Father has sealed you, Christ the Lord has confirmed you, and has given the pledge of the Spirit in your hearts."¹ The sacrament of confirmation has sometimes been called by other names: imposition of the hand, mystery of the ointment, sacrament of chrism, seal, perfection, sacrament of fullness, and so forth; in Greek, however: σφραγίς, χρίσμα, μύρον, the last of which names is now customarily employed by the Greeks.

¹ De myst., c. 7, n. 42 (Migne, Patr. lat. 16, 403).

150. Definition. Among the Holy Fathers and the older Scholastics there is no definition properly so called, but only a description of confirmation. It can be defined: A sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord, whereby the Holy Spirit is given to the baptized, through the imposition of the hand and the anointing with chrism under certain sacred words, for courageously and publicly confessing the faith by words and works. This definition will become clearer from what is to be said below concerning the effects of this sacrament and concerning its matter and form.

151. Existence. That confirmation exists as a true sacrament of the New Law is of faith, defined by several Councils, but especially by the Council of Florence, which teaches: "The second sacrament is confirmation, whose matter is chrism made from oil ... and balsam ... blessed by the bishop";² and by the Council of Trent, which says: "If anyone says 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 whereby those approaching adolescence gave an account of their faith before the Church, let him be anathema."³

It is not so certain whether the ancient heretics, namely, the Novatians and afterward the Albigensians, Waldensians, Wycliffites, and Hussites, truly denied confirmation or rather neglected it.⁴ The first who expressly denied that confirmation is a sacrament was Luther, although he had previously taught the contrary. Luther wished confirmation to be a mere ecclesiastical rite; Melanchthon, Calvin, and Chemnitz wished it to be a catechesis or public profession of faith. Against them the existence of the sacrament of confirmation is proved:

a) From Sacred Scripture. When the Samaritans "had believed Philip preaching of the kingdom of God, men and women were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ." Therefore, they had already been validly baptized, but had not yet received the Holy Spirit in a special manner; therefore, "when the apostles who were in Jerusalem had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John. Who, when they had come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for He had not yet come upon any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Spirit."⁵ From this text three things follow: 1. baptism is distinct from the imposition of hands and has another effect; 2. Philip, since he was a deacon, could not impose hands, but this was the proper office of the Apostles and their successors; 3. confirmation is a true sacrament, just as the Catholic Church has always taught. For in it are found: a) a sensible sign, namely, the imposition of hands; b) the conferral of grace, that is, a special reception of the Holy Spirit; c) institution by Christ, who often promised that He would send the Holy Spirit,⁶ and who alone can join sanctifying grace to a sensible sign.

b) From tradition. Tertullian speaks not obscurely of baptism and confirmation and adds that these things are done "from the ancient discipline."⁷ St. Cyprian, speaking of the baptism of Philip and of the imposition of hands by Peter and John narrated in the Acts of the Apostles, says: "This is also done now among us, that those who are baptized in the Church are brought to the prelates of the Church and, through our prayer and the imposition of hands, obtain the Holy Spirit and are perfected with the Lord's seal."⁸ The testimonies of other Fathers, for example, St. Augustine, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, and especially St. Cyril of Jerusalem, who has an entire catechesis, the third, concerning this sacrament,⁹ may be seen among the dogmatic theologians, for example, Billuart,¹⁰ or in the Roman Catechism.¹¹ A very efficacious argument for the existence of the sacrament of confirmation can also be drawn from the agreement of the Eastern Churches, all of which, except the Nestorians, acknowledge this sacrament.¹² When, however, Cyril Lucaris, Patriarch of Constantinople, denied confirmation among the other sacraments in the seventeenth century, he was immediately and vehemently opposed from all parts of the East.¹³

² Denz., n. 697.

³ Sess. 7, can. 1 on confirmation (Denz., n. 871).

⁴ Cf. Drouven, De confirm., q. 1.

⁵ Acts 8:12 sqq.

⁶ John 7:38 sq.; 14:15.

⁷ De bapt., c. 7 sq. (Migne, Patr. lat. 1, 1206 sqq.).

⁸ Ep. 73 to Jubaianus, n. 9 (Migne, loc. cit. 3, 1160).

⁹ Migne, Patr. graec. 33, 1090.

¹⁰ De confirm., a. 1.

¹¹ P. 2, c. 3, q. 3.

¹² Cf. Drouven, loc. cit., c. 1.

¹³ Cf. ibid.

152. Institution. Christ instituted confirmation, as He did all the other sacraments. When He did this is unknown. Some think that He did so at the Supper of the Lord after the institution of the Eucharist; for this reason, according to a most ancient custom introduced by St. Fabian in the third century, chrism is also consecrated by bishops on Thursday in the Supper of the Lord. St. Alphonsus favors this opinion.¹⁴ Pope Fabian writes in his second epistle: "For on that day [of the Last Supper], after the Lord Jesus had supped with His disciples and washed their feet, as our predecessors received from the holy Apostles and left to us, He taught them to confect chrism."¹⁵ Others think that confirmation was indeed instituted after the Resurrection, but that the obligation of it began after Pentecost. Concerning this matter St. Thomas¹⁶ writes: "Concerning the institution of this sacrament there is a twofold opinion. For some said that this sacrament was instituted neither by Christ nor by the Apostles, but afterward, in the course of time, in a certain Council;¹⁷ others, however, said that it was instituted by the Apostles. But this cannot be, because to institute a new sacrament belongs to the power of excellence, which belongs to Christ alone. And therefore it must be said that Christ instituted this sacrament, not by exhibiting it, but by promising it."

From these words it is by no means lawful to conclude that Christ did not institute the sacrament of confirmation but only promised it. Otherwise the Angelic Doctor ought to have conceded institution by the Apostles, which nevertheless he denies in express words. The sense, therefore, is: Christ truly instituted the sacrament of confirmation, but this sacrament was not actually administered until after the promised descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. "And this was because in this sacrament the fullness of the Holy Spirit is given, which was not to be given before Christ's Resurrection and Ascension, according to that saying:¹⁸ 'The Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.'"¹⁹

¹⁴ Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 161.

¹⁵ In Mansi, Collect. Conc. I, col. 775. Some consider this epistle of Fabian apocryphal.

¹⁶ S. theol. 3, q. 72, a. 1 ad 1.

¹⁷ At Meaux in the year 845; this is the opinion of Alexander of Hales; cf. above, n. 49.

¹⁸ John 7:39.

¹⁹ St. Thomas, loc. cit.; cf. the condemned thesis 44 of the Syllabus of Pius X (Denz., n. 2044).

153. The effects of confirmation are three by divine law: a) character; b) an increase of sanctifying grace; c) sacramental grace; by ecclesiastical law there is added d) spiritual kinship.

a) That a character is imprinted in confirmation is of faith, defined by the Council of Trent.²⁰ That the character of confirmation differs numerically and essentially from the character of baptism is taught by the far more probable and common opinion. The Holy Fathers often speak of this character as of a seal,²¹ by which a man is marked and disposed as a good soldier to fight courageously in dangers to the faith. Because of the character imprinted, the sacrament of confirmation cannot be repeated.

St. Thomas²² writes concerning the character of confirmation: "Through the sacrament of confirmation there is given to man spiritual power for certain other sacred actions besides those for which power is given to him in baptism. For in baptism man receives the power to do those things which pertain to his own salvation, insofar, namely, as he lives according to himself; but in confirmation man receives the power to do those things which pertain to the spiritual battle against the enemies of the faith, as is evident from the example of the Apostles, who, before they received the fullness of the Holy Spirit, were persevering in prayer in the upper room; but afterward, going forth, they did not fear publicly to confess the faith even before the enemies of the Christian faith.... The character of confirmation is a distinctive sign, not of infidels from the faithful, but of those spiritually advanced from those to whom it is said: 'As newborn infants,'²³ and so forth."

b) An increase of sanctifying grace is given in confirmation, and notably the seven gifts are increased, by which man is made well disposed to be moved by the Holy Spirit. For confirmation is a sacrament of the living, which accordingly presupposes the state of grace and increases it. Certainly, in every conferral of sanctifying grace the Holy Spirit is given, since the whole Trinity dwells in the soul of the just; but in a special manner the Holy Spirit comes through confirmation and increases grace, the seven gifts, and all the virtues.

c) The sacramental graces annexed to confirmation are reduced especially to the exercise of a special fortitude and are not unfittingly signified by the diverse ceremonies of confirmation. For in confirmation an anointing with oil mixed with balsam is employed. Just as an anointing was accustomed to prepare one for battle, just as oil signifies the brightness of conscience, and balsam the fragrance of the virtues, so in confirmation man receives sacramental graces for fighting courageously, for preserving purity of conscience, and for furnishing a virtuous example. The anointing is made upon the forehead and with the imposition of the hand, to cast out all undue shame and to signify a certain deputation or consecration to the office of a soldier of Christ. The blow on the cheek is given with the words, "Peace be with you," so that it may be signified most beautifully that a Christian man ought and is able to suffer injuries of every kind without the interior peace of the soul thereby being disturbed.

The Roman Catechism, using the words of Pseudo-Miltiades (Melchiades), explains very fittingly and concisely the difference between the graces of baptism and confirmation: "In baptism man is received into the soldiery, and in confirmation he is armed for battle. In the font of baptism the Holy Spirit bestows fullness unto innocence; in confirmation, however, He ministers perfection unto grace. In baptism we are regenerated unto life; after baptism we are confirmed for battle. In baptism we are washed; after baptism we are strengthened. Regeneration by itself saves in peace those receiving baptism; confirmation arms and instructs them for contests."²⁴ This text also plainly demonstrates that, already in the most ancient times, not only the existence but also the efficacy of confirmation was acknowledged. For although the works of Miltiades are today regarded as spurious, they are nevertheless certainly most ancient.²⁵

d) Spiritual kinship arises from valid confirmation between the confirmed person and the sponsor; from this kinship the sponsor must have the confirmed person perpetually commended to him and care for his Christian education.²⁶ Nevertheless, an impediment of marriage no longer arises from such kinship.

²⁰ Sess. 7, can. 9 on the sacraments in general (Denz., n. 852).

²¹ Cf. the text of St. Cyprian cited above.

²² S. theol. 3, q. 72, a. 5, corp. and ad 1.

²³ 1 Peter 2:2.

²⁴ P. 2, c. 3, q. 4.

²⁵ Cf. Jaffé, *Reg. Rom. Pont.*², p. 28, nn. 171-173.

²⁶ Code of Canon Law, c. 797.

S. Th. III, q. 72, a. 1.

176. State of the question. - The Reformers denied to Confirmation the dignity of a sacrament; and today all Protestants, the Ritualists excepted, deny this sacrament.

Already formerly the Novatians, Waldensians, and Albigensians seem to have denied this Sacrament or at least neglected it as a useless rite. Luther was the first who expressly denied the sacrament, and asserted that it was a mere ecclesiastical ceremony. But Calvin taught that the Lord had willed that the Apostles should, by imposition of hands, communicate the charisms of the Holy Spirit or graces gratuitously given to the faithful; but when the charisms ceased, the rite also ought to have ceased. Yet the Church retained it so that catechesis might be completed with a certain solemnity, by which adolescents expounded the reason of their faith before the bishop. Therefore it was a ceremony introduced by bishops so that they might assert their authority over the faithful; but a later age posited it as a sacrament and thus took away half the efficacy from Baptism.¹

¹ Van Noort, op. cit., n. 242.

In modern times certain Modernists maintained: "Nothing proves that the rite of the sacrament of Confirmation was used by the apostles: moreover the formal distinction of the two sacraments, namely Baptism and Confirmation, does not pertain to the history of primitive Christianity" (prop. 44). This was reproved by the Church.

177. Thesis. Confirmation is a true sacrament of the New Law, instituted by Christ and distinct from Baptism. - It is of faith from the Second Council of Lyons, profession of faith of Michael Palaeologus; Florence, decree for the Armenians; and Trent, sess. 7, on the Sacraments, can. 1, and on Confirmation, cap. 1, of which the first part is against Luther, the other against Calvin.

It is proved: 1. From the Scriptures: Acts VIII, 12-18 and XIX, 1-6, from which it is established that the Apostles imposed hands on the baptized faithful so that they might receive the Holy Spirit.

There all the essential elements of a sacrament are found:

a) a sensible sign: imposition of hands;

b) conferring grace ex opere operato, because, hands having been imposed, the Holy Spirit is immediately given; but He, as Scripture bears witness (John VII, 37-39; Rom. V, 5; I Cor. II, 12; III, 16; Gal. V, 22; I Thess. IV, 8), is not given without grace; but in the case grace confers virtue and strength for confessing the faith (Acts I, 8);

c) distinct from Baptism, because hands are imposed upon those previously baptized, and this belongs to the apostles alone, not to deacons; likewise distinct from Order, because the imposition was done upon all, both women and men;

d) permanently instituted: for it is used not once, but commonly, and not by one apostle indeed, but by all; and indeed as the fulfillment of the promises of Christ, who promised the Holy Spirit to all the faithful. Whence it is referred to as pertaining "to the beginning of Christ" (Heb. VI, 1-4), i.e. to the initiation of Christians. This, moreover, is clear from universal Tradition.

2. From Tradition. At the beginning there are not direct and formal testimonies, because the writers are few and do not intend to make a complete exposition of the doctrine or practice of the Church or even of the rites of initiation; but there are several incidental allusions. From the third century explicit testimonies are had concerning Confirmation as distinct from Baptism, and as pertaining to primitive discipline and continuing the practice of the apostles. In the fourth century the doctrine is common. Whence Innocent I in the fifth century recalls it as universally known and customary.

Clement of Rome II, 2; Hermas, Simil. IX; Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. I, 23, 31; Clement of Alexandria, Quis dives salvetur, 42; Origen, De Princ. I, 3, have allusions and insinuations. Explicit testimonies are exhibited by Tertullian, De Baptismo VI and VIII; De carn. res. 8; De praescr. 36; Cyprian, ep. 73, n. 9, and 74, n. 7; Firmilian, ep. to Cyprian n. 7 (75 among the epistles of Cyprian); the anonymous work De Rebaptizante, n. 3; Cornelius, ep. to Fabius (H.E. VI, 43); Didascalia III, 12; Council of Elvira (a. 306), can. 38; Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. myst. III, 3; Gregory Nazianzen, or. XL, 15; Hilary, on Matthew IV, 27; X, 2; XIX, 12; Ambrose, De myst. VI, 29; VII, 42; Chrysostom, on Acts, hom. XVIII, 3; Jerome, Adv. Lucif. 9; Pacian, to Sympronianus I, 6; Optatus of Milevis, De schism. Don. II, 42; IV, 7; Augustine, Contra duas ep. Pel. II, 104; De Trin. XV, 26; Leo, serm. on the Nativity IV, 6.

3. From the reason of fittingness which St. Thomas explains, a. 1:

Where a special effect of grace occurs, there must be a special sacrament. But, just as in bodily life it is one special perfection to be generated unto life, and another to arrive at perfect age, so in the spiritual life it is one thing to be spiritually regenerated, and another to receive, as it were, the perfect age of this life. Therefore, just as there is a special Sacrament, namely Baptism, by which we are regenerated unto the life of grace, so there must be a special sacrament by which we attain the perfect age of this life, and this is Confirmation. Therefore Confirmation is a special sacrament.

178. Observation. - Concerning the mode and time in which this sacrament was instituted, there has been a manifold opinion. It is better said with St. Thomas, ad 1: "Christ instituted this sacrament, not by exhibiting it, but by promising it (John XVI, 7)," insofar as by His will He established that it was to be conferred, but He Himself did not minister it, because "in this sacrament the fullness of the Holy Spirit is given, which was not to be given before the resurrection and ascension of Christ (John VII, 39)."