Sect. 254Nature and Institution of ConfirmationNature and Institution of Confirmation

I. After a person has been born again, and cleansed from his original stain, he needs to be spiritually strengthened by the Holy Ghost to enable him to overcome the enemies of his soul; he must be enrolled in Christ’s army, and a mark must be set upon him whereby he may be known to be a Christian soldier. The sacrament instituted for this purpose should therefore, by its outward signs, indicate these effects.

1. To lay the hand on any one is the means of pointing him out; and is often an emblem of setting him apart for any particular office or dignity. Imposition of hands, accordingly, formed a part of the ceremonial observed on the appointment and consecration of persons to high and holy undertakings. “Take Josue, the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and put thy hand upon him,” etc. (Num. 28:18). Again, anointing with oil was used by the ancients for the purpose of strengthening the limbs, and so enabling the athletes to take part in the contests of the arena. Hence imposition of hands and anointing are made use of in this sacrament. There has been much difference of opinion as to whether the latter is part of the matter of Confirmation. According to the Council of Florence (Decr. pro Armenis), chrism is the matter. We find that the Fathers speak of “the sacrament of anointing,” and attribute to the chrism the power of conferring grace. Thus, Tertullian (De Bapt., c. 7): “After this, having come out of the laver, we are anointed thoroughly with a blessed unction according to the ancient rule.… The unction runs bodily over us, but profits spiritually.” And St. Cyril of Jerusalem: “To you also, after you had come up from the pool of the sacred streams, was given the chrism (unction), the emblem (antitype) of that wherewith Christ was anointed; and this is the Holy Ghost.… After the invocation, this holy ointment is no longer plain ointment, nor, so to say, common, but Christ’s gift, and by the presence of His Godhead it causes in us the Holy Ghost” (Cat. Myst., iii. 3). (Cf. St. Cyril of Alexandria, Comm. in Joel, ii. 23; and St. Augustine, In 1 Ep. Joann., tract. iii. n. 5). So, too, St. Thomas: “Chrism is the appropriate (conveniens) matter of this sacrament; for in this sacrament the fulness of the Holy Ghost is given for the spiritual strength which belongs to perfect age.… Now, the grace of the Holy Ghost is symbolized by oil; wherefore Christ is said to be ‘anointed with the oil of gladness’ (Ps. 44; Heb. 1:9), on account of the fulness of the Holy Ghost which He had” (3, q. 72, a. 2). Moreover, the Eastern Churches have always looked upon the anointing with chrism as the principal part of the sacrament, and to it they attribute the power of impressing upon the soul the seal of the Holy Ghost; so that for many centuries past the sacrament has gone by the name of “the Sacrament of Chrism,” or “Chrism” simply. (Chardon, Confirm., ch. i.). Nevertheless, when the sacrament was conferred by the Apostles, no mention is ever made of anointing. On the other hand, no mention of imposition of hands is made by the Council of Florence; nor is it found in the Greek rituals (see, however, Chardon, l.c.). But the anointing spoken of by St. John (“Let the unction (τὸ χρῖσμα) which you have received abide in you,” 1 Ep. 2:27; cf. 20) and St. Paul (“He that confirmeth us with you in Christ, and that hath anointed us, is God, Who also hath sealed us, and given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts, ὁ δὲ βεβαιῶν ἡμᾶς σὺν ὑμῖν εἰς Χριστὸν καὶ χρίσας ἡμᾶς Θεός, ὁ καὶ σφραγισάμενος ἡμᾶς καὶ δοὺς τὸν ἀραβῶνα τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν,” 2 Cor. 1:20, 21) may be referred to this sacrament; and as the very act of anointing involves a laying-on of hands, the omission of any express mention of it need not present much difficulty. In practice, however, the general imposition of hands prescribed in the Roman ritual must not be omitted when the sacrament is conferred on those who are subject to the Western rite.

2. The form of Confirmation—that is to say, the distinguishing element which marks off the imposition of hands and anointing from the ordinary profane use of these acts—consists in words suited for this purpose. When the Apostles conferred the sacrament, “they prayed for [the baptized] that they might receive the Holy Ghost.… Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost” (Acts 8:15–17). What words were used is not mentioned, and hence considerable variation has prevailed (see Chardon, l.c.). Besides the prayers accompanying the imposition of hands, the Roman rite prescribes the following to accompany the anointing: “I sign thee with the sign of the cross, and I confirm thee with the chrism of salvation, in the name of the Father,” etc. This formula did not come into general use, according to Chardon, until the twelfth century. The formula in the Greek Church is simply, “The seal of the gift of the Holy Ghost (σφραγίς δωρεᾶς Πνεύματος Ἁγίου),” and was prescribed by the First Council of Constantinople (381).

II. The institution of Confirmation by our Lord is nowhere expressly stated in Scripture; nevertheless, there are several texts from which this institution may be inferred.

1. Christ promised that those who believed in Him should receive the Holy Ghost (John 7:37–39); and in the discourse at the Last Supper He made frequent reference to the sending of the same Spirit (ibid. 15, 16). We find the Apostles from the very first making use of a rite to confer this Divine gift (Acts 8:14–17; 19:1–6), and frequently alluding to it in their writings (2 Cor. 1:21, 22; Eph. 1:13; Tit. 3:5; 1 John 1:2, 7). We may be sure that they would not take upon themselves to confer a rite in addition to Baptism (which Christ had expressly enjoined) unless they had received it from Him. The institution probably took place some time during our Lord’s risen life, “when He showed Himself alive after His passion by many proofs, for forty days appearing to them, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3).

2. The Fathers frequently speak of this sacrament, mentioning it along with Baptism and the Eucharist; e.g Tertullian (supra, p. 394); St. Cyprian, “Anointed also must he of necessity be who is baptized, in order that, having received the chrism, that is, the unction, he may be anointed of God, and have within him the grace of Christ” (Ep. lxx. ad Januarium). (For St. Cyril of Jerusalem, see supra, p. 394). St. Cyril of Alexandria, explaining Isaias 25:6, says, “By the wine he signifies the mystic eulogy and the manner of the unbloody sacrifice which we are wont to celebrate in the holy churches; whilst the ointment admirably points out to us the unction of the Holy Spirit. For the wise John writes, ‘And you have an unction from the Holy One, and you have no need that any man teach you, but as His unction teacheth you of all things;’ for we are anointed with ointment at the time, especially of the holy Baptism, making a symbol of our partaking of the Holy Spirit” (In Esai., 1. iii.). If more frequent mention of Confirmation as a special sacrament is not found among the early Fathers, this arose from the fact that as baptism was usually conferred upon grown-up people, Confirmation immediately followed. Later Fathers speak clearly enough; e.g. St. Pacian: “By the laver sins are cleansed away; by the chrism the Holy Spirit is poured upon us; but both of these we obtain at the hand and mouth of the bishop, and thus the whole man is born again and is renewed in Christ” (Serm. de Bapt., nn. 5, 6). Cf. St. Ambrose, De Mysteriis, c. vii. n. 42; St. John Chrysostom, Hom. xviii. in Act. Apost., n. 3; see also Hom. ix. in Ep. ad Heb., n. 2; St. Augustine, Serm. ccxxvii. ad Infantes; Tract, vi. in Ep. Joan; St. Innocent I., Ep. xxv. ad Decentium, n. 6, etc. They do not speak clearly of its institution by our Lord.

3. Some of the greatest of the Schoolmen were of opinion that the sacrament was instituted by the Holy Ghost through the instrumentality of the Apostles (Peter Lomb. Sent., iv. dist. 7; Hugh of St. Victor, De Sacram., ii.; St. Bonav., in 4 dist. 7, a. 1, q. 1). St. Thomas, however, with the greater number, held the institution by our Lord. “Concerning the institution of this sacrament,” says the Angelic Doctor, “there are two opinions: some say that this sacrament was instituted neither by Christ nor by His Apostles, but later on in the course of time at a certain council. This was the opinion of Alexander of Hales (Summ. iv. q. 9, m. 1), whereas others said that it was instituted by the Apostles. But this cannot be the case, because the institution of a sacrament belongs to the power of excellence which is proper to Christ alone. And therefore we must hold that Christ instituted this sacrament not by showing it (exhibendo), but by promising it, according to the text (John 16:7), ‘If I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.’ And this because in this sacrament the fulness of the Holy Ghost is given which was not to be given before Christ’s resurrection and ascension, according to the text (John 7:39), ‘As yet the Spirit was not given, because Jesus was not yet glorified’ “ (3, q. 72, a. 1, ad. 1). Though the Council of Trent refrained from any express canon on the subject, it nevertheless defined of the sacraments generally, that “all were instituted by Christ Jesus our Lord”, (sess. vii., De Sacr. in Gen., can. 1); and hence all the later theologians have held that Confirmation was instituted by Him. This opinion is not, however, strictly of faith. See Franzelin, De Sacr. in Gen., p. 183.