Tertia Pars · Baptism and Confirmation

Of the Sacrament of Confirmation

III, q. 72 · Twelve articles

Prooemium · Thomas's plan for this question

Consequenter considerandum est de sacramento confirmationis. Et circa hoc quaeruntur duodecim. Primo, utrum confirmatio sit sacramentum. Secundo, de materia eius. Tertio, utrum sit de necessitate sacramenti quod chrisma fuerit prius per episcopum consecratum. Quarto, de forma ipsius. Quinto, utrum imprimat characterem. Sexto, utrum character confirmationis praesupponat characterem baptismalem. Septimo, utrum conferat gratiam. Octavo, cui competat recipere hoc sacramentum. Nono, in qua parte. Decimo, utrum requiratur aliquis qui teneat confirmandum. Undecimo, utrum hoc sacramentum per solos episcopos detur. Duodecimo, de ritu eius.

We have now to consider the Sacrament of Confirmation. Concerning this there are twelve points of inquiry:

(1) Whether Confirmation is a sacrament?

(2) Its matter;

(3) Whether it is essential to the sacrament that the chrism should have been previously consecrated by a bishop?

(4) Its form;

(5) Whether it imprints a character?

(6) Whether the character of Confirmation presupposes the character of Baptism?

(7) Whether it bestows grace?

(8) Who is competent to receive this sacrament?

(9) In what part of the body?

(10) Whether someone is required to stand for the person to be confirmed?

(11) Whether this sacrament is given by bishops only?

(12) Of its rite.

1 Whether Confirmation Is a Sacrament?
2 Whether Chrism Is a Fitting Matter for This Sacrament?
3 Whether It Is Essential to This Sacrament That the Chrism Which Is Its Matter Be Previously Consecrated by a Bishop?
4 Whether the Proper Form of This Sacrament Is: "I Sign Thee with the Sign of the Cross," Etc.?
5 Whether the Sacrament of Confirmation Imprints a Character?
6 Whether the Character of Confirmation Presupposes of Necessity, the Baptismal Character?
7 Whether Sanctifying Grace Is Bestowed in This Sacrament?
8 Whether This Sacrament Should Be Given to All?
9 Whether This Sacrament Should Be Given to Man on the Forehead?
10 Whether He Who Is Confirmed Needs One to Stand* for Him? [Literally, "to hold him"]
11 Whether Only a Bishop Can Confer This Sacrament?
12 Whether the Rite of This Sacrament Is Appropriate?

Articulus I

Whether Confirmation Is a Sacrament?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod confirmatio non sit sacramentum. Sacramenta enim ex divina institutione efficaciam habent, sicut supra dictum est. Sed confirmatio non legitur a Christo instituta. Ergo non est sacramentum.

It seems that Confirmation is not a sacrament. For sacraments derive their efficacy from the Divine institution, as stated above (Q. 64, A. 2). But we read nowhere of Confirmation being instituted by Christ. Therefore it is not a sacrament.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, sacramenta novae legis in veteri praefigurata fuerunt, ut apostolus dicit, I Cor. X, quod omnes in Moyse baptizati sunt in nube et in mari, et omnes eandem spiritualem escam manducaverunt, et omnes eundem potum spiritualem biberunt. Sed confirmatio non fuit praefigurata in veteri testamento. Ergo non est sacramentum.

Further, the sacraments of the New Law were foreshadowed in the Old Law; thus the Apostle says (1 Cor. 10:2-4), that "all in Moses were baptized, in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink." But Confirmation was not foreshadowed in the old Testament. Therefore it is not a sacrament.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, sacramenta ordinantur ad hominum salutem. Sed sine confirmatione potest esse salus, nam pueri baptizati sine confirmatione decedentes salvantur. Ergo confirmatio non est sacramentum.

Further, the sacraments are ordained unto man's salvation. But man can be saved without Confirmation: since children that are baptized, who die before being confirmed, are saved. Therefore Confirmation is not a sacrament.

Arg. 4 Objection 4

Praeterea, per omnia sacramenta Ecclesiae homo Christo conformatur, qui est sacramentorum auctor. Sed per confirmationem homo Christo conformari non potest, qui non legitur esse confirmatus.

Further, by all the sacraments of the Church, man is conformed to Christ, Who is the Author of the sacraments. But man cannot be conformed to Christ by Confirmation, since we read nowhere of Christ being confirmed.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Melchiades Papa scribit Hispaniarum episcopis, de his super quibus rogastis nos vos informari, idest, utrum maius sit sacramentum manus impositio episcoporum an Baptismus, scitote utrumque magnum esse sacramentum.

On the contrary, Pope Melchiades wrote to the bishops of Spain: "Concerning the point on which you sought to be informed, i.e. whether the imposition of the bishop's hand were a greater sacrament than Baptism, know that each is a great sacrament."

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod sacramenta novae legis ordinantur ad speciales gratiae effectus, et ideo, ubi occurrit aliquis specialis effectus gratiae, ibi ordinatur speciale sacramentum. Quia vero sensibilia et corporalia gerunt spiritualium et intelligibilium similitudinem, ex his quae in vita corporali aguntur, percipere possumus quid in spirituali vita speciale existat. Manifestum est autem quod in vita corporali specialis quaedam perfectio est quod homo ad perfectam aetatem perveniat, et perfectas actiones hominis agere possit, unde et apostolus dicit, I Cor. XIII, cum autem factus sum vir, evacuavi quae erant parvuli. Et inde etiam est quod, praeter motum generationis, quo aliquis accipit vitam corporalem, est motus augmenti, quo aliquis perducitur ad perfectam aetatem. Sic igitur et vitam spiritualem homo accipit per Baptismum, qui est spiritualis regeneratio. In confirmatione autem homo accipit quasi quandam aetatem perfectam spiritualis vitae. Unde Melchiades Papa dicit, spiritus sanctus, qui super aquas Baptismi salutifero descendit lapsu, in fonte plenitudinem tribuit ad innocentiam, in confirmatione augmentum praestat ad gratiam. In Baptismo regeneramur ad vitam, post Baptismum roboramur. Et ideo manifestum est quod confirmatio est speciale sacramentum.

I answer that, The sacraments of the New Law are ordained unto special effects of grace: and therefore where there is a special effect of grace, there we find a special sacrament ordained for the purpose. But since sensible and material things bear a likeness to things spiritual and intelligible, from what occurs in the life of the body, we can perceive that which is special to the spiritual life. Now it is evident that in the life of the body a certain special perfection consists in man's attaining to the perfect age, and being able to perform the perfect actions of a man: hence the Apostle says (1 Cor. 13:11): "When I became a man, I put away the things of a child." And thence it is that besides the movement of generation whereby man receives life of the body, there is the movement of growth, whereby man is brought to the perfect age. So therefore does man receive spiritual life in Baptism, which is a spiritual regeneration: while in Confirmation man arrives at the perfect age, as it were, of the spiritual life. Hence Pope Melchiades says: "The Holy Ghost, Who comes down on the waters of Baptism bearing salvation in His flight, bestows at the font, the fulness of innocence; but in Confirmation He confers an increase of grace. In Baptism we are born again unto life; after Baptism we are strengthened." And therefore it is evident that Confirmation is a special sacrament.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod circa institutionem huius sacramenti est triplex opinio. Quidam enim dixerunt quod hoc sacramentum non fuit institutum nec a Christo nec ab apostolis, sed postea processu temporis in quodam Concilio. Alii vero dixerunt quod fuit institutum ab apostolis. Sed hoc non potest esse, quia instituere novum sacramentum pertinet ad potestatem excellentiae, quae competit soli Christo. Et ideo dicendum quod Christus instituit hoc sacramentum, non exhibendo, sed promittendo, secundum illud Ioan. XVI, nisi ego abiero, Paraclitus non veniet ad vos, si autem abiero, mittam eum ad vos. Et hoc ideo quia in hoc sacramento datur plenitudo spiritus sancti, quae non erat danda ante Christi resurrectionem et ascensionem, secundum illud Ioan. VII, nondum erat spiritus datus, quia Iesus nondum erat glorificatus.

Concerning the institution of this sacrament there are three opinions. Some (Alexander of Hales, Summa Theol. P. IV, Q. IX; St. Bonaventure, Sent. iv, D, 7) have maintained that this sacrament was instituted neither by Christ, nor by the apostles; but later in the course of time by one of the councils. Others (Pierre de Tarentaise, Sent. iv, D, 7) held that it was instituted by the apostles. But this cannot be admitted; since the institution of a new sacrament belongs to the power of excellence, which belongs to Christ alone.

And therefore we must say that Christ instituted this sacrament not by bestowing, but by promising it, according to 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 was because in this sacrament the fulness of the Holy Ghost is bestowed, which was not to be given before Christ's Resurrection and Ascension; according to John 7:39: "As yet the Spirit was not given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod confirmatio est sacramentum plenitudinis gratiae, et ideo non potuit habere aliquid respondens in veteri lege, quia nihil ad perfectum adduxit lex, ut dicitur Heb. VII.

Confirmation is the sacrament of the fulness of grace: wherefore there could be nothing corresponding to it in the Old Law, since "the Law brought nothing to perfection" (Heb. 7:19).

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, omnia sacramenta sunt aliqualiter necessaria ad salutem, sed quaedam sine quibus non est salus, quaedam vero sicut quae operantur ad perfectionem salutis. Et hoc modo confirmatio est de necessitate salutis, quamvis sine ea possit esse salus, dummodo non praetermittatur ex contemptu sacramenti.

As stated above (Q. 65, A. 4), all the sacraments are in some way necessary for salvation: but some, so that there is no salvation without them; some as conducing to the perfection of salvation; and thus it is that Confirmation is necessary for salvation: although salvation is possible without it, provided it be not omitted out of contempt.

Ad 4 Reply to Objection 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod illi qui confirmationem accipiunt, quae est sacramentum plenitudinis gratiae, Christo conformantur inquantum ipse a primo instanti suae conceptionis fuit plenus gratiae et veritatis, ut dicitur Ioan. I. Quae quidem plenitudo declarata est in Baptismo, quando spiritus sanctus descendit corporali specie super eum. Unde et Luc. IV dicitur quod Iesus plenus spiritu sancto regressus est a Iordane. Non autem conveniebat dignitati Christi, qui est sacramentorum auctor, ut a sacramento plenitudinem gratiae acciperet.

Those who receive Confirmation, which is the sacrament of the fulness of grace, are conformed to Christ, inasmuch as from the very first instant of His conception He was "full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). This fulness was made known at His Baptism, when "the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape . . . upon Him" (Luke 3:22). Hence (Luke 4:1) it is written that "Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost, returned from the Jordan." Nor was it fitting to Christ's dignity, that He, Who is the Author of the sacraments, should receive the fulness of grace from a sacrament.

Articulus II

Whether Chrism Is a Fitting Matter for This Sacrament?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod chrisma non sit conveniens materia huius sacramenti. Hoc enim sacramentum, ut dictum est, institutum est a Christo promittente discipulis spiritum sanctum. Sed ipse misit eis spiritum sanctum absque chrismatis unctione. Ipsi etiam apostoli hoc sacramentum conferebant per solam manus impositionem, absque chrismate, dicitur enim Act. VIII quod apostoli imponebant manus super baptizatos, et accipiebant spiritum sanctum. Ergo chrisma non est materia huius sacramenti, quia materia est de necessitate sacramenti.

It seems that chrism is not a fitting matter for this sacrament. For this sacrament, as stated above (A. 1, ad 1), was instituted by Christ when He promised His disciples the Holy Ghost. But He sent them the Holy Ghost without their being anointed with chrism. Moreover, the apostles themselves bestowed this sacrament without chrism, by the mere imposition of hands: for it is written (Acts 8:17) that the apostles "laid their hands upon" those who were baptized, "and they received the Holy Ghost." Therefore chrism is not the matter of this sacrament: since the matter is essential to the sacrament.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, confirmatio quodammodo perficit sacramentum Baptismi, sicut supra dictum est, et ita debet ei conformari sicut perfectio perfectibili. Sed in Baptismo est materia simplex elementum, scilicet aqua. Ergo huius sacramenti non est conveniens materia chrisma, quod conficitur ex oleo et balsamo.

Further, Confirmation perfects, in a way, the sacrament of Baptism, as stated above (Q. 65, AA. 3, 4): and so it ought to be conformed to it as perfection to the thing perfected. But the matter, in Baptism, is a simple element, viz. water. Therefore chrism, which is made of oil and balm, is not a fitting matter for this sacrament.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, oleum assumitur in materia huius sacramenti ad inungendum. Sed quolibet oleo potest fieri inunctio, puta oleo quod fit ex nucibus, et ex quibuscumque aliis rebus. Non ergo solum oleum olivarum debet assumi ad huiusmodi sacramentum.

Further, oil is used as the matter of this sacrament for the purpose of anointing. But any oil will do for anointing: for instance, oil made from nuts, and from anything else. Therefore not only olive oil should be used for this sacrament.

Arg. 4 Objection 4

Praeterea, supra dictum est quod aqua assumitur ut materia ad baptizandum quia ubique de facili invenitur. Sed oleum olivarum non ubique invenitur, et multo minus balsamum. Non ergo chrisma, quod ex his conficitur, est conveniens materia huius sacramenti.

Further, it has been stated above (Q. 66, A. 3) that water is used as the matter of Baptism, because it is easily procured everywhere. But olive oil is not to be procured everywhere; and much less is balm. Therefore chrism, which is made of these, is not a fitting matter for this sacrament.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Gregorius dicit, in registro, presbyteri baptizatos infantes signare in frontibus sacro chrismate non praesumant. Ergo chrisma est materia huius sacramenti.

On the contrary, Gregory says (Registr. iv): "Let no priest dare to sign the baptized infants on the brow with the sacred chrism." Therefore chrism is the matter of this sacrament.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod chrisma est conveniens materia huius sacramenti. Sicut enim dictum est, in hoc sacramento datur plenitudo spiritus sancti ad robur spirituale, quod competit perfectae aetati. Homo autem, cum ad perfectam aetatem pervenerit, incipit iam communicare actiones suas ad alios, antea vero quasi singulariter sibi ipsi vivit. Gratia vero spiritus sancti in oleo designatur, unde Christus dicitur esse, unctus oleo laetitiae, propter plenitudinem spiritus sancti quam habuit. Et ideo oleum competit materiae huius sacramenti. Admiscetur autem balsamum propter fragrantiam odoris, quae redundat ad alios, unde et apostolus dicit, II Cor. II, Christi bonus odor sumus, et cetera. Et licet multa alia sint odorifera, tamen praecipue accipitur balsamum, propter hoc quod habet praecipuum odorem, et quia etiam incorruptionem praestat, unde Eccli. XXIV dicitur, quasi balsamum non mixtum odor meus.

I answer that, Chrism is the fitting matter of this sacrament. For, as stated above (A. 1), in this sacrament the fulness of the Holy Ghost is given for the spiritual strength which belongs to the perfect age. Now when man comes to perfect age he begins at once to have intercourse with others; whereas until then he lives an individual life, as it were, confined to himself. Now the grace of the Holy Ghost is signified by oil; hence Christ is said to be "anointed with the oil of gladness" (Ps. 44:8), by reason of His being gifted with the fulness of the Holy Ghost. Consequently oil is a suitable matter of this sacrament. And balm is mixed with the oil, by reason of its fragrant odor, which spreads about: hence the Apostle says (2 Cor. 2:15): "We are the good odor of Christ," etc. And though many other things be fragrant, yet preference is given to balm, because it has a special odor of its own, and because it confers incorruptibility: hence it is written (Ecclus. 24:21): "My odor is as the purest balm."

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Christus ex potestate quam habet in sacramentis, contulit apostolis rem huius sacramenti, idest plenitudinem spiritus sancti, sine sacramento, eo quod ipsi primitias spiritus sancti acceperunt, sicut dicitur Rom. VIII. Nihilominus tamen aliquid conforme materiae huius sacramenti exhibitum fuit apostolis sensibiliter in collatione spiritus sancti. Quod enim spiritus sanctus sensibiliter super eos descendit in specie ignis, ad eandem significationem refertur ad quam refertur oleum, nisi quod ignis habet vim activam, oleum autem vim passivam, inquantum est materia et fomentum ignis. Et hoc satis competebat, nam per apostolos gratia spiritus sancti erat ad alios derivanda. Super apostolos etiam spiritus sanctus descendit in figura linguae. Quod ad idem refertur significandum quod significat balsamum, nisi quod lingua per locutionem est communicativa ad alterum, balsamum vero per odorem; quia scilicet apostoli replebantur spiritu sancto ut fidei doctores, alii vero fideles ut operatores eorum quae pertinent ad aedificationem fidelium. Similiter etiam ad impositionem manus apostolorum, et etiam ad eorum praedicationem, descendebat plenitudo spiritus sancti super fideles sub visibilibus signis, sicut a principio descenderat super apostolos, unde Petrus dicit, Act. XI, cum coepissem loqui, cecidit spiritus sanctus super eos, sicut et in nos in initio. Et ideo non erat necessaria sensibilis materia sacramentalis, ubi sensibilia signa miraculose exhibebantur divinitus. Utebantur tamen apostoli communiter chrismate in exhibitione sacramenti, quando huiusmodi visibilia signa non exhibebantur. Dicit enim Dionysius, IV cap. Eccl. Hier., est quaedam perfectiva operatio, quam duces nostri, idest apostoli, chrismatis hostiam nominant.

Christ, by the power which He exercises in the sacraments, bestowed on the apostles the reality of this sacrament, i.e. the fulness of the Holy Ghost, without the sacrament itself, because they had received "the first fruits of the Spirit" (Rom. 8:23). Nevertheless, something of keeping with the matter of this sacrament was displayed to the apostles in a sensible manner when they received the Holy Ghost. For that the Holy Ghost came down upon them in a sensible manner under the form of fire, refers to the same signification as oil: except in so far as fire has an active power, while oil has a passive power, as being the matter and incentive of fire. And this was quite fitting: for it was through the apostles that the grace of the Holy Ghost was to flow forth to others. Again, the Holy Ghost came down on the apostles in the shape of a tongue. Which refers to the same signification as balm: except in so far as the tongue communicates with others by speech, but balm, by its odor. because, to wit, the apostles were filled with the Holy Ghost, as teachers of the Faith; but the rest of the believers, as doing that which gives edification to the faithful.

In like manner, too, when the apostles imposed their hands, and when they preached, the fulness of the Holy Ghost came down under visible signs on the faithful, just as, at the beginning, He came down on the apostles: hence Peter said (Acts 11:15): "When I had begun to speak, the Holy Ghost fell upon them, as upon us also in the beginning." Consequently there was no need for sacramental sensible matter, where God sent sensible signs miraculously.

However, the apostles commonly made use of chrism in bestowing the sacrament, when such like visible signs were lacking. For Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iv): "There is a certain perfecting operation which our guides," i.e. the apostles, "call the sacrifice of Chrism."

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod Baptismus datur ad spiritualem vitam simpliciter consequendam, et ideo competit illi sacramento materia simplex. Sed hoc sacramentum datur ad plenitudinem consequendam spiritus sancti, cuius est multiformis operatio, secundum illud Sap. VII, est autem in illa spiritus sanctus, unicus, multiplex, et I Cor. XII dicitur, divisiones gratiarum sunt, idem autem spiritus. Et ideo convenienter huius sacramenti est materia composita.

Baptism is bestowed that spiritual life may be received simply; wherefore simple matter is fitting to it. But this sacrament is given that we may receive the fulness of the Holy Ghost, Whose operations are manifold, according to Wis. 7:22, "In her is the" Holy "Spirit . . . one, manifold"; and 1 Cor. 12:4, "There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit." Consequently a compound matter is appropriate to this sacrament.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod proprietates olei quibus significatur spiritus sanctus, magis inveniuntur in oleo olivarum quam in quocumque alio oleo. Unde et ipsa oliva, semper frondibus virens, virorem et misericordiam spiritus sancti significat. Hoc etiam oleum proprie dicitur oleum, et maxime habetur in usu ubi haberi potest. Quilibet autem alius liquor ex similitudine huius oleum nominatur, nec est in usu communi, nisi in supplementum apud eos quibus deest oleum olivarum. Et ideo hoc oleum solum assumitur in usum huius et quorundam aliorum sacramentorum.

These properties of oil, by reason of which it symbolizes the Holy Ghost, are to be found in olive oil rather than in any other oil. In fact, the olive-tree itself, through being an evergreen, signifies the refreshing and merciful operation of the Holy Ghost.

Moreover, this oil is called oil properly, and is very much in use, wherever it is to be had. And whatever other liquid is so called, derives its name from its likeness to this oil: nor are the latter commonly used, unless it be to supply the want of olive oil. Therefore it is that this oil alone is used for this and certain other sacraments.

Ad 4 Reply to Objection 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod Baptismus est sacramentum absolutae necessitatis, et ideo eius materia debet ubique inveniri. Sufficit autem quod materia huius sacramenti, quod non est tantae necessitatis, possit de facili ad omnia loca terrarum deferri.

Baptism is the sacrament of absolute necessity; and so its matter should be at hand everywhere. But it is enough that the matter of this sacrament, which is not of such great necessity, be easily sent to all parts of the world.

Articulus III

Whether It Is Essential to This Sacrament That the Chrism Which Is Its Matter Be Previously Consecrated by a Bishop?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod non sit de necessitate huius sacramenti quod chrisma, quod est materia huius sacramenti, fuerit prius per episcopum consecratum. Baptismus enim, in quo fit plena remissio peccatorum, non est minoris efficaciae quam hoc sacramentum. Sed, licet quaedam sanctificatio adhibeatur aquae baptismali ante Baptismum, non tamen est de necessitate sacramenti, quia in articulo necessitatis praeteriri potest. Ergo nec est de necessitate huius sacramenti quod chrisma fuerit per episcopum consecratum.

It seems that it is not essential to this sacrament, that the chrism, which is its matter, be previously consecrated by a bishop. For Baptism which bestows full remission of sins is not less efficacious than this sacrament. But, though the baptismal water receives a kind of blessing before being used for Baptism; yet this is not essential to the sacrament: since in a case of necessity it can be dispensed with. Therefore neither is it essential to this sacrament that the chrism should be previously consecrated by a bishop.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, idem non debet bis consecrari. Sed materia sacramenti sanctificatur in ipsa collatione sacramenti per formam verborum qua confertur sacramentum, unde et Augustinus dicit, super Ioan., accedit verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. Non ergo debet prius chrisma consecrari quam hoc sacramentum tradatur.

Further, the same should not be consecrated twice. But the sacramental matter is sanctified, in the very conferring of the sacrament, by the form of words wherein the sacrament is bestowed; hence Augustine says (Tract. lxxx in Joan.): "The word is added to the element, and this becomes a sacrament." Therefore the chrism should not be consecrated before this sacrament is given.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, omnis consecratio quae fit in sacramentis, ad consecutionem gratiae ordinatur. Sed materia sensibilis confecta ex oleo et balsamo non est capax gratiae. Ergo non debet ei aliqua consecratio adhiberi.

Further, every consecration employed in the sacraments is ordained to the bestowal of grace. But the sensible matter composed of oil and balm is not receptive of grace. Therefore it should not be consecrated.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Innocentius Papa dicit, presbyteris, cum baptizant, ungere baptizatos chrismate liceat, quod ab episcopo fuerat consecratum, non tamen frontem ex eodem oleo signare, quod solis debetur episcopis, cum tradunt Paraclitum; quod quidem fit in hoc sacramento. Ergo ad hoc sacramentum requiritur quod materia huius sacramenti prius per episcopum consecretur.

On the contrary, Pope Innocent I says (Ep. ad Decent.): "Priests, when baptizing, may anoint the baptized with chrism, previously consecrated by a bishop: but they must not sign the brow with the same oil; this belongs to the bishop alone, when he gives the Paraclete." Now this is done in this sacrament. Therefore it is necessary for this sacrament that its matter be previously consecrated by a bishop.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod tota sacramentorum sanctificatio a Christo derivatur, ut supra dictum est. Est autem considerandum quod quibusdam sacramentis habentibus materiam corpoream Christus est usus, scilicet Baptismo et etiam Eucharistia. Et ideo ex ipso usu Christi materiae horum sacramentorum aptitudinem acceperunt ad perfectionem sacramenti. Unde Chrysostomus dicit quod nunquam aquae Baptismi purgare peccata credentium possent, nisi tactu dominici corporis sanctificatae fuissent. Et ipse similiter dominus, accipiens panem, benedixit, similiter autem et calicem, ut habetur Matth. XXVI et Luc. XXII. Et propter hoc non est de necessitate horum sacramentorum quod materia prius benedicatur, quia sufficit benedictio Christi. Si qua vero benedictio adhibeatur, pertinet ad solemnitatem sacramenti, non autem ad necessitatem. Unctionibus autem visibilibus Christus non est usus, ne fieret iniuria invisibili unctioni qua est unctus prae consortibus suis. Et ideo tam chrisma quam oleum sanctum et oleum infirmorum prius benedicuntur quam adhibeantur ad usum sacramenti.

I answer that, The entire sanctification of the sacraments is derived from Christ, as stated above (Q. 64, A. 3). But it must be observed that Christ did use certain sacraments having a corporeal matter, viz. Baptism, and also the Eucharist. And consequently, from Christ's very act in using them, the matter of these sacraments received a certain aptitude to the perfection of the sacrament. Hence Chrysostom (Chromatius, In Matth. 3:15) says that "the waters of Baptism could never wash away the sins of believers, had they not been sanctified by contact with our Lord's body." And again, our Lord Himself "taking bread . . . blessed . . . and in like manner the chalice" (Matt. 26:26, 27; Luke 22:19, 20). For this reason there is no need for the matter of these sacraments to be blessed previously, since Christ's blessing is enough. And if any blessing be used, it belongs to the solemnity of the sacrament, not to its essence. But Christ did not make use of visible anointings, so as not to slight the invisible unction whereby He was "anointed above" His "fellows" (Ps. 44:8). And hence both chrism, and the holy oil, and the oil of the sick are blessed before being put to sacramental use. This suffices for the reply to the First Objection.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo patet responsio ex dictis.

—

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod utraque consecratio chrismatis non refertur ad idem. Sicut enim instrumentum virtutem instrumentalem acquirit dupliciter, scilicet quando accipit formam instrumenti, et quando movetur a principali agente ita etiam materia sacramenti duplici sanctificatione indiget, per quarum unam fit propria materia sacramenti, per aliam vero applicatur ad effectum.

Each consecration of the chrism has not the same object. For just as an instrument derives instrumental power in two ways, viz. when it receives the form of an instrument, and when it is moved by the principal agent; so too the sacramental matter needs a twofold sanctification, by one of which it becomes fit matter for the sacrament, while by the other it is applied to the production of the effect.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod materia corporalis non est capax gratiae quasi gratiae subiectum, sed solum sicut gratiae instrumentum, ut supra dictum est. Et ad hoc materia sacramenti consecratur, vel ab ipso Christo, vel ab episcopo, qui gerit in Ecclesia personam Christi.

Corporeal matter is receptive of grace, not so as to be the subject of grace, but only as the instrument of grace, as explained above (Q. 62, A. 3). And this sacramental matter is consecrated, either by Christ, or by a bishop, who, in the Church, impersonates Christ.

Articulus IV

Whether the Proper Form of This Sacrament Is: "I Sign Thee with the Sign of the Cross," Etc.?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod haec non sit conveniens forma huius sacramenti, consigno te signo crucis, confirmo te chrismate salutis, in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti, amen. Usus enim sacramentorum a Christo et ab apostolis derivatur. Sed neque Christus hanc formam instituit, nec apostoli ea usi leguntur. Ergo haec non est conveniens forma huius sacramenti.

It seems that the proper form of this sacrament is not: "I sign thee with the sign of the cross, I confirm thee with the chrism of salvation, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." For the use of the sacraments is derived from Christ and the apostles. But neither did Christ institute this form, nor do we read of the apostles making use of it. Therefore it is not the proper form of this sacrament.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, sicut sacramentum est idem apud omnes, ita et forma debet esse eadem, quia quaelibet res habet unitatem, sicut et esse, a sua forma. Sed hac forma non omnes utuntur, quidam enim dicunt, confirmo te chrismate sanctificationis. Ergo haec non est conveniens forma huius sacramenti.

Further, just as the sacrament is the same everywhere, so should the form be the same: because everything has unity, just as it has being, from its form. But this form is not used by all: for some say: "I confirm thee with the chrism of sanctification." Therefore the above is not the proper form of this sacrament.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, sacramentum hoc debet conformari Baptismo sicut perfectio perfectibili, ut supra dictum est. Sed in forma Baptismi non fit mentio de consignatione characteris; nec etiam de cruce Christi, cum tamen per Baptismum homo Christo commoriatur, ut apostolus dicit, Rom. VI; nec etiam fit mentio de effectu salutis, cum tamen Baptismus sit de necessitate salutis. In forma etiam Baptismi ponitur unus actus tantum; et exprimitur persona baptizantis, cum dicitur, ego te baptizo; cuius contrarium apparet in forma praedicta. Non ergo est conveniens forma huius sacramenti.

Further, this sacrament should be conformed to Baptism, as the perfect to the thing perfected, as stated above (A. 2, Obj. 2). But in the form of Baptism no mention is made of signing the character; nor again of the cross of Christ, though in Baptism man dies with Christ, as the Apostle says (Rom. 6:3-8); nor of the effect which is salvation, though Baptism is necessary for salvation. Again, in the baptismal form, only one action is included; and the person of the baptizer is expressed in the words: "I baptize thee, whereas the contrary is to be observed in the above form." Therefore this is not the proper form of this sacrament.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est auctoritas Ecclesiae, quae hac forma communiter utitur.

On the contrary, Is the authority of the Church, who always uses this form.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod praedicta forma est conveniens huic sacramento. Sicut enim forma rei naturalis dat ei speciem, ita forma sacramenti continere debet quidquid pertinet ad speciem sacramenti. Sicut autem ex supra dictis patet, in hoc sacramento datur spiritus sanctus ad robur spiritualis pugnae. Et ideo in hoc sacramento tria sunt necessaria, quae continentur in forma praedicta. Quorum primum est causa conferens plenitudinem roboris spiritualis, quae est sancta Trinitas. Quae exprimitur cum dicitur, in nomine patris et cetera. Secundum est ipsum robur spirituale, quod homini confertur per sacramentum materiae visibilis ad salutem. Quod quidem tangitur cum dicitur, confirmo te chrismate salutis. Tertium est signum quod pugnatori datur, sicut et in pugna corporali, sicut milites signis ducum insigniuntur. Et quantum ad hoc dicitur, consigno te signo crucis, in quo scilicet rex noster triumphavit, ut dicitur Coloss. II.

I answer that, The above form is appropriate to this sacrament. For just as the form of a natural thing gives it its species, so a sacramental form should contain whatever belongs to the species of the sacrament. Now as is evident from what has been already said (AA. 1, 2), in this sacrament the Holy Ghost is given for strength in the spiritual combat. Wherefore in this sacrament three things are necessary; and they are contained in the above form. The first of these is the cause conferring fulness of spiritual strength which cause is the Blessed Trinity: and this is expressed in the words, "In the name of the Father," etc. The second is the spiritual strength itself bestowed on man unto salvation by the sacrament of visible matter; and this is referred to in the words, "I confirm thee with the chrism of salvation." The third is the sign which is given to the combatant, as in a bodily combat: thus are soldiers marked with the sign of their leaders. And to this refer the words, "I sign thee with the sign of the cross," in which sign, to wit, our King triumphed (cf. Col. 2:15).

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, per ministerium apostolorum quandoque dabatur effectus huius sacramenti, scilicet plenitudo spiritus sancti, quibusdam visibilibus signis miraculose a Deo confectis, qui potest effectum sacramenti sine sacramento conferre. Et tunc non erat necessaria nec materia nec forma huius sacramenti. Quandoque autem tanquam ministri sacramentorum hoc sacramentum praebebant. Et tunc, sicut materia, ita et forma ex mandato Christi utebantur. Multa enim servabant apostoli in sacramentorum collatione quae in Scripturis communiter propositis non sunt tradita. Unde Dionysius dicit, in fine Eccl. Hier., consummativas invocationes, idest verba quibus perficiuntur sacramenta, non est iustum Scripturas interpretantibus, neque mysticum earum, aut in ipsis operatas ex Deo virtutes, ex occulto ad commune adducere, sed nostra sacra traditio sine pompa, idest occulte, edocet eas. Unde et apostolus dicit, loquens de celebratione Eucharistiae, I Cor. XI, cetera cum venero disponam.

As stated above (A. 2, ad 1), sometimes the effect of this sacrament, i.e. the fulness of the Holy Ghost, was given through the ministry of the apostles, under certain visible signs, wrought miraculously by God, Who can bestow the sacramental effect, independently of the sacrament. In these cases there was no need for either the matter or the form of this sacrament. On the other hand, sometimes they bestowed this sacrament as ministers of the sacraments. And then, they used both matter and form according to Christ's command. For the apostles, in conferring the sacraments, observed many things which are not handed down in those Scriptures that are in general use. Hence Dionysius says at the end of his treatise on the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy (chap. vii): "It is not allowed to explain in writing the prayers which are used in the sacraments, and to publish their mystical meaning, or the power which, coming from God, gives them their efficacy; we learn these things by holy tradition without any display,"* i.e. secretly. [The passage quoted in the text of the Summa differs slightly from the above, which is translated directly from the works of Dionysius.] Hence the Apostle, speaking of the celebration of the Eucharist, writes (1 Cor. 11:34): "The rest I will set in order, when I come."

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod sanctitas est salutis causa. Et ideo in idem redit quod dicitur chrismate salutis, et sanctificationis.

Holiness is the cause of salvation. Therefore it comes to the same whether we say "chrism of salvation" or "of sanctification."

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod Baptismus est regeneratio in spiritualem vitam, qua homo vivit in seipso. Et ideo non ponitur in forma Baptismi nisi ipse actus ad ipsum hominem pertinens sanctificandum. Sed hoc sacramentum non solum ordinatur ad hoc quod homo sanctificetur in seipso, sed exponitur cuidam pugnae exteriori. Et ideo non solum fit mentio de interiori sanctificatione, cum dicitur, confirmo te chrismate salutis, sed etiam consignatur homo exterius, quasi vexillo crucis, ad pugnam exteriorem spiritualem, quod significatur cum dicitur, consigno te signo crucis. In ipso autem verbo baptizandi, quod ablutionem significat, potest intelligi et materia, quae est aqua abluens, et effectus salutis. Quae non intelliguntur in verbo confirmandi, et ideo oportuit haec ponere. Dictum est autem supra quod hoc quod dicitur, ego, non est de necessitate formae baptismalis, quia intelligitur in verbo primae personae. Apponitur tamen ad exprimendam intentionem. Quod non est ita necessarium in confirmatione, quae non exhibetur nisi ab excellenti ministro, ut infra dicetur.

Baptism is the regeneration unto the spiritual life, whereby man lives in himself. And therefore in the baptismal form that action alone is expressed which refers to the man to be sanctified. But this sacrament is ordained not only to the sanctification of man in himself, but also to strengthen him in his outward combat. Consequently not only is mention made of interior sanctification, in the words, "I confirm thee with the chrism of salvation": but furthermore man is signed outwardly, as it were with the standard of the cross, unto the outward spiritual combat; and this is signified by the words, "I sign thee with the sign of the cross."

But in the very word "baptize," which signifies "to cleanse," we can understand both the matter, which is the cleansing water, and the effect, which is salvation. Whereas these are not understood by the word "confirm"; and consequently they had to be expressed.

Again, it has been said above (Q. 66, A. 5, ad 1) that the pronoun "I" is not necessary to the Baptismal form, because it is included in the first person of the verb. It is, however, included in order to express the intention. But this does not seem so necessary in Confirmation, which is conferred only by a minister of excellence, as we shall state later on (A. 11).

Articulus V

Whether the Sacrament of Confirmation Imprints a Character?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad quintum sic proceditur. Videtur quod sacramentum confirmationis non imprimat characterem. Character enim importat quoddam signum distinctivum. Sed per sacramentum confirmationis non distinguitur homo ab infidelibus, hoc enim fit per Baptismum, nec etiam ab aliis fidelibus, quia hoc sacramentum ordinatur ad pugnam spiritualem, quae omnibus fidelibus indicitur. Non ergo in hoc sacramento imprimitur aliquis character.

It seems that the sacrament of Confirmation does not imprint a character. For a character means a distinctive sign. But a man is not distinguished from unbelievers by the sacrament of Confirmation, for this is the effect of Baptism; nor from the rest of the faithful, because this sacrament is ordained to the spiritual combat, which is enjoined to all the faithful. Therefore a character is not imprinted in this sacrament.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, supra dictum est quod character est quaedam potentia spiritualis. Potentia autem non est nisi activa vel passiva. Potentia autem activa in sacramentis confertur per sacramentum ordinis, potentia autem passiva, sive receptiva, per sacramentum Baptismi. Ergo per sacramentum confirmationis nullus character imprimitur.

Further, it was stated above (Q. 63, A. 2) that a character is a spiritual power. Now a power must be either active or passive. But the active power in the sacraments is conferred by the sacrament of order: while the passive or receptive power is conferred by the sacrament of Baptism. Therefore no character is imprinted by the sacrament of Confirmation.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, in circumcisione, quae est character corporalis, non imprimitur aliquis spiritualis character. Sed in hoc sacramento imprimitur quidam character corporalis, dum scilicet homo chrismate signatur signo crucis in fronte. Non ergo imprimitur in hoc sacramento character spiritualis.

Further, in circumcision, which is a character of the body, no spiritual character is imprinted. But in this sacrament a character is imprinted on the body, when the sign of the cross is signed with chrism on man's brow. Therefore a spiritual character is not imprinted by this sacrament.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra, in omni sacramento quod non iteratur, imprimitur character. Sed hoc sacramentum non iteratur, dicit enim Gregorius, de homine qui a pontifice confirmatus fuerit denuo, talis iteratio prohibenda est. Ergo in confirmatione imprimitur character.

On the contrary, A character is imprinted in every sacrament that is not repeated. But this sacrament is not repeated: for Gregory II says (Ep. iv ad Bonifac.): "As to the man who was confirmed a second time by a bishop, such a repetition must be forbidden." Therefore a character is imprinted in Confirmation.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, character est quaedam spiritualis potestas ad aliquas sacras actiones ordinata. Dictum est autem supra quod, sicut Baptismus est quaedam spiritualis generatio in vitam Christianam, ita etiam confirmatio est quoddam spirituale augmentum promovens hominem in spiritualem aetatem perfectam. Manifestum est autem ex similitudine corporalis vitae quod alia est actio hominis statim nati, et alia actio competit ei cum ad perfectam aetatem pervenerit. Et ideo per sacramentum confirmationis datur homini potestas spiritualis ad quasdam actiones alias sacras, praeter illas ad quas datur ei potestas in Baptismo. Nam in Baptismo accipit potestatem ad ea agenda quae ad propriam pertinent salutem, prout secundum seipsum vivit, sed in confirmatione accipit potestatem ad agendum ea quae pertinent ad pugnam spiritualem contra hostes fidei. Sicut patet exemplo apostolorum, qui, antequam plenitudinem spiritus sancti acciperent, erant in cenaculo perseverantes in oratione; postmodum autem egressi non verebantur fidem publice fateri, etiam coram inimicis fidei Christianae. Et ideo manifestum est quod in sacramento confirmationis imprimitur character.

I answer that, As stated above (Q. 63, A. 2), a character is a spiritual power ordained to certain sacred actions. Now it has been said above (A. 1; Q. 65, A. 1) that, just as Baptism is a spiritual regeneration unto Christian life, so also is Confirmation a certain spiritual growth bringing man to perfect spiritual age. But it is evident, from a comparison with the life of the body, that the action which is proper to man immediately after birth, is different from the action which is proper to him when he has come to perfect age. And therefore by the sacrament of Confirmation man is given a spiritual power in respect of sacred actions other than those in respect of which he receives power in Baptism. For in Baptism he receives power to do those things which pertain to his own salvation, forasmuch as he lives to himself: whereas in Confirmation he receives power to do those things which pertain to the spiritual combat with the enemies of the Faith. This is evident from the example of the apostles, who, before they received the fulness of the Holy Ghost, were in the "upper room . . . persevering . . . in prayer" (Acts 1:13, 14); whereas afterwards they went out and feared not to confess their faith in public, even in the face of the enemies of the Christian Faith. And therefore it is evident that a character is imprinted in the sacrament of Confirmation.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod pugna spiritualis contra hostes invisibiles omnibus competit. Sed contra hostes visibiles, idest contra persecutores fidei pugnare, nomen Christi confitendo, est confirmatorum, qui iam sunt perducti spiritualiter ad virilem aetatem, secundum quod dicitur I Ioan. II, scribo vobis, iuvenes, quoniam fortes estis, et verbum Dei in vobis manet, et vicistis malignum. Et ideo character confirmationis est signum distinctivum, non infidelium a fidelibus, sed spiritualiter provectorum ab his quibus dicitur, sicut modo geniti infantes.

All have to wage the spiritual combat with our invisible enemies. But to fight against visible foes, viz. against the persecutors of the Faith, by confessing Christ's name, belongs to the confirmed, who have already come spiritually to the age of virility, according to 1 John 2:14: "I write unto you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and you have overcome the wicked one." And therefore the character of Confirmation is a distinctive sign, not between unbelievers and believers, but between those who are grown up spiritually and those of whom it is written: "As new-born babes" (1 Pet. 2:2).

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod omnia sacramenta sunt quaedam fidei protestationes. Sicut igitur baptizatus accipit potestatem spiritualem ad protestandum fidem per susceptionem aliorum sacramentorum; ita confirmatus accipit potestatem publice fidem Christi verbis profitendi, quasi ex officio.

All the sacraments are protestations of faith. Therefore just as he who is baptized receives the power of testifying to his faith by receiving the other sacraments; so he who is confirmed receives the power of publicly confessing his faith by words, as it were ex officio.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod sacramenta veteris legis dicuntur iustitia carnis, ut patet Heb. IX, quia scilicet interius nihil efficiebant. Et ideo in circumcisione imprimebatur character solum in corpore, non autem in anima. Sed in confirmatione cum charactere corporali imprimitur simul character spiritualis, eo quod est sacramentum novae legis.

The sacraments of the Old Law are called "justice of the flesh" (Heb. 9:10) because, to wit, they wrought nothing inwardly. Consequently in circumcision a character was imprinted in the body only, but not in the soul. But in Confirmation, since it is a sacrament of the New Law, a spiritual character is imprinted at the same time, together with the bodily character.

Articulus VI

Whether the Character of Confirmation Presupposes of Necessity, the Baptismal Character?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad sextum sic proceditur. Videtur quod character confirmationis non praesupponat ex necessitate characterem baptismalem. Sacramentum enim confirmationis ordinatur ad confitendum publice fidem Christi. Sed multi etiam ante Baptismum sunt fidem Christi publice confessi, sanguinem fundentes pro fide. Ergo character confirmationis non praesupponit characterem baptismalem.

It seems that the character of Confirmation does not presuppose, of necessity, the baptismal character. For the sacrament of Confirmation is ordained to the public confession of the Faith of Christ. But many, even before Baptism, have publicly confessed the Faith of Christ by shedding their blood for the Faith. Therefore the character of Confirmation does not presuppose the baptismal character.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, de apostolis non legitur quod fuerint baptizati, praesertim cum dicatur, Ioan. IV, quod ipse Christus non baptizabat, sed discipuli eius. Et tamen postea fuerunt confirmati per adventum spiritus sancti. Ergo similiter alii possunt confirmari antequam baptizentur.

Further, it is not related of the apostles that they were baptized; especially, since it is written (John 4:2) that Christ "Himself did not baptize, but His disciples." Yet afterwards they were confirmed by the coming of the Holy Ghost. Therefore, in like manner, others can be confirmed before being baptized.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, Act. X dicitur quod, adhuc loquente Petro, cecidit spiritus sanctus super omnes qui audiebant verbum, et audiebant eos loquentes linguis, et postea iussit eos baptizari. Ergo pari ratione possunt alii prius confirmari quam baptizentur.

Further, it is written (Acts 10:44-48) that "while Peter was yet speaking . . . the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word . . . and [Vulg.: 'for'] they heard them speaking with tongues": and afterwards "he commanded them to be baptized." Therefore others with equal reason can be confirmed before being baptized.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Rabanus dicit, de Institut. Cleric., novissime a summo sacerdote per impositionem manus Paraclitus traditur baptizato, ut roboretur per spiritum sanctum ad praedicandum.

On the contrary, Rabanus says (De Instit. Cleric. i): "Lastly the Paraclete is given to the baptized by the imposition of the high priest's hands, in order that the baptized may be strengthened by the Holy Ghost so as to publish his faith."

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod character confirmationis ex necessitate praesupponit characterem baptismalem, ita scilicet quod, si aliquis non baptizatus confirmaretur, nihil reciperet, sed oporteret ipsum iterato confirmari post Baptismum. Cuius ratio est quia sic se habet confirmatio ad Baptismum sicut augmentum ad generationem, ut ex supra dictis patet. Manifestum est autem quod nullus potest promoveri in aetatem perfectam nisi primo fuerit natus. Et similiter, nisi aliquis primo fuerit baptizatus, non potest sacramentum confirmationis accipere.

I answer that, The character of Confirmation, of necessity supposes the baptismal character: so that, in effect, if one who is not baptized were to be confirmed, he would receive nothing, but would have to be confirmed again after receiving Baptism. The reason of this is that, Confirmation is to Baptism as growth to birth, as is evident from what has been said above (A. 1; Q. 65, A. 1). Now it is clear that no one can be brought to perfect age unless he be first born: and in like manner, unless a man be first baptized, he cannot receive the sacrament of Confirmation.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod virtus divina non est alligata sacramentis. Unde potest conferri homini spirituale robur ad confitendum publice fidem Christi absque sacramento confirmationis, sicut etiam potest consequi remissionem peccatorum sine Baptismo. Tamen, sicut nullus consequitur effectum Baptismi sine voto Baptismi, ita nullus consequitur effectum confirmationis sine voto ipsius. Quod potest haberi etiam ante susceptionem Baptismi.

The Divine power is not confined to the sacraments. Hence man can receive spiritual strength to confess the Faith of Christ publicly, without receiving the sacrament of Confirmation: just as he can also receive remission of sins without Baptism. Yet, just as none receive the effect of Baptism without the desire of Baptism; so none receive the effect of Confirmation, without the desire of Confirmation. And man can have this even before receiving Baptism.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, ex hoc quod dominus dicit, Ioan. XIII, qui lotus est, non indiget nisi ut pedes lavet, intelligimus Petrum et alios Christi discipulos fuisse baptizatos, sive Baptismo Ioannis, sicut nonnulli arbitrantur; sive, quod magis credibile est, Baptismo Christi. Neque enim renuit ministerium baptizandi, ut haberet servos per quos ceteros baptizaret.

As Augustine says (Ep. cclxv), from our Lord's words, "'He that is washed, needeth not but to wash his feet' (John 13:10), we gather that Peter and Christ's other disciples had been baptized, either with John's Baptism, as some think; or with Christ's, which is more credible. For He did not refuse to administer Baptism, so as to have servants by whom to baptize others."

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod audientes praedicationem Petri acceperunt effectum confirmationis miraculose, non tamen sacramentum confirmationis. Dictum est autem quod effectus confirmationis potest alicui conferri ante Baptismum, non autem sacramentum confirmationis. Sicut enim effectus confirmationis, qui est robur spirituale, praesupponit effectum Baptismi, qui est iustificatio, ita sacramentum confirmationis praesupponit sacramentum Baptismi.

Those who heard the preaching of Peter received the effect of Confirmation miraculously: but not the sacrament of Confirmation. Now it has been stated (ad 1) that the effect of Confirmation can be bestowed on man before Baptism, whereas the sacrament cannot. For just as the effect of Confirmation, which is spiritual strength, presupposes the effect of Baptism, which is justification, so the sacrament of Confirmation presupposes the sacrament of Baptism.

Articulus VII

Whether Sanctifying Grace Is Bestowed in This Sacrament?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad septimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod per hoc sacramentum gratia gratum faciens non conferatur. Gratia enim gratum faciens ordinatur contra culpam. Sed hoc sacramentum, sicut dictum est, non exhibetur nisi baptizatis, qui sunt a culpa mundati. Ergo per hoc sacramentum gratia gratum faciens non confertur.

It seems that sanctifying grace is not bestowed in this sacrament. For sanctifying grace is ordained against sin. But this sacrament, as stated above (A. 6) is given only to the baptized, who are cleansed from sin. Therefore sanctifying grace is not bestowed in this sacrament.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, peccatores maxime indigent gratia gratum faciente, per quam solam iustificari possunt. Si ergo per hoc sacramentum gratia gratum faciens confertur, videtur quod deberet dari hominibus in peccato existentibus. Quod tamen non est verum.

Further, sinners especially need sanctifying grace, by which alone can they be justified. If, therefore, sanctifying grace is bestowed in this sacrament, it seems that it should be given to those who are in sin. And yet this is not true.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, gratia gratum faciens specie non differt, cum ad unum effectum ordinetur. Sed duae formae eiusdem speciei non possunt esse in eodem subiecto. Cum ergo gratia gratum faciens conferatur homini per Baptismum, videtur quod per sacramentum confirmationis, quod non exhibetur nisi baptizato, gratia gratum faciens non conferatur.

Further, there can only be one species of sanctifying grace, since it is ordained to one effect. But two forms of the same species cannot be in the same subject. Since, therefore, man receives sanctifying grace in Baptism, it seems that sanctifying grace is not bestowed in Confirmation, which is given to none but the baptized.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Melchiades Papa dicit, spiritus sanctus in fonte Baptismi plenitudinem tribuit ad innocentiam, in confirmatione augmentum praestat ad gratiam.

On the contrary, Pope Melchiades says (Ep. ad Episc. Hispan.): "The Holy Ghost bestows at the font the fulness of innocence; but in Confirmation He confers an increase of grace."

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod in hoc sacramento, sicut dictum est, datur baptizato spiritus sanctus ad robur, sicut apostolis datus est in die Pentecostes, ut legitur Act. II; et sicut dabatur baptizatis per impositionem manus apostolorum, ut dicitur Act. VIII. Ostensum est autem in prima parte quod missio seu datio spiritus sancti non est nisi cum gratia gratum faciente. Unde manifestum est quod gratia gratum faciens confertur in hoc sacramento.

I answer that, In this sacrament, as stated above (AA. 1, 4), the Holy Ghost is given to the baptized for strength: just as He was given to the apostles on the day of Pentecost, as we read in Acts 2; and just as He was given to the baptized by the imposition of the apostles' hands, as related in Acts 8:17. Now it has been proved in the First Part (Q. 43, A. 3) that the Holy Ghost is not sent or given except with sanctifying grace. Consequently it is evident that sanctifying grace is bestowed in this sacrament.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod gratiae gratum facientis est remissio culpae, habet tamen et alios effectus, quia sufficit ad hoc quod promoveat hominem per omnes gradus usque in vitam aeternam. Unde et Paulo dictum est, II Cor. XII, sufficit tibi gratia mea, et ipse de se dicit, I Cor. XV, gratia Dei sum id quod sum. Et ideo gratia gratum faciens non solum datur ad remissionem culpae, sed etiam ad augmentum et firmitatem iustitiae. Et sic confertur in hoc sacramento.

Sanctifying grace does indeed take away sin; but it has other effects also, because it suffices to carry man through every step as far as eternal life. Hence to Paul was it said (2 Cor. 12:9): "My grace is sufficient for thee": and he says of himself (1 Cor. 15:10): "By the grace of God I am what I am." Therefore sanctifying grace is given not only for the remission of sin, but also for growth and stability in righteousness. And thus is it bestowed in this sacrament.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut ex ipso nomine apparet, hoc sacramentum datur ad confirmandum quod prius invenerit. Et ideo non debet dari his qui non habent gratiam. Et propter hoc, sicut non datur non baptizatis, ita non debet dari adultis peccatoribus, nisi per poenitentiam reparatis. Unde dicitur in Aurelianensi Concilio, ut ieiuni ad confirmationem veniant, ut moneantur confessionem facere prius, ut mundi donum spiritus sancti valeant accipere. Et tunc per hoc sacramentum perficitur poenitentiae effectus, sicut et Baptismi, quia per gratiam collatam in hoc sacramento consequetur poenitens pleniorem remissionem peccati. Et si aliquis adultus in peccato existens cuius conscientiam non habet, vel si etiam non perfecte contritus accedat, per gratiam collatam in hoc sacramento consequetur remissionem peccatorum.

Further, as appears from its very name, this sacrament is given in order "to confirm" what it finds already there. And consequently it should not be given to those who are not in a state of grace. For this reason, just as it is not given to the unbaptized, so neither should it be given to the adult sinners, except they be restored by Penance. Wherefore was it decreed in the Council of Orleans (Can. iii) that "men should come to Confirmation fasting; and should be admonished to confess their sins first, so that being cleansed they may be able to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." And then this sacrament perfects the effects of Penance, as of Baptism: because by the grace which he has received in this sacrament, the penitent will obtain fuller remission of his sin. And if any adult approach, being in a state of sin of which he is not conscious or for which he is not perfectly contrite, he will receive the remission of his sins through the grace bestowed in this sacrament.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, gratia sacramentalis addit super gratiam gratum facientem communiter sumptam aliquid effectivum specialis effectus, ad quod ordinatur sacramentum. Si ergo consideretur gratia in hoc sacramento collata quantum ad id quod est commune, sic per hoc sacramentum non confertur aliqua alia gratia quam per Baptismum, sed quae prius inerat, augetur. Si autem consideretur quantum ad illud speciale quod superadditur, sic non est eiusdem speciei cum ipsa.

As stated above (Q. 62, A. 2), the sacramental grace adds to the sanctifying grace taken in its wide sense, something that produces a special effect, and to which the sacrament is ordained. If, then, we consider, in its wide sense, the grace bestowed in this sacrament, it does not differ from that bestowed in Baptism, but increases what was already there. On the other hand, if we consider it as to that which is added over and above, then one differs in species from the other.

Articulus VIII

Whether This Sacrament Should Be Given to All?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad octavum sic proceditur. Videtur quod hoc sacramentum non sit omnibus exhibendum. Hoc enim sacramentum ad quandam excellentiam datur, ut dictum est. Sed id quod ad excellentiam pertinet, non competit omnibus. Ergo hoc sacramentum non debet omnibus dari.

It seems that this sacrament should not be given to all. For this sacrament is given in order to confer a certain excellence, as stated above (A. 11, ad 2). But all are not suited for that which belongs to excellence. Therefore this sacrament should not be given to all.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, per hoc sacramentum augetur aliquis spiritualiter in perfectam aetatem. Sed perfecta aetas repugnat aetati puerili. Ergo ad minus pueris dari non debet.

Further, by this sacrament man advances spiritually to perfect age. But perfect age is inconsistent with childhood. Therefore at least it should not be given to children.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, sicut Melchiades Papa dicit, post Baptismum confirmamur ad pugnam. Sed pugnare non competit mulieribus, propter fragilitatem sexus. Ergo nec mulieribus hoc sacramentum debet dari.

Further, as Pope Melchiades says (Ep. ad Episc. Hispan.) "after Baptism we are strengthened for the combat." But women are incompetent to combat, by reason of the frailty of their sex. Therefore neither should women receive this sacrament.

Arg. 4 Objection 4

Praeterea, Melchiades Papa dicit, quamvis continuo transituris sufficiant regenerationis beneficia, victuris tamen confirmationis beneficia necessaria sunt. Confirmatio armat et instruit ad agones mundi huius et praelia reservandos. Qui autem post Baptismum cum acquisita innocentia immaculatus pervenerit ad mortem, confirmatur morte, quia iam non potest peccare post mortem. Ergo statim morituris non debet hoc sacramentum conferri. Et sic non debet omnibus dari.

Further, Pope Melchiades says (Ep. ad Episc. Hispan.): "Although the benefit of Regeneration suffices for those who are on the point of death, yet the graces of Confirmation are necessary for those who are to conquer. Confirmation arms and strengthens those to whom the struggles and combats of this world are reserved. And he who comes to die, having kept unsullied the innocence he acquired in Baptism, is confirmed by death; for after death he can sin no more." Therefore this sacrament should not be given to those who are on the point of death: and so it should not be given to all.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod dicitur Act. II, quod spiritus sanctus veniens replevit totam domum, per quam significatur Ecclesia, et postea subditur quod repleti sunt omnes spiritu sancto. Sed ad illam plenitudinem consequendam hoc sacramentum datur. Ergo est omnibus qui sunt in Ecclesia exhibendum.

On the contrary, It is written (Acts 2:2) that the Holy Ghost in coming, "filled the whole house," whereby the Church is signified; and afterwards it is added that "they were all filled with the Holy Ghost." But this sacrament is given that we may receive that fulness. Therefore it should be given to all who belong to the Church.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, per hoc sacramentum promovetur homo spiritualiter in aetatem perfectam. Hoc autem est de intentione naturae, ut omnis qui corporaliter nascitur, ad perfectam aetatem perveniat, sed hoc quandoque impeditur propter corruptibilitatem corporis, quod morte praevenitur. Multo autem magis de intentione Dei est omnia ad perfectionem perducere, ex cuius imitatione hoc natura participat, unde et Deut. XXXII dicitur, Dei perfecta sunt opera. Anima autem, ad quam pertinet spiritualis nativitas et spiritualis aetatis perfectio, immortalis est, et potest, sicut tempore senectutis spiritualem nativitatem consequi, ita tempore iuventutis et pueritiae consequi perfectam aetatem; quia huiusmodi corporales aetates animae non praeiudicant. Et ideo hoc sacramentum debet omnibus exhiberi.

I answer that, As stated above (A. 1), man is spiritually advanced by this sacrament to perfect age. Now the intention of nature is that everyone born corporally, should come to perfect age: yet this is sometimes hindered by reason of the corruptibility of the body, which is forestalled by death. But much more is it God's intention to bring all things to perfection, since nature shares in this intention inasmuch as it reflects Him: hence it is written (Deut. 32:4): "The works of God are perfect." Now the soul, to which spiritual birth and perfect spiritual age belong, is immortal; and just as it can in old age attain to spiritual birth, so can it attain to perfect (spiritual) age in youth or childhood; because the various ages of the body do not affect the soul. Therefore this sacrament should be given to all.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod hoc sacramentum datur ad quandam excellentiam, non quidem unius hominis ad alium, sicut sacramentum ordinis, sed hominis ad seipsum, sicut idem, perfectus vir existens, habet excellentiam ad se puerum.

This sacrament is given in order to confer a certain excellence, not indeed, like the sacrament of order, of one man over another, but of man in regard to himself: thus the same man, when arrived at maturity, excels himself as he was when a boy.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, corporalis aetas non praeiudicat animae. Unde etiam in puerili aetate homo potest consequi perfectionem spiritualis aetatis, de qua dicitur Sap. IV, senectus venerabilis est non diuturna, neque numero annorum computata. Et inde est quod multi in puerili aetate, propter robur spiritus sancti perceptum, usque ad sanguinem fortiter certaverunt pro Christo.

As stated above, the age of the body does not affect the soul. Consequently even in childhood man can attain to the perfection of spiritual age, of which it is written (Wis. 4:8): "Venerable old age is not that of long time, nor counted by the number of years." And hence it is that many children, by reason of the strength of the Holy Ghost which they had received, fought bravely for Christ even to the shedding of their blood.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut Chrysostomus dicit, in homilia de Machabaeis, in mundanis agonibus aetatis et formae generisque dignitas requiritur, et ideo servis ac mulieribus, senibus ac pueris, ad eos aditus denegatur. In caelestibus autem omni personae et aetati et sexui indiscreta facultate stadium patet. Et in homilia de militia spirituali dicit, apud Deum femineus etiam militat sexus, multae namque feminae animo virili spiritualem militiam gesserunt. Quaedam enim interioris hominis virtute viros aequaverunt in agonibus martyrum, quaedam etiam fortiores viris exstiterunt. Et ideo mulieribus hoc sacramentum conferendum est.

As Chrysostom says (Hom. i De Machab.), "in earthly contests fitness of age, physique and rank are required; and consequently slaves, women, old men, and boys are debarred from taking part therein. But in the heavenly combats, the Stadium is open equally to all, to every age, and to either sex." Again, he says (Hom. de Militia Spirit.): "In God's eyes even women fight, for many a woman has waged the spiritual warfare with the courage of a man. For some have rivaled men in the courage with which they have suffered martyrdom; and some indeed have shown themselves stronger than men." Therefore this sacrament should be given to women.

Ad 4 Reply to Objection 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, anima, ad quam pertinet spiritualis aetas, immortalis est. Et ideo morituris hoc sacramentum dandum est, ut in resurrectione perfecti appareant, secundum illud Ephes. IV, donec occurramus in virum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi. Et ideo Hugo de sancto Victore dicit, omnino periculosum esset, si ab hac vita sine confirmatione migrare contingeret, non quia damnaretur, nisi forte per contemptum; sed quia detrimentum perfectionis pateretur. Unde etiam pueri confirmati decedentes maiorem gloriam consequuntur, sicut et hic maiorem obtinent gratiam. Auctoritas autem illa intelligitur quantum ad hoc, quod morituris non est necessarium hoc sacramentum propter periculum pugnae praesentis.

As we have already observed, the soul, to which spiritual age belongs, is immortal. Wherefore this sacrament should be given to those on the point of death, that they may be seen to be perfect at the resurrection, according to Eph. 4:13: "Until we all meet into the unity of faith . . . unto the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ." And hence Hugh of St. Victor says (De Sacram. ii), "It would be altogether hazardous, if anyone happened to go forth from this life without being confirmed": not that such a one would be lost, except perhaps through contempt; but that this would be detrimental to his perfection. And therefore even children dying after Confirmation obtain greater glory, just as here below they receive more grace. The passage quoted is to be taken in the sense that, with regard to the dangers of the present combat, those who are on the point of death do not need this sacrament.

Articulus IX

Whether This Sacrament Should Be Given to Man on the Forehead?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad nonum sic proceditur. Videtur quod hoc sacramentum non sit conferendum homini in fronte. Hoc enim sacramentum est perfectivum Baptismi, ut supra dictum est. Sed sacramentum Baptismi confertur homini in toto corpore. Ergo hoc sacramentum non debet conferri solum in fronte.

It seems that this sacrament should not be given to man on the forehead. For this sacrament perfects Baptism, as stated above (Q. 65, AA. 3, 4). But the sacrament of Baptism is given to man over his whole body. Therefore this sacrament should not be given on the forehead only.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, hoc sacramentum datur ad robur spirituale, ut supra dictum est. Sed spirituale robur maxime consistit in corde. Ergo hoc sacramentum magis debet conferri supra cor quam in fronte.

Further, this sacrament is given for spiritual strength, as stated above (AA. 1, 2, 4). But spiritual strength is situated principally in the heart. Therefore this sacrament should be given over the heart rather than on the forehead.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, hoc sacramentum datur homini ad hoc quod libere fidem Christi confiteatur. Sed ore fit confessio ad salutem, ut dicitur Rom. X. Ergo hoc sacramentum magis debet conferri circa os quam in fronte.

Further, this sacrament is given to man that he may freely confess the faith of Christ. But "with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation," according to Rom. 10:10. Therefore this sacrament should be given about the mouth rather than on the forehead.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Rabanus dicit, in libro de Institut. Cleric., signatur baptizatus chrismate in summitate capitis per sacerdotem, per pontificem vero in fronte.

On the contrary, Rabanus says (De Instit. Cleric. i): "The baptized is signed by the priest with chrism on the top of the head, but by the bishop on the forehead."

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, in hoc sacramento homo accipit spiritum sanctum ad robur spiritualis pugnae, ut fortiter etiam inter adversarios fidei fidem Christi confiteatur. Unde convenienter signatur chrismate signo crucis in fronte, propter duo. Primo quidem, quia insignitur signo crucis sicut miles signo ducis, quod quidem debet esse evidens et manifestum. Inter omnia autem loca corporis humani maxime manifestus est frons, qui quasi nunquam obtegitur. Et ideo linitur confirmatus chrismate in fronte, ut in manifesto demonstraret se esse Christianum, sicut et apostoli post receptum spiritum sanctum se manifestaverunt, qui prius in cenaculo latebant. Secundo, quia aliquis impeditur a libera confessione nominis Christi propter duo, scilicet propter timorem, et propter verecundiam. Utriusque autem horum signum maxime manifestatur in fronte, propter propinquitatem imaginationis, et propter hoc quod spiritus a corde directe ad frontem ascendunt, unde verecundati erubescunt, timentes autem pallescunt, ut dicitur in IV Ethic. Et ideo in fronte signatur chrismate, ut neque propter timorem neque propter erubescentiam nomen Christi confiteri praetermittat.

I answer that, As stated above (AA. 1, 4), in this sacrament man receives the Holy Ghost for strength in the spiritual combat, that he may bravely confess the Faith of Christ even in face of the enemies of that Faith. Wherefore he is fittingly signed with the sign of the cross on the forehead, with chrism, for two reasons. First, because he is signed with the sign of the cross, as a soldier with the sign of his leader, which should be evident and manifest. Now, the forehead, which is hardly ever covered, is the most conspicuous part of the human body. Wherefore the confirmed is anointed with chrism on the forehead, that he may show publicly that he is a Christian: thus too the apostles after receiving the Holy Ghost showed themselves in public, whereas before they remained hidden in the upper room.

Secondly, because man is hindered from freely confessing Christ's name, by two things—by fear and by shame. Now both these things betray themselves principally on the forehead on account of the proximity of the imagination, and because the (vital) spirits mount directly from the heart to the forehead: hence "those who are ashamed, blush, and those who are afraid, pale" (Ethic. iv). And therefore man is signed with chrism, that neither fear nor shame may hinder him from confessing the name of Christ.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod per Baptismum regeneramur ad vitam spiritualem, quae ad totum hominem pertinet. Sed in confirmatione roboramur ad pugnam, cuius signum ferendum est in fronte, quasi in evidenti loco.

By baptism we are regenerated unto spiritual life, which belongs to the whole man. But in Confirmation we are strengthened for the combat; the sign of which should be borne on the forehead, as in a conspicuous place.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod principium fortitudinis est in corde, sed signum apparet in fronte, unde dicitur Ezech. III, ecce, dedi frontem tuam duriorem frontibus eorum. Et ideo sacramentum Eucharistiae, quo homo in seipso confirmatur, pertinet ad cor, secundum illud Psalmi, panis cor hominis confirmet. Sed sacramentum confirmationis requiritur in signum fortitudinis ad alios. Et ideo exhibetur in fronte.

The principle of fortitude is in the heart, but its sign appears on the forehead: wherefore it is written (Ezech. 3:8): "Behold I have made . . . thy forehead harder than their foreheads." Hence the sacrament of the Eucharist, whereby man is confirmed in himself, belongs to the heart, according to Ps. 103:15: "That bread may strengthen man's heart." But the sacrament of Confirmation is required as a sign of fortitude against others; and for this reason it is given on the forehead.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod hoc sacramentum datur ad libere confitendum, non autem ad confitendum simpliciter, quia hoc fit etiam in Baptismo. Et ideo non debet dari in ore, sed in fronte, ubi apparent signa passionum quibus libera confessio impeditur.

This sacrament is given that we may confess freely: but not that we may confess simply, for this is also the effect of Baptism. And therefore it should not be given on the mouth, but on the forehead, where appear the signs of those passions which hinder free confession.

Articulus X

Whether He Who Is Confirmed Needs One to Stand* for Him? [Literally, "to hold him"]

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad decimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod ille qui confirmatur non debet ab alio teneri ad confirmationem. Hoc enim sacramentum non solum pueris, sed etiam adultis exhibetur. Adulti autem per seipsos stare possunt. Ergo ridiculum est quod ab alio teneantur.

It seems that he who is confirmed needs no one to stand for him. For this sacrament is given not only to children but also to adults. But adults can stand for themselves. Therefore it is absurd that someone else should stand for them.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, ille qui iam est de Ecclesia, liberum habet accessum ad Ecclesiae principem, qui est episcopus. Sed hoc sacramentum, sicut dictum est, non exhibetur nisi baptizato, qui iam est membrum Ecclesiae. Ergo videtur quod non debeat per alium exhiberi episcopo ad hoc sacramentum recipiendum.

Further, he that belongs already to the Church, has free access to the prince of the Church, i.e. the bishop. But this sacrament, as stated above (A. 6), is given only to one that is baptized, who is already a member of the Church. Therefore it seems that he should not be brought by another to the bishop in order to receive this sacrament.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, hoc sacramentum datur ad robur spirituale. Quod magis viget in viris quam in mulieribus, secundum illud Prov. ult., mulierem fortem quis inveniet? Ergo ad minus mulier non debet tenere virum ad confirmationem.

Further, this sacrament is given for spiritual strength, which has more vigor in men than in women, according to Prov. 31:10: "Who shall find a valiant woman?" Therefore at least a woman should not stand for a man in confirmation.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Innocentius Papa dicit, et habetur in decretis, XXX, qu. IV, si quis ex coniugio filium aut filiam alterius de sacro fonte susceperit, aut ad chrisma tenuerit, et cetera. Ergo, sicut requiritur quod aliquis baptizatum de sacro fonte levet, ita debet aliquis teneri ad sacramentum confirmationis accipiendum.

On the contrary, Are the following words of Pope Innocent, which are to be found in the Decretals (XXX, Q. 4): "If anyone raise the children of another's marriage from the sacred font, or stand for them in Confirmation," etc. Therefore, just as someone is required as sponsor of one who is baptized, so is someone required to stand for him who is to be confirmed.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, hoc sacramentum exhibetur homini ad robur pugnae spiritualis. Sicut autem aliquis de novo natus indiget instructore in his quae pertinent ad conversationem vitae, secundum illud Heb. XII, patres quidem carnis nostrae habuimus eruditores, et obtemperabamus eis; ita illi qui assumuntur ad pugnam, indigent eruditoribus a quibus instruantur de his quae pertinent ad modum certaminis; et ideo in bellis materialibus constituuntur duces et centuriones, per quos alii gubernentur. Et propter hoc etiam ille qui accipit hoc sacramentum, ab alio tenetur, quasi per alium in pugna erudiendus. Similiter etiam, quia per hoc sacramentum confertur homini perfectio spiritualis aetatis, sicut dictum est; ideo ille qui ad hoc sacramentum accedit, sustentatur, quasi adhuc spiritualiter imbecillis et puer.

I answer that, As stated above (AA. 1, 4, 9), this sacrament is given to man for strength in the spiritual combat. Now, just as one newly born requires someone to teach him things pertaining to ordinary conduct, according to Heb. 12:9: "We have had fathers of our flesh, for instructors, and we obeyed [Vulg.: 'reverenced']" them; so they who are chosen for the fight need instructors by whom they are informed of things concerning the conduct of the battle, and hence in earthly wars, generals and captains are appointed to the command of the others. For this reason he also who receives this sacrament, has someone to stand for him, who, as it were, has to instruct him concerning the fight.

Likewise, since this sacrament bestows on man the perfection of spiritual age, as stated above (AA. 2, 5), therefore he who approaches this sacrament is upheld by another, as being spiritually a weakling and a child.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, licet ille qui confirmatur sit adultus corporaliter, nondum tamen est adultus spiritualiter.

Although he who is confirmed, be adult in body, nevertheless he is not yet spiritually adult.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, licet baptizatus sit effectus membrum Ecclesiae, nondum tamen est adscriptus militiae Christianae. Et ideo episcopo, tanquam duci exercitus, per alium exhibetur iam militiae Christianae adscriptum. Non enim debet alium ad confirmationem tenere qui nondum est confirmatus.

Though he who is baptized is made a member of the Church, nevertheless he is not yet enrolled as a Christian soldier. And therefore he is brought to the bishop, as to the commander of the army, by one who is already enrolled as a Christian soldier. For one who is not yet confirmed should not stand for another in Confirmation.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut dicitur Coloss. III, in Christo Iesu non est masculus neque femina. Et ideo non differt utrum masculus vel femina teneat aliquem in confirmatione.

According to Col. 3 *(Gal. 3:28), "in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female." Consequently it matters not whether a man or a woman stand for one who is to be confirmed.

Articulus XI

Whether Only a Bishop Can Confer This Sacrament?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad undecimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non solus episcopus hoc sacramentum conferre possit. Gregorius enim, scribens Ianuario episcopo, dicit, pervenit ad nos quosdam scandalizatos fuisse quod presbyteros chrismate tangere eos qui baptizati sunt, prohibuimus. Et nos quidem secundum veterem usum nostrae Ecclesiae fecimus, sed si omnino hac de re aliqui contristantur, ubi episcopi desunt, ut presbyteri etiam in frontibus baptizatos chrismate tangere debeant, concedimus. Sed illud quod pertinet ad necessitatem sacramentorum, non est propter vitandum scandalum immutandum. Ergo videtur quod non sit de necessitate huius sacramenti quod ab episcopo conferatur.

It seems that not only a bishop can confer this sacrament. For Gregory (Regist. iv), writing to Bishop Januarius, says: "We hear that some were scandalized because we forbade priests to anoint with chrism those who have been baptized. Yet in doing this we followed the ancient custom of our Church: but if this trouble some so very much we permit priests, where no bishop is to be had, to anoint the baptized on the forehead with chrism." But that which is essential to the sacraments should not be changed for the purpose of avoiding scandal. Therefore it seems that it is not essential to this sacrament that it be conferred by a bishop.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, sacramentum Baptismi videtur esse maioris efficaciae quam sacramentum confirmationis, quia per Baptismum fit plena remissio peccatorum et quantum ad culpam et quantum ad poenam, quod non fit in hoc sacramento. Sed simplex sacerdos ex suo officio potest tradere sacramentum Baptismi, et in necessitate quilibet, etiam non ordinatus, potest baptizare. Ergo non est de necessitate huius sacramenti quod ab episcopo conferatur.

Further, the sacrament of Baptism seems to be more efficacious than the sacrament of Confirmation: since it bestows full remission of sins, both as to guilt and as to punishment, whereas this sacrament does not. But a simple priest, in virtue of his office, can give the sacrament of Baptism: and in a case of necessity anyone, even without orders, can baptize. Therefore it is not essential to this sacrament that it be conferred by a bishop.

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, summitas capitis, ubi secundum medicos est locus rationis (scilicet particularis, quae dicitur virtus cogitativa), est nobilior fronte, ubi est locus imaginativae virtutis. Sed simplex sacerdos potest baptizatos chrismate ungere in vertice. Ergo multo magis potest eos chrismate signare in fronte, quod pertinet ad hoc sacramentum.

Further, the top of the head, where according to medical men the reason is situated (i.e. the "particular reason," which is called the "cogitative faculty"), is more noble than the forehead, which is the site of the imagination. But a simple priest can anoint the baptized with chrism on the top of the head. Therefore much more can he anoint them with chrism on the forehead, which belongs to this sacrament.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est quod Eusebius Papa dicit, manus impositionis sacramentum magna veneratione tenendum est, quod ab aliis perfici non potest nisi a summis sacerdotibus. Nec tempore apostolorum ab aliis quam ab ipsis apostolis legitur aut scitur peractum esse, nec ab aliis quam qui eorum locum tenent, unquam perfici potest, aut fieri debet. Nam si aliter praesumptum fuerit, irritum habeatur et vacuum, nec inter ecclesiastica unquam reputabitur sacramenta. Est igitur de necessitate huius sacramenti, quod dicitur sacramentum manus impositionis, quod ab episcopo tradatur.

On the contrary, Pope Eusebius (Ep. iii ad Ep. Tusc.) says: "The sacrament of the imposition of the hand should be held in great veneration, and can be given by none but the high priests. Nor is it related or known to have been conferred in apostolic times by others than the apostles themselves; nor can it ever be either licitly or validly performed by others than those who stand in their place. And if anyone presume to do otherwise, it must be considered null and void; nor will such a thing ever be counted among the sacraments of the Church." Therefore it is essential to this sacrament, which is called "the sacrament of the imposition of the hand," that it be given by a bishop.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod in quolibet opere ultima consummatio supremae arti aut virtuti reservatur, sicut praeparatio materiae pertinet ad inferiores artifices, superior autem dat formam, supremus autem est ad quem pertinet usus, qui est finis artificiatorum; et epistola quae a notario scribitur, a domino signatur. Fideles autem Christi sunt quoddam divinum opus, secundum illud I Cor. III, Dei aedificatio estis, sunt etiam quasi quaedam epistola spiritu Dei scripta, sicut dicitur II Cor. III. Hoc autem confirmationis sacramentum est quasi ultima consummatio sacramenti Baptismi, ita scilicet quod per Baptismum aedificatur homo in domum spiritualem, et conscribitur quasi quaedam spiritualis epistola; sed per sacramentum confirmationis, quasi domus aedificata, dedicatur in templum spiritus sancti; et quasi epistola conscripta, signatur signo crucis. Et ideo collatio huius sacramenti episcopis reservatur, qui obtinent summam potestatem in Ecclesia, sicut in primitiva Ecclesia per impositionem manus apostolorum, quorum vicem gerunt episcopi, plenitudo spiritus sancti dabatur, ut habetur Act. VIII. Unde Urbanus Papa dicit, omnes fideles per manus impositionem episcoporum spiritum sanctum post Baptismum accipere debent, ut pleni Christiani inveniantur.

I answer that, In every work the final completion is reserved to the supreme act or power; thus the preparation of the matter belongs to the lower craftsmen, the higher gives the form, but the highest of all is he to whom pertains the use, which is the end of things made by art; thus also the letter which is written by the clerk, is signed by his employer. Now the faithful of Christ are a Divine work, according to 1 Cor. 3:9: "You are God's building"; and they are also "an epistle," as it were, "written with the Spirit of God," according to 2 Cor. 3:2, 3. And this sacrament of Confirmation is, as it were, the final completion of the sacrament of Baptism; in the sense that by Baptism man is built up into a spiritual dwelling, and is written like a spiritual letter; whereas by the sacrament of Confirmation, like a house already built, he is consecrated as a temple of the Holy Ghost, and as a letter already written, is signed with the sign of the cross. Therefore the conferring of this sacrament is reserved to bishops, who possess supreme power in the Church: just as in the primitive Church, the fulness of the Holy Ghost was given by the apostles, in whose place the bishops stand (Acts 8). Hence Pope Urban I says: "All the faithful should, after Baptism, receive the Holy Ghost by the imposition of the bishop's hand, that they may become perfect Christians."

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Papa in Ecclesia habet plenitudinem potestatis, ex qua potest quaedam quae sunt superiorum ordinum, committere inferioribus quibusdam, sicut presbyteris concedit conferre minores ordines, quod pertinet ad potestatem episcopalem. Et ex hac plenitudine potestatis concessit beatus Gregorius Papa quod simplices sacerdotes conferrent hoc sacramentum, quandiu scandalum tolleretur.

The Pope has the plenitude of power in the Church, in virtue of which he can commit to certain lower orders things that belong to the higher orders: thus he allows priests to confer minor orders, which belong to the episcopal power. And in virtue of this fulness of power the Pope, Blessed Gregory, allowed simple priests to confer this sacrament, so long as the scandal was ended.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod sacramentum Baptismi est efficacius quam hoc sacramentum quantum ad remotionem mali, eo quod est spiritualis generatio, quae est mutatio de non esse in esse. Hoc autem sacramentum est efficacius ad proficiendum in bono, quia est quoddam spirituale augmentum de esse imperfecto ad esse perfectum. Et ideo hoc sacramentum digniori ministro committitur.

The sacrament of Baptism is more efficacious than this sacrament as to the removal of evil, since it is a spiritual birth, that consists in change from non-being to being. But this sacrament is more efficacious for progress in good; since it is a spiritual growth from imperfect being to perfect being. And hence this sacrament is committed to a more worthy minister.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut Rabanus dicit, in libro de Institut. Cleric., signatur baptizatus chrismate in summitate capitis per sacerdotem, per pontificem vero in fronte, ut priori unctione significetur super ipsum spiritus sancti descensio ad habitationem Deo consecrandam, in secunda quoque ut eiusdem spiritus sancti septiformis gratia, cum omni plenitudine sanctitatis et scientiae et virtutis, venire in hominem declaretur. Non ergo propter digniorem partem, sed propter potiorem effectum, haec unctio episcopis reservatur.

As Rabanus says (De Instit. Cleric. i), "the baptized is signed by the priest with chrism on the top of the head, but by the bishop on the forehead; that the former unction may symbolize the descent of the Holy Ghost on him, in order to consecrate a dwelling to God: and that the second also may teach us that the sevenfold grace of the same Holy Ghost descends on man with all fulness of sanctity, knowledge and virtue." Hence this unction is reserved to bishops, not on account of its being applied to a more worthy part of the body, but by reason of its having a more powerful effect.

Articulus XII

Whether the Rite of This Sacrament Is Appropriate?

Arg. 1 Objection 1

Ad duodecimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod ritus huius sacramenti non sit conveniens. Sacramentum enim Baptismi est maioris necessitatis quam hoc sacramentum, ut supra dictum est. Sed Baptismo deputantur certa tempora, scilicet Pascha et Pentecoste. Ergo etiam huic sacramento aliquod certum tempus debet praefigi.

It seems that the rite of this sacrament is not appropriate. For the sacrament of Baptism is of greater necessity than this, as stated above (A. 2, ad 4; Q. 65, AA. 3, 4). But certain seasons are fixed for Baptism, viz. Easter and Pentecost. Therefore some fixed time of the year should be chosen for this sacrament.

Arg. 2 Objection 2

Praeterea, sicut hoc sacramentum requirit devotionem et dantis et recipientis, ita etiam et sacramentum Baptismi. Sed in sacramento Baptismi non requiritur quod a ieiunis sumatur vel conferatur. Ergo videtur inconvenienter statutum in Aurelianensi Concilio, ut ieiuni ad confirmationem veniant; et in Concilio Meldensi ut episcopi non nisi ieiuni per impositionem manus spiritum sanctum tradant.

Further, just as this sacrament requires devotion both in the giver and in the receiver, so also does the sacrament of Baptism. But in the sacrament of Baptism it is not necessary that it should be received or given fasting. Therefore it seems unfitting for the Council of Orleans to declare that "those who come to Confirmation should be fasting"; and the Council of Meaux, "that bishops should not give the Holy Ghost with imposition of the hand except they be fasting."

Arg. 3 Objection 3

Praeterea, chrisma est quoddam signum plenitudinis spiritus sancti, ut supra dictum est. Sed plenitudo spiritus sancti data est fidelibus Christi in die Pentecostes, ut habetur Act. II. Magis ergo deberet chrisma confici et benedici in festo Pentecostes quam in cena domini.

Further, chrism is a sign of the fulness of the Holy Ghost, as stated above (A. 2). But the fulness of the Holy Ghost was given to Christ's faithful on the day of Pentecost, as related in Acts 2:1. Therefore the chrism should be mixed and blessed on the day of Pentecost rather than on Maundy Thursday.

Sed contra On the contrary

Sed contra est usus Ecclesiae, quae a spiritu sancto gubernatur.

On the contrary, Is the use of the Church, who is governed by the Holy Ghost.

Respondeo I answer that

Respondeo dicendum quod dominus, Matth. XVIII, fidelibus suis promisit dicens, ubi fuerint duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in medio eorum. Et ideo firmiter tenendum est quod ordinationes Ecclesiae dirigantur secundum sapientiam Christi. Et propter hoc certum esse debet ritus quos Ecclesia observat in hoc et in aliis sacramentis, esse convenientes.

I answer that, Our Lord promised His faithful (Matt. 18:20) saying: "Where there are two or three gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them." And therefore we must hold firmly that the Church's ordinations are directed by the wisdom of Christ. And for this reason we must look upon it as certain that the rite observed by the Church, in this and the other sacraments, is appropriate.

Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut Melchiades Papa dicit, ita coniuncta sunt haec duo sacramenta, scilicet Baptismi et confirmationis, ut ab invicem nisi morte praeveniente nullatenus possint segregari, et unum sine altero rite perfici non possit. Et ideo eadem tempora sunt praefixa Baptismo solemniter celebrando et huic sacramento. Sed quia hoc sacramentum a solis episcopis datur, qui non sunt semper praesentes ubi presbyteri baptizant, oportuit, quantum ad communem usum, sacramentum confirmationis etiam in alia tempora differri.

As Pope Melchiades says (Ep. ad Epis. Hispan.), "these two sacraments," viz. Baptism and Confirmation, "are so closely connected that they can nowise be separated save by death intervening, nor can one be duly celebrated without the other." Consequently the same seasons are fixed for the solemn celebration of Baptism and of this sacrament. But since this sacrament is given only by bishops, who are not always present where priests are baptizing, it was necessary, as regards the common use, to defer the sacrament of Confirmation to other seasons also.

Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod ab illa prohibitione excipiuntur infirmi et morte periclitantes, sicut in statuto Meldensis Concilii legitur. Et ideo, propter multitudinem fidelium, et propter pericula imminentia, sustinetur ut hoc sacramentum, quod non nisi ab episcopis dari potest, etiam a non ieiunis detur vel accipiatur, quia unus episcopus, praecipue in magna dioecesi, non sufficeret ad omnes confirmandos, si ei tempus arctaretur. Ubi tamen congrue observari potest, convenientius est ut a ieiunis detur et accipiatur.

The sick and those in danger of death are exempt from this prohibition, as we read in the decree of the Council of Meaux. And therefore, on account of the multitude of the faithful, and on account of imminent dangers, it is allowed for this sacrament, which can be given by none but a bishop, to be given or received even by those who are not fasting: since one bishop, especially in a large diocese, would not suffice to confirm all, if he were confined to certain times. But where it can be done conveniently, it is more becoming that both giver and receiver should be fasting.

Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod, sicut ex Concilio Martini Papae habetur, omni tempore licebat chrisma conficere. Sed quia solemnis Baptismus, ad quem requiritur usus chrismatis, in vigilia Paschae celebratur, congrue ordinatum est ut per biduum ante ab episcopo chrisma benedicatur, ut possit per dioecesim destinari. Dies etiam ille satis congruit ad materias sacramentorum benedicendas, in quo fuit Eucharistiae sacramentum institutum, ad quod omnia alia sacramenta quodammodo ordinantur, sicut dictum est.

According to the acts of the Council of Pope Martin, "it was lawful at all times to prepare the chrism." But since solemn Baptism, for which chrism has to be used, is celebrated on Easter Eve, it was rightly decreed, that chrism should be consecrated by the bishop two days beforehand, that it may be sent to the various parts of the diocese. Moreover, this day is sufficiently appropriate to the blessing of sacramental matter, since thereon was the Eucharist instituted, to which, in a certain way, all the other sacraments are ordained, as stated above (Q. 65, A. 3).

Showing Thomas's answers only.