Articulus 2 Article 2 Utrum chrisma sit conveniens materia huius sacramenti Whether chrism is a fitting matter for this sacrament? 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. Objection 1: 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 Spirit. But He sent them the Holy Spirit 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 Spirit. Therefore chrism is not the matter of this sacrament: since the matter is essential to the sacrament. 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. Obj. 2: 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. 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. Obj. 3: 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. 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. Obj. 4: 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 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 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 fullness of the Holy Spirit 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 Spirit 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 fullness of the Holy Spirit. 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 (Sir 24:21): My odor is as the purest balm. 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. Reply Obj. 1: Christ, by the power which He exercises in the sacraments, bestowed on the apostles the reality of this sacrament, i.e., the fullness of the Holy Spirit, 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 Spirit. For that the Holy Spirit 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 Spirit was to flow forth to others. Again, the Holy Spirit 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 Spirit, as teachers of the Faith; but the rest of the believers, as doing that which gives edification to the faithful. 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. In like manner, too, when the apostles imposed their hands, and when they preached, the fullness of the Holy Spirit 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 Spirit 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. 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. 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 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. Reply Obj. 2: 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 fullness of the Holy Spirit, 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 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. Reply Obj. 3: These properties of oil, by reason of which it symbolizes the Holy Spirit, 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 Spirit. 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. 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 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. Reply Obj. 4: 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 3 Article 3 Utrum sit de necessitate huius sacramenti quod chrisma, quod est materia huius sacramenti, fuerit prius per episcopum consecratum Whether it is essential to this sacrament that the chrism which is its matter be previously consecrated by a bishop? 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. Objection 1: 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. 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. Obj. 2: 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. 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. Obj. 3: 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 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 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. Ad primum ergo patet responsio ex dictis. This suffices for the reply to the First Objection. 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. Reply Obj. 2: 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 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. Reply Obj. 3: 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 4 Article 4 Utrum haec sit conveniens forma huius sacramenti, ‘consigno te signo crucis,’ etc. Whether the proper form of this sacrament is: “I sign thee with the sign of the cross,” etc.? 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. Objection 1: 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 Spirit. 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. 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. Obj. 2: 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. 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. Obj. 3: 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 est auctoritas Ecclesiae, quae hac forma communiter utitur. On the contrary, Is the authority of the Church, who always uses this form. 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 Spirit 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 fullness 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 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. Reply Obj. 1: As stated above (A. 2, ad 1), sometimes the effect of this sacrament, i.e., the fullness of the Holy Spirit, 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. 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 secundum dicendum quod sanctitas est salutis causa. Et ideo in idem redit quod dicitur chrismate salutis, et sanctificationis. Reply Obj. 2: Holiness is the cause of salvation. Therefore it comes to the same whether we say chrism of salvation or of sanctification. 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. Reply Obj. 3: 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. 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. 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.