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. 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. 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 5 Article 5 Utrum sacramentum confirmationis imprimat characterem Whether the sacrament of Confirmation imprints a character? 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. Objection 1: 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. 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. Obj. 2: 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. 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. Obj. 3: 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, 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 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 fullness of the Holy Spirit, 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 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. Reply Obj. 1: 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 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. Reply Obj. 2: 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 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. Reply Obj. 3: 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 6 Article 6 Utrum character confirmationis praesupponat ex necessitate characterem baptismalem Whether the character of Confirmation presupposes the baptismal character, of necessity? 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. Objection 1: 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. 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. Obj. 2: 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 Spirit. Therefore, in like manner, others can be confirmed before being baptized.