Dist. 7, Art. 1, Q. 2
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 7
Quaestio II. Utrum materia confirmationis sit necessaria.
Secundo quaeritur de materia, utrum sit necessaria; et videtur primo, quod istud Sacramentum indigeat necessaria materia:
1. Quia, sicut dicit Hugo1, «Sacramentum est elementum foris sensibiliter propositum, ex similitudine repraesentans»; sed repraesentatio est per materiam: ergo materia est necessaria.
2. Praeterea, supra2 habitum est, quod Dominus potestatem mundandi non tradidit homini per se, sed per elementum, ne poneretur spes in homine: ergo pari ratione potestatem confirmandi non debuit dare homini nisi mediante elemento.
Contra: 1. Apostoli sola manus impositione confirmabant3: ergo videtur, quod successores eorum sola manus impositione hoc possint, si transmiserunt potestatem, quam habebant.
2. Item, materia aliorum Sacramentorum fuit instituta a Christo, ut patet in baptismo et eucharistia, et Christus etiam ea suscepit: ergo videtur pari ratione, quodsi hoc Sacramentum haberet materiam, quod Christus instituisset Sacramentum suscipiendo. — Si tu dicas, quod non decebat eum confirmari; obiicitur tunc, quia similiter nec circumcidi nec baptizari; sed fecit propter auctoritatem Sacramenti et humilitatis, ut habitum est4, exemplum: ergo etc.
Quaestio incidens 1. — Item, quaero, utrum materia huius Sacramenti debeat esse consecrata, et videtur, quod sic: quia est chrisma, quod consecratur a Pontificibus determinato tempore anni5. — Sed videtur, quod non, cum alia Sacramenta possint fieri sine consecratione, ut patet in baptismo, qui antecedit, et eucharistia, quae sequitur baptismum: ergo et in confirmatione.
Quaestio incidens 2. — Item, quaero: cum alia Sacramenta habeant elementa simplicia non mixta, quare hoc Sacramentum habet mixta? Et videtur, quod non deberet habere, quia dicitur Ecclesiastici vigesimo quarto6: Quasi balsamum non mixtum odor meus; hoc dicit Sapientia de se.
Quaestio incidens 3. — Item, quaero: quare magis assumitur balsamum quam aqua? Et videtur, quod aqua magis, quia morbo generali debet respondere elementum commune et generale; sed balsamum est pretiosum et rarum7, aqua communis est omnibus: ergo etc.
Quaestio incidens 4. — Item, quare magis oleum quam vinum? Et videtur, quod vinum magis, quia facit hominem audacem et disertum; et hic est huius Sacramenti effectus.
### Conclusio. Materia consecrata est de integritate confirmationis.
Respondeo: Sicut tactum est prius8, Christus hoc Sacramentum non instituit, quia credentes post eius ascensionem erant confirmandi. Unde nec materiam nec formam Apostoli dispensaverunt, sed rem huius Sacramenti sine forma, a Spiritu sancto immediate confirmante, et sine elemento vel materia, quia in datione Spiritus sancti signa visibilia apparebant9: et ideo non erat opus elemento. Sed post a successoribus institutis dandus erat vi verborum et invisibiliter; ideo oportuit, institui sensibile elementum.
Institutum est igitur hoc elementum, Spiritu sancto dictante, ab ipsis Ecclesiae rectoribus; et quia Christus non instituerat nec vim ei dederat, secundum quod ipse «contactu mundissimae carnis dederat aquis10», et ut ipse, conficiendo corpus suum, instituit elementum sive materiam eucharistiae, ut panem vel vinum: ideo episcopi non valentes se ipsis materias consecrare, consecrari per benedictionem instituerunt. Et ideo materia huius Sacramenti debet esse consecrata.
Ad illud quod quaeritur: quare mixta in isto, et non in aliis? dicendum, quod, sicut dictum est11 de forma, quia erat ad duplicem actum arduum, ideo duplex actus exprimitur in forma; et ideo et
duplex elementum, consonans illi duplici actui et rei, commiscetur: oleum olivarum propter nitorem signat interiorem fidem ex bona conscientia; balsamum propter odorem dignam et laudabilem confessionem. Et ex hoc patet, quare haec duo elementa magis quam alia.
Ad illud quod obiicitur de generalitate, dicendum, quod hoc verum esset, si esset Sacramentum necessitatis, et salvaretur in aqua completa ratio signandi12. — De vino similiter dicendum, quod non convenit propter hoc, quod audacem et fortem faciat obnubilando rationem: ideo non convenit, quia fortitudo spiritualis est ex ratione recta et pura, non ex ratione obnubilata13.
---
Question II. Whether the matter of confirmation is necessary.
Secondly it is asked concerning the matter, whether it is necessary; and it seems first that this Sacrament requires a necessary matter:
1. Because, as Hugh says1, «A Sacrament is an element outwardly set forth in a sensible way, representing by likeness»; but representation is through matter: therefore matter is necessary.
2. Likewise, it was held above2 that the Lord did not hand over the power of cleansing to man through himself, but through an element, lest hope be placed in man: therefore by parity of reasoning he ought not to have given the power of confirming to man except by the mediation of an element.
On the contrary: 1. The Apostles confirmed by the imposition of the hand alone3: therefore it seems that their successors can do this by the imposition of the hand alone, if they transmitted the power which they had.
2. Likewise, the matter of the other Sacraments was instituted by Christ, as is evident in baptism and the Eucharist, and Christ also received them: therefore it seems by parity of reasoning that, if this Sacrament had a matter, Christ would have instituted the Sacrament by receiving it. — If you say that it was not fitting for him to be confirmed; it is then objected, that likewise it was not fitting for him to be circumcised or baptized; but he did this for the authority of the Sacrament and of humility, as has been held4, as an example: therefore etc.
Incidental question 1. — Likewise, I ask whether the matter of this Sacrament ought to be consecrated, and it seems that it should: because it is chrism, which is consecrated by the Pontiffs at a determined time of the year5. — But it seems that it should not, since the other Sacraments can be performed without consecration, as is evident in baptism, which precedes, and the Eucharist, which follows baptism: therefore also in confirmation.
Incidental question 2. — Likewise, I ask: since the other Sacraments have simple, unmixed elements, why does this Sacrament have mixed ones? And it seems that it ought not to have them, because it is said in Ecclesiasticus twenty-four6: My odor is as balsam unmixed; this Wisdom says of herself.
Incidental question 3. — Likewise, I ask: why is balsam taken rather than water? And it seems that water rather, because a common and general element ought to correspond to a general disease; but balsam is precious and rare7, water is common to all: therefore etc.
Incidental question 4. — Likewise, why oil rather than wine? And it seems that wine rather, because it makes a man bold and eloquent; and this is the effect of this Sacrament.
### Conclusion. The consecrated matter belongs to the integrity of confirmation.
I respond: As was touched on before8, Christ did not institute this Sacrament, because believers were to be confirmed after his ascension. Hence the Apostles dispensed neither the matter nor the form, but the reality of this Sacrament without form, the Holy Spirit confirming immediately, and without element or matter, because in the giving of the Holy Spirit visible signs appeared9: and therefore there was no need of an element. But afterward, by their instituted successors, it was to be given by the power of words and invisibly; therefore it was necessary that a sensible element be instituted.
Therefore this element was instituted, the Holy Spirit dictating, by the rulers of the Church themselves; and because Christ had not instituted it nor given it power, according as he himself «by the contact of his most pure flesh had given [power] to the waters10», and as he himself, in confecting his body, instituted the element or matter of the Eucharist, namely bread or wine: therefore the bishops, not being able of themselves to consecrate the matters, instituted that they be consecrated by a blessing. And therefore the matter of this Sacrament ought to be consecrated.
To that which is asked: why mixed in this Sacrament, and not in the others? it must be said that, as was said11 concerning the form, because it was for a twofold arduous act, therefore a twofold act is expressed in the form; and therefore also
a twofold element, consonant with that twofold act and reality, is mixed together: the oil of olives, on account of its brightness, signifies the interior faith from a good conscience; the balsam, on account of its odor, the worthy and laudable confession. And from this it is evident why these two elements rather than others.
To that which is objected concerning generality, it must be said that this would be true if it were a Sacrament of necessity, and if in water the complete account of signifying were preserved12. — Of wine it must similarly be said that it is not suitable on this account, that it makes one bold and strong by clouding the reason: therefore it is not suitable, because spiritual fortitude is from a right and pure reason, not from a clouded reason13.
---
- 1Libr. I. de Sacram. p. IX. c. 2. Cfr. supra pag. 13, nota 2.Bk. I, On the Sacraments, p. IX, c. 2. Cf. above, p. 13, note 2.
- 2Dist. 3. a. 3. q. 1.Distinction 3, a. 3, q. 1.
- 3Act. 8, 17, ubi Glossa interlinearis (apud Lyranum): Ecce exemplum confirmationis. — In fine arg. non pauci codd. transmiserint pro transmiserunt.Acts 8, 17, where the interlinear Gloss (in Lyra): Behold an example of confirmation. — At the end of the argument not a few codices read transmiserint for transmiserunt.
- 4Supra d. 3. p. II. a. 3. q. 1. ad 3, ubi triplex ratio adducitur, scilicet in fidei argumentum, humilitatis exemplum et Legis complementum. Cfr. etiam d. 6. p. II. a. 1. q. 1. — Supplevimus ex cod. N humilitatis, ut, quod male deest in aliis codd. et in edd.Above, d. 3, p. II, a. 3, q. 1, ad 3, where a threefold reason is adduced, namely as an argument of faith, an example of humility, and the fulfillment of the Law. Cf. also d. 6, p. II, a. 1, q. 1. — We have supplied from codex N humilitatis, ut, which is wrongly lacking in the other codices and in the editions.
- 5Scil. secundum antiquum morem in Coena Domini, ut insinuatur C. Litteris vestris (18.), de Consecrat. d. 3. Cfr. C. Presbyteri, qui per dioeceses (4.), d. 95, et Dionys., de Eccles. Hierarch. c. 4. per totum.That is, according to the ancient custom on Maundy Thursday (the Lord's Supper), as is implied in the Canon Litteris vestris (18), On Consecration, d. 3. Cf. the Canon Presbyteri, qui per dioeceses (4), d. 95, and Dionysius, On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, c. 4 throughout.
- 6Vers. 21. — Pro deberet codd. FGI debeat.Verse 21. — For deberet codices FGI read debeat.
- 7Codd. A G carum.Codices A G read carum (dear).
- 8Quaest. praeced. ad 1.The preceding question, ad 1.
- 9Cfr. Act. 19, 6. — Paulo superius post materia cod. aa non male supplet conferebant, et pro sine forma plurimi codd. perperam sive formam. Vat. hanc propositionem, utpote a communi doctrina alienam, mutavit sic: sine forma a Spiritu sancto immediate acceperunt. Nam immediate ab ipso confirmati fuerunt et quidem sine elemento etc. Mox pro Sed post [cod. H potius] a successoribus edd. Sed postea successoribus.Cf. Acts 19, 6. — A little above, after materia, codex aa not unfittingly supplies conferebant, and for sine forma very many codices wrongly read sive formam. The Vatican edition, this proposition being foreign to the common teaching, altered it thus: they received without a form from the Holy Spirit immediately. For they were confirmed immediately by him himself, and indeed without an element, etc. Soon, for Sed post [codex H rather] a successoribus, the editions read Sed postea successoribus.
- 10Secundum Bedam, supra pag. 21, nota 3. allegatum. — Superius pro hoc elementum cod. U hoc Sacramentum. Infra pro episcopi cod. aa ipsi.According to Bede, cited above, p. 21, note 3. — Above, for hoc elementum codex U reads hoc Sacramentum. Below, for episcopi codex aa reads ipsi.
- 11Quaest. praeced. — Pro de forma edd. et plurimi codd. in forma; qui error forte irrepsit ex seq. in forma. — Mox post arduum codd. MO addunt sive difficilem, codd. KLaa difficilem.The preceding question. — For de forma the editions and very many codices read in forma; which error perhaps crept in from the following in forma. — Soon after arduum codices MO add sive difficilem, codices KLaa difficilem.
- 12Cfr. infra a. 3. q. 2. et supra d. 3. p. II. a. 1. q. 1.Cf. below, a. 3, q. 2, and above, d. 3, p. II, a. 1, q. 1.
- 13Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion to the preceding question. ---