

























86      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   
 

 

RETHINKING CONFIRMATION AS AN  
INITIATION SACRAMENT: A HISTORICAL, 
THEOLOGICAL AND RITUAL APPROACH 

 

 

 

 

Abstract 

There is no denial of the fact that the idea of many 

contemporary Catholic Christians about confirmation is 

shaped by the definition in the Catechism of Baltimore that 

Confirmation is a sacrament through which we receive the 

Holy Ghost to make us strong and perfect Christians and 

soldiers of Christ (no. 166). This definition tends to 

emphasise confirmation as a sacrament of Christian 

maturity. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, however 

emphasizes that confirmation, together with Baptism and 

Eucharist are sacraments of initiation whose unity must be 

safeguarded (CCC. 1212, 1285).How can we possibly 

consider the notion of Confirmation as a sacrament of 

Christian maturity and one whose unity with baptism and 

eucharist must be kept? Is our present ritual practise 

reflective of the initiation character of the sacrament? When 

and how did this differentiation in the primary role of the 

sacrament emerge? This essay responds to these, and some 

other pertinent questions regarding the true character of the 

sacrament of Confirmation. It assumes that the survey of the 

historical, theological, and ritual understanding of the 

sacrament can help to put in right perspective the true 

character of the sacrament and thus affect the present 

practice. 

 

Keywords: Confirmation, Sacrament, Baptism, Initiation, 

Catechism. 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      87 

 

   
 

Introduction 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explicitly stated that the 

Sacraments of Christian initiation are Baptism, Confirmation, and 

Eucharist, they lay the foundations for every Christian life, and their 

unity must be safeguarded (CCC 1212, 1285). This affirmation 

understands ‘initiation’ as a unitary process by which an individual 

comes to full membership in the Christian community. However, the 

practice of Confirmation today reflects little of the initiation 

character, and consequently raises question about its meaning.  

When the question is asked about the meaning of 

Confirmation, the most likely answer will be something relating to 

the Holy Spirit and not basically initiatory. It may be said to be the 

sacrament that gives us the Holy Spirit with all his gifts.  Or as the 

Catechism of Baltimore defines it: a sacrament through which we 

receive the Holy Ghost to make us strong and perfect Christians and 

soldiers of Christ (no. 166). This notion of Confirmation with its link 

to the Holy Spirit and strengthening has been over emphasised at the 

detriment of its initiatory character. But this attitude attracts myriad 

of questions: Is the Holy Spirit not given in Baptism? If it is (and 

indeed is), is the Holy Spirit given in Baptism different or in little 

measure to the one at Confirmation? Are those who have not 

received Confirmation not capable of living the life in the Spirit and 

manifesting the gifts of the Holy Spirit? Do those who receive 

Confirmation always manifest the gifts of the Spirit? Is it necessary 

to wait till adulthood to receive the Holy Spirit and his gifts? If it is 

a sacrament of Initiation, are those who have not received 

Confirmation full member of the Church? How and why are those 

who are not fully initiated, partaking in the Eucharistic meal? If it 

not for its initiation character, why is the request for Confirmation 

of Catholics before Marriage (CIC 1065 §1)? Why should those 

from other Christian traditions being received into full communion 

with the Catholic Church be confirmed (CCC 1312; CIC 884 §2)? 

And the question can go on and on.  One thing that these questions 

reveal is that Confirmation is not as easily understood as it 

sometimes seems to be.  It is a Sacrament with complexities and this 



88      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

calls for a rethink about what the Sacrament is in its history, 

theology and ritual. 

 

Confirmation: A Sacrament with Complexities 
One of the recurrent features in the writings on Confirmation is the 

acknowledgement that it has multiple complexities in its history, 

theology and ritual practice. It is arguably one of the most difficult 

and complex questions in the history of the Church.1 For Gerard 

Austin, “no other Sacrament has had such a checkered history.  No 

other sacrament has changed so frequently in ritual, prayers, and 

meaning through the centuries.”2 As a liturgical act, there is no other 

sacrament that has generated so much theological controversy and 

as a result attracted variety of interpretations.3 Regarding its history 

and origin, “it is one of the most obscured chapters in the origin of 

Christian worship.”4 It is a sacrament shrouded in much ambiguity, 

not just in its history and theology but also in practice. Frank Quinn 

considers it as “one of the most vexing issues in contemporary 

theology, liturgical reform and practice”.5 Both the development and 

the reform of the rites of the sacrament seem to consistently generate 

more questions than they hope to clarify.  

 

Confirmation: A Definition 

To avoid ambiguity, it is important to give a working definition of 

the object of our discourse – Confirmation.6  Maxwell Johnson gives 

a comprehensive definition thus: 
 

Confirmation is the second of the three sacraments of 

Christian Initiation in the Roman Catholic Church, 

the ‘seal of the Holy Spirit’ completing baptism and 

connected to the hand-laying prayer for the seven-

fold gifts of the Holy Spirit and an anointing with 

Chrism, both usually performed by a bishop (or by 

presbyters in the case of adult initiation), leading to 

the fullness of Christian initiation signified by 

participation for the first time in the Eucharist.Post-

baptismal ‘chrismation’ for both infants and adults, 

in the Eastern orthodox and eastern Catholic 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      89 

 

   
 

Churches is often viewed as equivalent to 

confirmation. 
 

In various Protestant traditions, however, the rite of 

confirmation is not part of ‘initiation’, properly 

speaking, but is, rather, a rite having to do with a 

public affirmation of one’s baptism after catechesis, 

usually during adolescence, with baptism itself 

understood as constituting the fullness of initiation 

into Christ and the church. And like Chrismation in 

the Eastern Rites, so confirmation in the Roman 

Catholic rite is also used as part of the rites of 

reception into full communion with the church for 

those baptised in other Christian traditions.7 

 

From the above definition, we can deduce key terms like Holy Spirit, 

hand-laying, anointing or chrismation as characterising what 

Confirmation is. In discussing confirmation therefore, these features 

are the pointers or markers for tracing its history, discussing its 

theology and shaping its ritual. 

 

Historical Approach to Confirmation 

Confirmation is closely linked to Baptism both in history and in 

practice.  As such, any attempt to trace the history and development 

of Confirmation, inevitably discusses the practice of Baptism as a 

(perhaps, the) means of Christian initiation. The scriptures attest to 

this link between Baptism and Confirmation especially in reference 

to ritual-bath, hand-laying and anointing. While I acknowledge that 

there are references to Spirit of God, ritual bath, hand-laying and 

anointing in the Old Testament (cf. Gen 1:1-2, Is. 11:1-6, 32:15-18, 

61:1-2; Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:25-27), they are often in relation to 

renewal, commissioning and foreshadowing of messianic era.  

Therefore, our attention will be more on the New Testament which 

inaugurates the messianic era and provides a clearer foundation for 

Confirmation. 

 



90      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

New Testament foundation for Confirmation 

The event of the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan (Matt. 3:13-17; Mark 

1:9-11; Luke 3: 21-22) furnishes us with much to say about Baptism 

and Confirmation. This baptism of Jesus was not the same as other 

baptisms by John because something particularly unique 

accompanied it – descent of the Holy spirit and sonship of Jesus.8 

The evangelists emphasise these two important elements that have 

marked the understanding of Baptism down the history – possession 

by the Holy Spirit and adoption as sons and daughters of God. Thus, 

“just as Jesus was anointed with the Spirit, so his followers will be 

given the same Spirit.  Just as Jesus was declared to be the ‘beloved 

son’, so his followers will be declared to be sons and daughters of 

God.”9 

The Acts of the Apostles that narrates the activities of the 

early Church, including how new converts were initiated into the 

Christian fold, also offers insights into the foundation for the origin 

of Confirmation. The events of Acts8:14-17 and 19:1-7 are often 

employed to buttress this point.  In these instances, the Samaritan 

converts (Acts 8) and others who have received the baptism of John 

the Baptist (Acts 19) received the Holy Spirit through a post-

baptismal hand-laying.  One will be safe to say that these texts show 

that the post-baptismal rite of imposition of hand was a sacramental 

context of the gift of the Holy Spirit.10 While traditional scholarship 

sees these texts as the foundation for Confirmation, Joseph Martos 

cautions that “recent scholarship underscores their exceptional 

contexts and situations rather than interpreting them as indicative of 

a singular or nominative practice in the apostolic Churches.”11Also, 

J.D Crichton added that while considering these texts as ‘proof text’ 

for Confirmation, they are to be seen as acts of the Jerusalem church 

to establish and maintain the unity of the church.12 It was an ad hoc 

gesture to solve an abnormal situation.13 Rather, baptism and 

reception of the Holy Spirit should have come together as suggested 

in Acts 2:38. 

The Pauline and Johannine literatures give another trajectory 

into the understanding of the relation of the Holy Spirit to the 

baptized. While Acts suggests that the Holy Spirit is imparted 

through post-baptismal hand-laying, for Paul and John the Holy 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      91 

 

   
 

Spirit is conferred by baptism itself and there is no mention of any 

post-baptismal ritual. John interprets baptism as being born by 

‘water and spirit’ (John 3:5). For Paul, the stages of proclamation 

and conversion (the earlier stages of initiation) is regularly 

consummated by a water birth that was itself the anointing and 

sealing of one’s adherence to Christ in the same Spirit (e.g. 2 Cor. 

1:21-22).14 Amidst these different views, “the only thing that the 

biblical evidence is certain of is that while the water-bath and the 

gifts of the Holy Spirit are in some way distinguishable, they can 

never be totally separated.”15 

As much as we do not have testimonies to the mode of 

initiation and impartation ofthe Holy Spirit in the immediate century 

after the Apostolic era, we turn to the patristic era in tracing the 

development of confirmation. 

 

The Origins of Confirmation 

In discussing the origins of Confirmation, one must note that the 

term ‘confirmation’ was not used until the mid-fifth century.  Prior 

to this time, terms such as perfectioor consummatio were used for 

those final rites of baptism which were associated with the bishop. 

The terms do not refer so much to specific rites as to the perfecting 

or completing of baptismal initiation by the bishop.16 As a technical 

term, confirmatiofirst appears in the fifth century, in documents 

reporting practices in southeast Gaul.  But as with perfectioand 

consummatio, confirmatiodid not refer directly to any particular rite 

or to the bestowal of the Holy Spirit. Instead, it was juridical, 

referring to the personal intervention of the bishop in baptismal 

initiation, especially when the bishop had not been present at the 

baptism itself.17 The councils of Orange and Riez used it in the 

context of hand-laying on heretics and neophytes respectively. We 

should however be careful not to imply that post-baptismal rite of 

initiation and admission of heretics are the same, though they both 

follow the same line of development.18 The initial term that has a 

link to bestowal of the Holy Spirit in ‘the seal.’19 Gregory Dix, 

captures the essence of the change in terminology thus:  



92      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

Hitherto, the Latin name for baptism of the Spirit had 

been the scriptural term ‘the Seal’ – signaculum, 

consignatio, corresponding to the sphragis which the 

Greeks and the rushma which the Syrian Churches 

still retain. In the fifth century the Latins begin to use 

the term confirmation. …. The change of term has its 

own significance. A document which needs ‘sealing’ 

is not valid until the seal has been affixed. The 

‘confirmation’ of a document, though it may add to 

its authority, implies that it was already operative 

before it was ‘confirmed’. 20 

 

Confirmation is thus seen as ‘completion of baptism.’ This 

connotation will eventually have implications for the theology of 

confirmation, especially in its relation to baptism, in the subsequent 

era. 

 

Stages of historical development 

The historical development of Confirmation can be outlined in 

stages.Though the development is not fine-cut, as there are series 

of overlaps, Marsh recognises three stages which I shall adopt in 

this work.21 These are: a). The early centuries (2nd to 4thcenturies)   

b).  the early medieval period (5th to 11th centuries), and  c). The 

central medieval to modern times and recent developments. 

 

The Early Centuries (2nd to 4th Centuries) 

As Paul Turner rightly noted, as much as we may not say that 

Confirmation had been in existence since the second century, it 

suffices to say that the second post-baptismal anointing or/and hand-

laying “by the bishop, attested in many documents, became the 

forerunner of Confirmation.  The term ‘confirmation’ still did not 

occur, but the ritual was beginning to take shape after Baptism and 

before Eucharist.”22 Most scholars believe that the Apostolic 

Tradition (AT) - a long thought to be an authentic, authoritative and 

dependable witness to early third-century Roman liturgical practice, 

composed by Hippolytus of Rome - is the first text in which what 

we consider as confirmation first appeared.23 The document outlines 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      93 

 

   
 

a ritual celebration of baptism for Christian initiation. What is 

relevant for our discussion here is the post baptismal rituals of hand-

laying and double anointing:  
 

Afterward, when they have come up out of the water, 

they shall be anointed by the elder with the Oil of 

Thanksgiving, saying, "I anoint you with holy oil in the 

name of Jesus Christ." Then, drying themselves, they 

shall dress and afterwards gather in the church. The 

bishop will then lay his hand upon them, invoking, 

saying, "Lord God, you who have made these worthy of 

the removal of sins through the bath of regeneration, 

make them worthy to be filled with your Holy Spirit, 

grant to them your grace, that they might serve you 

according to your will, for to you is the glory, Father and 

Son with the Holy Spirit, in the Holy Church, now and 

throughout the ages of the ages. Amen. After this he 

pours the oil into his hand, and laying his hand on each 

of their heads, says, "I anoint you with holy oil in God 

the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus, and the Holy 

Spirit." Then, after sealing each of them on the forehead, 

he shall give them the kiss of peace and say, "The Lord 

be with you."24 

 

Though the model of initiation mentioned in the AT referred to 

double post-baptismal anointing and hand-laying, a common 

practice in Rome, there was no common consensus about the point 

when people receive the Holy Spirit during their initiation. The 

common agreement was that by the conclusion of the ceremony, 

Christians had received the Spirit.But for some of the Patristics,“this 

happened during baptismal washing, for others it happened 

afterward.  Some did not specify when it happened but only spoke 

of the anointing or the imposition of hand as a sign that it 

happened.”25 Tertullian, for instance, in De Baptismosees the 

imposition of hand as a rite of inviting and welcoming the Holy 

Spirit.26 



94      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

Unlike in Rome where there was both post-baptismal and 

hand-laying, the Eastern Churches only had post baptismal 

anointing for giving the Holy Spirit. Cyril of Jerusalem, for instance 

recognised the anointing, not just as the moment of imparting the 

Holy Spirit, but that the anointing is the Holy Spirit.27 For him, post-

baptismal anointing is to ‘instil Divinity’ in the one anointed.28  The 

Apostolic Constitutions requested that: “you shall anoint with holy 

oil, then you shall baptize with water, and finally you shall seal with 

Chrism, so that the anointing may be the partaking of the Holy 

Spirit, the water the symbol of the death (of Christ), and the chrism, 

the seal of the covenants.”29 The ApostolicConstitution however 

added that: "but if there be neither oil nor chrism, the water is 

sufficient both for the anointing and for the sealing, and for the 

confession (of faith) of him who is dying, or rather is dying together 

(with Christ).”30 J.D Crichton captured the implications and the 

sentiments of the compiler of the document so well when he says 

“the compiler certainly believed that the Spirit was given but 

evidently did not see either hand-laying or anointing as essential.  

For him, both ‘anointing’ and ‘seal’, which he regarded as 

important, did not need physical gestures for them to take place.”31 

Moreover, this period witnessed the separation of 

confirmation (as expressed in anointing and hand-laying) from 

baptism (water-birth). This separation is closely linked to the 

prevailing practice that the second post-baptismal anointing and 

hand-laying are reserved for the Bishop. It gradually became 

practically impossible for bishops to be present at every baptism as 

Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. 

Partly, the prevailing teaching of Augustine about original sin of 

which baptism was necessary for its remittance influenced the 

increased infant baptism at that time.More people request for 

baptism and dioceses enlarged. Also, as missionaries move towards 

the Alps, only few bishops went with them. Because of these, so 

many were baptised but only few were consigned.32 

 

The Early Medieval Period (5th to 11th Centuries) 

In Gaul, the fifth century was marked by some developments which 

will have long effect on the understanding of confirmation. In 416, 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      95 

 

   
 

Pope Innocent I decreed that priest could anoint with chrism but the 

rite of consignation with chrism is reserved to the bishop since it is 

only the successor of the Apostles that can give the Holy Spirit. 

Through the Council of Orange in 441 however, the Gallican 

bishops allowed the priest who celebrated baptism to anoint the 

people with Chrism if it was consecrated by the bishop. Also, as 

noted earlier, this was the first time the term ‘Confirmation’ was 

used for the post-baptismal hand-laying or/and anointing. In 460, 

Faustus of Riez delivered a popular Pentecost Homily which was 

meant to encourage the people to approach the bishop for 

confirmation.33  Faustus emphasised that confirmation gives graces 

different from what baptism gives. He preached that through 

baptism we receive new life through the Holy Spirit, but we are 

strengthenedonly in Confirmation to battle with sin and evil.  

Though this preaching didn’t yield much positive effect at the time, 

it doubtlessly will about 400 years later. Lastly, though the term 

‘confirmation’ was used in the Councils of Riez and Orange in 439 

and 441 respectively, and in the Pentecost homily of Faustus, it was 

not until 750 that it came to refer to baptismal episcopal rites in 

rubrical text – Ordo Romanus XI.  

Moreover, this stage of the development of confirmation was 

strongly influenced by the Germanization of the Roman liturgy.34 

The Roman practices eventually found its way into Gallican 

territory when Pepin III and later Charlemagne established the ‘Holy 

Roman Empire’ in the West. During their reign, they sought to end 

the rivalry between the Roman and Gallican liturgies and at the same 

time “wanted to be in closer contact with the porter of heaven, Saint 

Peter, with his tomb, with his city, and with his liturgy.”35 At this 

time, the Roman custom of episcopal confirmation was extended 

“through all the countries of Europe (except Milan and some 

Spanish dioceses), and the French explanation for confirmation 

became the accepted Catholic view.”36 

Though the Roman rite was imposed, it met with resistance 

with the Gallican people.  Several efforts were made to safeguard 

the Gallican autonomy, both politically and liturgically. These 



96      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

efforts invariably led to the emergence of false decretals, which was 

an ingenious piece of forgery combining a collection of letter and 

decrees from Popes and councils with the opinions of the forgers, 

and given the purported credibility by attributing it to Isidore of 

Seville in early 600s. Parts of the decretals stated that “…all the 

faithful must receive the Holy Spirit after baptism through the 

imposition of the hand of the bishop so that they may become fully 

Christians.” It taught that “at the baptismal font the Holy Spirit 

bestow absolutely all that is needed to restore innocence, but in 

confirmation he provides an increase of grace. In baptism we are 

born to new life; after baptism we are confirmed for combat.  In 

baptism we are washed; after baptism we are strengthened.” And 

“that the sacrament of the imposition of hands was to be performed 

by no one but the successors of the apostles.”37 

This forgery was so successful, accepted as genuine, attained 

the force of law and became foundational for the theology of 

confirmation championed by the scholastics. 

 

The central medieval to modern times and recent 

developments. 

Much of what was done during this period was the theological 

explanations of Confirmation and its effects. Theologians of this 

period are largely influenced by the Pentecost homily often credited 

to Faustus of Riez.  This period witnessed the emergence of the use 

of military imagery with its defensive connotations for, an imagery 

which hitherto had been restricted to the pre-baptismal anointings. 

Hence, Confirmation is foremost considered as the sacrament of 

being strengthened or empowered by the Holy Spirit. This was the 

idea projected by many theologians of the time including Alcuin, 

Rabanus Maurus, Peter Lombard, Nicholas Claivaux and Thomas 

Aquinas.  

There are some other notable pronouncements that shaped 

the practice of confirmation during this period. Based on the 

teachings of Peter Lombard in his treatise that Confirmation is a 

sacrament, the second Council of Lyon (1247) recognizes 

confirmation as one of the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church. 

The Council of Cologne (1280) declared that children under the age 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      97 

 

   
 

of seven were too young for confirmation and various episcopal and 

conciliar bodies opted for between twelve and fourteen. It was 

however the Council of Florence (1439) that canonized the medieval 

practice and theology of confirmation. It declared that there are 

seven sacraments, define the form and matter of confirmation, the 

ordinary minister is the bishop and priest can be delegated provided 

that the chrism blessed by the bishop will be used.  

The medieval teachings about Confirmation however met 

with opposition during the modern era. The modern era was the 

period of the Reformations and the understanding and practice of 

confirmation was so much attacked by Martin Luther and other 

reformers. For Luther, that confirmation gives the Holy Spirit is a 

superstition.  At best, confirmation is for him a sacramental at par 

with ritual of blessing of water. In his 1520 treatise, Babylonian 

Captivity of the Church, Luther rejected confirmation as a sacrament 

on the ground that it does not have a biblical foundation. Calvin on 

the other hand argues that baptism on its own is perfect without 

confirmation as against the teaching of the scholastics that 

confirmation perfects baptism.38The Council of Trent responded to 

these accusations, but only by mostly reaffirming the teachings of 

the scholastics especially, Aquinas. 

In recent times, the reform of the Second Vatican Council 

has been responsible for the development in the understanding and 

practice of confirmation today. The conciliar Fathers proposed the 

revision of the Rite of Confirmation.  The revision was done in 1971 

and was accompanied by an Apostolic constitution, Divinae 

consortium naturae. The new Rite sought to respond to the 

questions of the age for confirmation, the matter and form of the 

sacrament, the minister of the sacrament and the relationship of the 

sacrament to baptism.  Paramount in the task of the reform was to 

situate confirmation back into the context of Christian initiation 

preceded by baptism and followed by the Eucharist. The reform has 

led to the emergence of different models of confirmation in the 

Roman Catholic Church: the confirmation of infants, children, 

adolescents and adults. Arguably, the most popular today is the 



98      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

adolescent confirmation.  In the opinion of Turner, this growing 

practice was enhanced by the “evolution of catechetical theory – or 

the theory of how people best learn and grow in the faith.”39  He 

argues that the late twentieth century has experienced a principal 

shift in theory of learning from being abstract learning to 

experiential learning, from learning from books to learning for 

experience, from learning by memorization to learning by reflecting 

on personal experience.  These eventually became the foundation 

upon which teen or youth catechesis was built. The method is highly 

productive in fostering spiritual growth and commitment to the faith. 

But the question remains: does it reflect the theological and ritual 

meaning of confirmation? 

 

Theological Approach 

What has mostly engaged the mind of liturgical theologians about 

confirmation is its theological relationship with baptism. Though 

Kavanagh argues that such relationship is more of structure than 

theology,40 the theological relationship should not be undermined. 

Schmemann argues from the Eastern understanding of the ‘seal of 

the Holy Spirit’ with which confirmation is celebrated.  He argues 

that Confirmation is both the fulfilment of Baptism and a new 

mystery taking the neophyte beyond baptism.  In Confirmation, 

Christ’s own Spirit is given as gift. Thus, “prepared and made 

possible by Baptism, which is fulfilled in it, it takes man beyond 

Baptism, beyond ‘salvation’: by making him ‘christ’ in Christ, by 

anointing him with the Anointment of the Anointed One, it opens to 

man the door of theosisor deification.”41 It is with this understanding 

that Turner says: “sequence alone does not make confirmation 

initiation; its conjunction with Baptism in the same ceremony drives 

the point home.”42 For Maxwell, problem only arises when 

confirmation is not connected to baptism at all but added as a 

separate and self-sustained rite.43 

Confirmation, together with Baptism and Orders are 

regarded as sacraments that impart permanent character and as such 

cannot be repeated (CCC 1317). While this is an ecclesiastical 

statement, it constantly begs for theological explanation. 

Theologians differ on what this means. For Schmemann, the 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      99 

 

   
 

question of character is more of the understanding of the relationship 

of the Holy Spirit with the confirmand. One is to ask what is 

received when we say Confirmation bestows the gift of the Spirit. 

Schmemann pointed out the scholastic problem when he says that 

“instead of ‘receiving’ the meaning of the sacrament from liturgical 

tradition, theologians created, so to speak, their own definition of 

sacraments and then, in the light of such definitions, began to 

interpret the liturgy of the Church, to ‘squeeze’ in into their own a 

priori approach.”44 For him, “the sacramental formula is and has 

always been in the singular, ‘the gift’ (dorea), theologians while 

‘defining’ this sacrament almost without exception speak of ‘gifts’ 

(charismata) in the plural; the sacrament, they say, bestows on the 

neophyte ‘gifts of the holy Spirit’. To them the two words, one in 

the plural and the other in the singular, seem to be 

interchangeable.”45 For Schmemann, the gifts needed for man’s 

preservation in Christian life is given in Baptism,  the sacrament of 

regeneration and, confirmation “bestows on man not any particular 

gift or gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit Himself as a gift 

(Dorea).”46 While the reflection of Schmemann seem to have 

corrected the scholastic idea, one cannot but ask if it is possible to 

have the gifs (as in Baptism) without having the Spirit as a gift (as 

in confirmation)?  

Moreover, apart from the theological relationship of 

Confirmation and Baptism, reflections on the various themes of 

confirmation have contributed to a better theological understanding 

of the sacrament. Among these are initiation, strengthening, more 

Christ-like and witnessing. When the conciliar Fathers requested for 

the revision of the Rite of Confirmation, it was foremost to situate it 

in the context of initiation.47 It was observable that the imagery of 

strengthening that was initially attached to pre-baptismal anointing 

in the early centuries soon became transferred to the post-baptismal 

anointing (that grew to be confirmation). The Rite of Confirmation 

(RC) in its euchologies constantly pray that those confirmed are 

conformed more to Christ (Cf. RC, 9, 22, 24, 58) and to be his 

witnesses in the world (RC 33, 59). 



100      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

Ritual Approach 

Just as the historical and theological approach to Confirmation are 

complex and difficult, so also is the case for the ritual approach. The 

difficulty in the ritual approach is largely due to the complex history 

and varying theologies of Confirmation. Nevertheless, the Rite was 

set forth to address the relationship of Confirmation with Baptism 

and Eucharist, and then how this relationship is to be understood and 

celebrated. Annibale Bugnini, the Secretary of Congregation for 

Divine worship (1969-1976), the commission that worked on the 

reform of the Catholic Liturgy following the Second Vatican 

Council wrote: “the path of reform of the Rite of Confirmation was 

a long and difficult one because of the many problems connected 

with the sacrament, the uncertainties and the adversity in theological 

and pastoral thinking about it.”48 

The present Rite of Confirmation, promulgated by Pope Paul 

VI in 1971 and revised at the direction of Pope John Paul II, provides 

a theologically rich resource in its content.  In structure, the Rite 

consists of the Apostolic constitution Divinae consortium naturaeof 

Paul VI.  The Apostolic constitution offers a synopsis of the history 

and theology of Confirmation. The Rite contains an introduction and 

five chapters. Chapter one contains the order for the conferral of 

Confirmation within mass. The second chapter deals with the order 

of conferral of confirmation without mass.  It was the third chapter 

that discusses those things to be observed when confirmation is 

conferred by the extra ordinary minister.  Chapter four considers the 

Confirmation to be administered to a sick person in danger of death. 

The final chapter offers texts to be used in the conferral of 

confirmation. The structure of the rite in all cases follow the order 

of liturgy of the Word, homily, renewal of baptismal promises, 

laying on of hands, chrismation, general intercessions, and at the end 

solemn blessing. 

Though the Roman Church has often been accused of not 

emphasizing the pneumatic dimension of liturgy like the Eastern 

churches, the Rite centralizes the role and position of the Holy Spirit 

in the celebration of the sacrament. Firstly, the rite keeps the two 

traditional ways of imparting the Holy Spirit: anointing and hand-

laying. The Apostolic Constitution decided to keep the two “in order 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      101 

 

   
 

that the revision of the Rite of Confirmation may, as is fitting, 

include even the essence of the sacramental rite.”49 Secondly the 

euchology is filled with pneumatic themes, and the suggested 

scripture readings relate directly with the Holy Spirit and the 

Pentecost experience.  Strikingly, the Alleluia verses included two 

options that are not taken from the scriptures but from traditional 

hymn to the Holy Spirit (RC. 64).50 

Furthermore, the centrality of the Holy Spirit also serves the 

purpose of linking Confirmation to Baptism and the Eucharist.  The 

Apostolic constitution opened by affirming that it is by the same 

Spirit by which the faithful are born anew in Baptism that they are 

strengthened in Confirmation and will be fed by the bread and wine 

transformed by the Holy Spirit into the Eucharist.  Also, we see the 

expansion of the renewal of baptismal promises.The usual threefold 

questions preceding baptism (RCIA 316) is expanded into four to 

accommodate the theme of the Holy Spirit relating Confirmation to 

Baptism: “Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of 

life, who today through the Sacrament of Confirmation is given to 

you in a special way just as he was given to the Apostles on the day 

of Pentecost?” (RC 23) 

Moreover, the former ritual practice of taking a new (or 

additional) name at Confirmation was dropped in the revised rite.  

The custom which originated from the imitation of baptismal ritual 

and signifying a new direction in the life of a Christian was now 

considered unrelated with Confirmation. This is largely because the 

Rite emphasises the link of Baptism and Confirmation as one 

initiation process. The omission thus “argue for the importance of 

the baptismal name throughout one’s life, and against the belief that 

Confirmation begins a new decisive moment in the life of the 

Christian.”51 

The Rite also sheds light on the minister of the sacrament. 

Leaning on the historical evidence of the celebration of the 

sacrament, the Rite acknowledges the bishop as the ‘ordinary’ (or 

Primary or original) minister of the sacrament.52 Like the Rite of 

ordination, the Rite of Confirmation also provides a provisional 



102      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

homily that can serve the celebrant as an outline.  However, unlike 

that of ordination, the Rite has an intriguing part to emphasise the 

role of the bishop. It reads:  “When Confirmation is conferred by an 

extraordinary minister, whether by concession of the general law or 

by special indult of the Apostolic See, it is fitting for him to mention 

in the homily that the Bishop is the ordinary minister of the 

Sacrament and to explain the reason why even Priests receive the 

faculty to confirm from the law or by an indult of the Apostolic See.” 

(RC, 18). 

The Rite also addresses the ‘matter’ and ‘form’ of the 

sacrament through the ritual description. The Rite acknowledges 

that Rome has the two traditions of anointing and hand-laying and 

the two are to be kept together though they are different ritual acts.  

This seems to resolve the medieval practice where the hand-laying 

is presumed by the anointing on the forehead. The bishop invites the 

people to pray to God that “he will graciously pour out the Holy 

Spirit upon them to confirm them with his abundant gifts.” He then 

lays hand on each of the candidates and says another prayer that God 

may send them the Holy Spirit and his seven gifts.  After this, the 

Bishop goes to the candidates for the anointing with Chrism. “The 

Bishop dips the tip of the thumb of his right-hand in the Chrism and, 

with the thumb, makes the Sign of the Cross on the forehead of the 

one to be confirmed, as he says: N., BE SEALED WITH THE GIFT 

OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.” (RC 27).  Through the prayers, the Rite 

seamlessly unites anointing and hand-laying.  We should note that 

there is no specific prayer for the anointing. The prayer that precedes 

it is the prayer after laying on of hands. Yet, the content of the prayer 

is in the context of anointing. In this way, the Rite shows that the 

ritual actions are distinct, yet performed to the same effect: 

impacting the Holy Spirit with His gifts.  Thus, while the Rite has 

borrowed the Byzantine chrismation ritual, it remains faithful to 

Rome’s hand-laying.  

Furthermore, the change in the sacramental formula in the 

new Rite - BE SEALED WITH THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT 

- captures the meaning of Confirmation.  Though Kavanagh regards 

this move as ‘Byzantinization’ of the Roman Rite,53 it was seen by 

the committee in charge of the revision as the best formula to 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      103 

 

   
 

express the ‘mind of the church’ regarding Confirmation. It 

expresses external action of signing, that is sealing the initiation, and 

at the same time the effect of the sacrament, which is the giving of 

the gift of the Holy Spirit.54 Hence, Johnson remarked that “never 

before had the Roman confirmation anointing been this explicitly 

pneumatic in language and orientation, and with the omission of the 

postbaptismal anointing in the RCIA in favour of this confirmation 

anointing alone, an interesting new parallel between Roman 

confirmation and Byzantine postbaptismal chrismation has been 

decidedly established.”55 

 

Evaluation 

The survey of the historical and theological development of 

Confirmation enables us to arrive at some considerations regarding 

the ritual and pastoral practice of the sacrament in the Roman 

Catholic Church today.  One thing that is persistent, as noted at the 

beginning of this work, is that there are complexities and 

ambiguities in the history and theology of confirmation.  The most 

popular reason for the observable liturgical crisis that results from 

these complexities and ambiguity is the separation of what used to 

be one single celebration of ‘double sacrament’. The separation is 

twofold: separation-in-time and separation as distinct sacraments. 

Several scholars argue that the separation-in-time for the 

celebration of Baptism and Confirmation is the source of the 

ambiguity surrounding the Sacrament.  Presently, there are different 

models for the celebration of the Sacrament based on the separation 

in time.  We have the confirmation of baptized Children, which often 

come up while they prepare for their first Holy Communion.  This 

is an attempt to rescue the supposed harm caused by the 1910 

document of Pope Pius X, Quam Singularis that decreed that 

children should receive communion at the age of seven.  Those who 

are faithful to the sequence of the sacrament thus celebrate 

confirmation with the First communion in the same Mass. The 

second model is the adolescent/adult Confirmation which is very 

popular today. Its origin lies in the practical experience where those 



104      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

who were baptized as infants desire to personally affirm their faith 

or the Christian community desires a reflection of a rite of passage 

to adulthood (in faith).  It takes place after a period of catechetical 

program aimed at faith growth and commitment to faith, and at the 

end, “Confirmation ritualized their own commitment”.56 

On the other hand, there are other scholars who believe that 

the liturgical crisis of confirmation goes deeper than their separation 

in time. Yarnold, holds this different view that even when Baptism 

and Confirmation are brought together into the same celebration, the 

crisis will still not dissolve.  He contends that there will still be 

question of the effects of the different sacraments.  Hence, he 

concluded that the problem lies in the recognition of Baptism and 

Confirmation as two distinct sacraments.  As long as they are held 

as two distinct sacraments and are both understood as giving the 

Holy Spirit, the rite will keep raising different questions.57 

Marsh maintains that the deeper problem of the Sacrament 

of Confirmation lies in the New Testament theologies of the Holy 

Spirit.58 In Luke-Acts’ theology the Holy Spirit is imparted after 

Baptism while Pauline and Johannine theologies uphold that the 

Holy Spirit is given at Baptism.  For Marsh, to maintain the unity of 

the Sacraments, their liturgical expression must recognize, accept 

and incorporate this scriptural foundational duality. “Not to do so is 

to commit oneself to a bad methodology which offers little hope for 

a sound solution.”59 

Furthermore, we may question further if the problems 

around confirmation is not imbedded in our understanding of 

sacrament?  Andrew McGowan rightly observed that the Catholic 

Church’s unequivocal recognition of seven sacraments has “caused 

confirmation to attract more meaning than it would if there were 

more (sacraments).”60 This is obviously an eye opener for us to 

discover that we may actually be ‘seeing’ problem where virtually 

there is no problem. Possibly, we have created problems by 

spending time theologizing about something else (perhaps another 

sacrament) in or with the name of ‘confirmation.’ Could it be that if 

from the early centuries, different terms (like perfectio, consumatio, 

orconfirmare) have been retained for the hand-laying in reconciling, 

penitents, heretics and schismatics, or the postbaptismal anointing 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      105 

 

   
 

of infants and children or the hand-laying, and anointing of very sick 

adults, we might be speaking of different sacraments all together?  

As much as I don’t intend to reduce the complexity to semantics, the 

problem might possibly not have existed if the use of the same term 

does not apply to several ritual events. 

 

Call To Return To A Unified Rite 

It is obvious that the problems that the Rite of Confirmation sought 

to resolve are still there.  It is a sign that the responses are not either 

satisfactory or confusing.As many as those who identify problems 

in the theology and practice of confirmation, so are attempts to 

proffer solutions.  But in all, it is almost a chorus that there should 

be a return to the practice of the early centuries, a ‘unified rite’ 

where Baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist are celebrated together 

in one liturgy.  Proponents of this view argue that this is the only 

way to restore the sacramental dignity of Confirmation. While they 

recognise that there are two main dominant theologies in the practice 

of confirmation today – as sacrament of initiation and as sacrament 

of maturity, commitment and mission – they insist that the former is 

the real essence of confirmation. However, they also recommend 

that there should be repeatable moments in which to ritualize 

maturity, commitment and mission. Such ritualization does not 

necessarily need to be a sacrament or the sacrament of 

Confirmation.61 With this, liturgical theologians might stop seeing 

adolescent confirmation as a misuse of the sacrament of 

confirmation as a catechetical device, a utilitarian purpose which 

makes a mockery of the Catholic sacramental system.62 

For the unified rite to be effective, this will necessarily 

involve allowing priests to celebrate confirmation along with 

Baptism, especially where the Rite of Christian Initiation of adults 

(RCIA) takes place. It may suffice to presume that the office of the 

Bishop, as the ordinary minister of the sacrament, is not usurped 

since the oil of Chrism to be used would be one that is blessed at the 

Chrism Mass presided over by the Bishop. The ceremony for the 

blessing of the oil on Holy Thursday invariably emphasises the 



106      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

ecclesiastical bond that the reservation of the sacrament to the 

Bishop envisaged (cf. CCC. 1318).  It is however unfortunate that 

even in some situations where the Bishop celebrates the Baptism of 

adults, Confirmation is still deferred to later date.  This attitude 

keeps one wondering what our understanding of Confirmation as 

initiation sacrament is. 

To better appreciate Confirmation as an initiation sacrament, 

efforts should be made to restore the order of initiation – Baptism, 

Cnfirmation and Eucharist. We must note that the Latin rite 

recognises that the practice in the East of administering 

Confirmation after Baptism and followed by the Eucharist 

highlights the unity of the three sacraments of initiation (CCC 

1318), and this is the foremost reason for the reform of the rite of 

Confirmation (LumenGentium, 71). It is worth rethinking if our 

practice today reflects the mind of the conciliar fathers. Also, 

bearing in mind that the Church is disposed to priests administering 

confirmation (cf. CCC 1313, CIC, 884§1), giving faculty to priests 

to administer Confirmation neither usurps the bishop’s authority nor 

diminishes the strengthening of ecclesiastical bond envisaged by the 

catechism (CCC 1318). On the contrary, it better signifies 

Confirmation as an initiation sacrament, and thus approached for the 

right reasons. 

 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, though the issues considered above presents us with 

liturgical crisis around confirmation, they also present us with 

pastoral possibilities as we seek to understand the mission of the 

Church.63 One thing that is certain is that we cannot totally separate 

the work of the Holy Spirit from the Gift of the Spirit. The themes 

of strengthening and witnessing that are closely linked with the 

mission of the Church should always be kept in view as members 

are initiated into the Church. 

 

 

 

 

 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      107 

 

   
 

ENDNOTES 

1 Thomas Marsh, “Confirmation” in The New Dictionary of Sacramental Worship, 

ed. Peter E. Fink, (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan Ltd., 1990), 260. 
2 Gerard Austin, Anointing With the Spirit: The Rite of Confirmation: The Use of 

Oil and Chrism, (New York: Pueblo Publications, 1985), ix. 
3 Alexander Schmemann, Of Water and Spirit, (London: SPCK, 1976), 76. 
4 Jean Daniélou, The Bible and the Liturgy, (Notre Dame: University of Notre 

Dame Press, 1956), 114. 
5 Frank C. Quinn, “Confirmation Reconsidered: Rite and Meaning,” Worship 59, 

no.4 (July 1985): 354. 
6 It is striking that the Catechism of the Catholic Church does not really define 

what the sacrament of confirmation is but makes several allusions to the effects 

of the sacrament (See CCC. 1285 – 1305) 
7 Maxwell Johnson, “Confirmation” in The New SCM Dictionary of Liturgy and 

Worship, ed. Paul Bradshaw, (London: SCM Press, 2002), 126. 
8 See Aidan Kavanagh, The Shape of Baptism: The Rite of Christian Initiation 

(Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1974), 12-13.  
9 Austin, Anointed with the Spirit, 4. 
10 Thomas Marsh, “A Study of Confirmation II,” Irish Theological Quarterly 39 

(1972), 319. 
11 Joseph Martos, Doors to the Sacred: A Historical Introduction to Sacraments 

in the Catholic Church (Ligouri: Ligouri/Triump, 2001), 187. 
12 J. D Chrichton, Christian Celebration: Understanding the Sacraments (New 

York: Geoffrey Chapman, 1993), 102. 
13 Marsh, “A Study of Confirmation,” 320. 
14 Kavanagh, The shape of Baptism, 25 (emphasis mine). 
15 Austin, Anointed with the Spirit, 7. 
16 Quinn, “Confirmation Reconsidered,” 360. 
17 Paul Turner, “The Origins of Confirmation: An Analysis of Kavanagh’s 

Hypothesis” in Living Water, Sealing Spirit: Readings on Christian Initiation, ed. 

Maxwell Johnson (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1995), 360-61. 
18 Austin, 16. 
19 For in depth analysis of ‘the Seal’ see the chapter on ‘The Sphragis’ in Jean 

Daniélou, The Bible and the Liturgy, 54-69. 
20 Gregory Dix, The Theology of Confirmation in Relation to Baptism (London: 

Dacre Press, 1946), 25. 
21 Marsh, “Confirmation,” 260-261. 
22 Paul Turner, Confirmation: The Baby in Solomon’s Court, (Chicago: 

Hillenbrand Books, 2006), 28. 
23See Paul Bradshaw, Maxwell Johnson and L. Edward Phillips, The Apostolic 

Tradition: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001), 1-6. 

                                                           



108      |     Ekpoma Review, Volume. 5 No. 1., 2019   

   

                                                                                                                                  
24 E.C Whitaker, Documents of Baptismal Liturgy (Revised and Expanded 

edition), ed. Maxwell Johnson (London: SPCK, 2003), 7-8. [I will henceforth 

refer to as DBL]. 
25Martos, Doors to the sacred, 190. 
26 DBL, 9. 
27 DBL 32. 
28 Paul Turner, Sources of Confirmation: From the Fathers Through the 

Reformers, (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1993), 30 
29 DBL 37. 
30 DBL 37 
31 J. D Crichton, Christian Celebration, 89. 
32Martos, 192. 
33 Gabriel Winkler, “Confirmation or Chrismation”Worship 58 (January 1984): 

13. 
34 Edward Foley, From Age to Age: How Christians Have Celebrated the 

Eucharist, (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 2008), 133-184. 
35 Theodore Klauser, A Short History of the Western Liturgy: An Account and 

Some Reflections, Transl. John Halliburton, (London: Oxford University Press, 

1969), 73. 
36See Martos, 194. 
37Martos, 193. 
38 Gregory Dix, 33-34. 
39 Turner, Confirmation, 101. 
40 Kavanagh, “Confirmation: A suggestion from Structure,” Worship 58:5 

(September 1978):386 & 394. 
41 Schmemann, 80. 
42 Turner, Confirmation, 87. 
43 Maxwell Johnson, The Rites of Christian Initiation, 252-253. 
44 Schmemann, 76-77. 
45 Ibid., 78. 
46 Ibid., 79. 
47SancrosanctumConcilium, 71. 
48AnnibaleBugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975, Transl. Matthew J. 

O’Connell (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1990), 613. 
49 Apostolic Constitution no.9 
50 “Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful, and kindle in them the fire 

of your love.” And “Holy Spirit, Lord of Light, from the clear celestial height, thy 

pure beaming radiance give.” 
51 Turner, Confirmation, 80. 
52 The English translation of ICEL opted for ‘ordinary’- a juridical term - to keep 

with Canon 882 and Catechism of the Catholic Church, no.1313.  However, 

Bugnini argued that the term ‘originarius’ better translated as ‘natural’ or 

‘primary’ is used in Lumen Gentium 26 and shows that the bishop’s office makes 



Rethinking confirmation as an Initiation sacrament…     |      109 

 

   
 

                                                                                                                                  
him the ‘natural’ minister of the sacrament. Cf. Bugnini, Liturgical Reform, 621 

(footnote 20). 
53 Kavanagh, Confirmation: Origins and Reform, 93 
54Bugnini, 625. 
55 Johnson, 400. 
56 See Turner, Confirmation, 98-103. 
57 Edward Yarnold, The Awe-Inspiring Rite: The Origins of RCIA, (Collegeville: 

The Liturgical Press, 1994), 35. 
58 Marsh, “A Study of Confirmation,” 335-336. 
59 Marsh, “A Study of Confirmation,” 150. 
60 McGowan, 131. 
61 See Geoffrey Robinson, “Confirmation: A Bishop’s Dilemma”, Worship  78 

(2004): 53-58. Nicholas E. Denysenko, Chrismation: A primer for Catholics 

(Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2014), 156, 171. 
62 Frank C. Quinn, “Confirmation: Does it Make Sense?” Ecclesia Orans(1988): 

322 
63 Liam Bergin, “Anointed to Proclaim the Kingdom” in Catholic Sacraments: A 

Rich Source of Blessing, ed John Baldovin and David Farina Turnbloom, (New 

York: Paulist Press, 2015), 48. 


