FOR

CHAPTER I.

THE ORIGIN OF CONFIRMATION.

OR the two great Sacraments of the Gospel, "generally necessary to salvation," we have our blessed Lord's own command: in the one case, 66 Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" in the other, "Do this in remembrance of Me."

No such distinct Divine command can be adduced for Confirmation by the imposition of hands, any more than for the Consecration of Bishops, the Ordination of Priests and Deacons, or the rites of Christian Marriage. But, short of an express command, we have an amount of Scripture authority, which has availed to establish the rite of Confirmation throughout the universal Church in all its branches, from the days of the Apostles until now.

Notwithstanding the absence of any record of an express ordinance from our Saviour's lips, some divines have held that, mediately at least, Confirmation is by Christ's institution. It can hardly be supposed, they argue, that the Apostles would immediately after the day of Pentecost have instituted such a rite, excepting by the command of their Lord. We are expressly told, that during the forty days of His abode on earth after His resurrection, He spoke to the Apostles "of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God a." And, as He had distinctly promised to them the gift of the Holy Ghost, which promise was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, it seems highly probable

& Acts i. 3.

B

that He would also tell them by what means the same gift should be conveyed to those who were to be converted by their preaching. Thomas Aquinas says that "Christ instituted this Sacrament, not by exhibiting, but by promising :"

“Dicendum est quod Christus instituit hoc Sacramentum, non exhibendo, sed promittendo.”—Summa Theol., Pt. 3. Quæs. 72, Art. 1. and he then quotes Christ's promise of sending the Holy Ghost b.

Several of the School-men held the same opinion; while others hesitated to trace the ordinance back to Christ through the practice of the Apostles, because in that practice they could find no countenance for the chrism, which they held to be the spiritual "materia of the Sacrament "."

The question of the "institution" does not seem to have arisen in the early ages of the Church. It was sufficient for the Bishops of those times, that the Apostles had communicated the gifts of the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands and they were content to do as their predecessors had done.

What satisfied them should suffice for us. About the practice of the Apostles there is no doubt. Whether they derived it from our Lord's express command, or by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, as it is not revealed, must

b St. John xvi. 7.

Wheatly holds strongly to the "Divine original" of Confirmation, even the example and institution of our blessed Lord, Who is the head and pattern in all things to the Church. For we read that after the Baptism of Jesus in the river of Jordan, when He was come up out of the water, and was praying on the shore, "the Holy Ghost descended upon Him," which represented and prefigured (as some ancient fathers tell us) that we also, after our baptism, must receive the ministration of the Holy Spirit. Of the Apostles he says, "On the day of Pentecost they were all visibly confirmed and filled with the Holy Ghost, who descended rom heaven, and sat

upon each of them, under the appearance of tongues like as of fire."

Hence we see, that the institution of this rite was holy and divine. As to the practice of it, we may observe, that the Apostles, having received the Spirit . . . immediately knew to what use it was given them, viz. not to be confined to their own persons and colleges, but to be imparted by them to the whole Church of God. . Accordingly, as soon as they heard that the Samaritans had been converted and baptized by Philip, they sent two of their number, Peter and John, to lay their hands on them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost.-On Common Prayer, chap. ix.