Confirmation using a Q-tip

[pj21stevenl]

Hi, Ive been in RCIA for the last 8 months. Last Saturday our adult class along with the high school group celebrated our Confirmation Mass outdoor with all the CA social distance protocols. When it was time to go up for the anointing by the Priest, he used a long Q tip, dipped it in a jar with the oil and used it on my forehead making the sign of The Father, The Son and Holy Spirit. I didn’t think much of it at the time. I was overwhelmed with joy and happiness to be confirmed into the Catholic Church. However couple days later I heard on the Patrick Madrid show a parent asked him that his son was Confirmed in CA in similar fashion with the Q tip and was very concerned if it was a valid Confirmation. That obviously got me sitting up cause I didn’t think anything of the sort. Again I was overwhelmed with joy and not educated in Cannon law. But what I got from the radio consversation was basically to be confirmed the Bishop or Father as long as Bishop gave him the authority to do it (which in my case we knew advanced the Parish Priest was doing it and assuming he got the ok from Bishop) and the big thing was the actual laying of hands and using THE THUMB to annoint the forehead and NOT a TOOL like a Q tip. Explained using a tool like a Q tip was ok for Anointing of the Sick but for Confirmation laying of the hands was mandatory for Confirmation. This has me tossing and turning really confused and extremely stressed out. Did I get a valid Confirmation? I went from a super high spirit, Confirmed in the Church, receiving the true Body and Blood of Jesus in my first communion to now a low of some doubt. I am embarrassed to ask my priest who annointed me all these questions. I dont want him thinking Im judging or questioning his intent or authority. I know in CA we are supet strict with regulations with COVID so I understand having to use the Q tip. Forgot to mention those Q tips were one time use for each candidate, I am assuming they were burned afterwards per doctrine. Any one else have to be confirmed like this? Am I overthinking this? I will wait till we can loosen the regulations so the Bishop or Father can lay hands on the forehead. I just want be sure my Confirmation was valid. Thanks any help would be much appreciated. Steve

 

[Tis_Bearself]

This thread seems to be the same as the one we just had about cotton balls aka cotton buds being used for the same purpose.

Confirmation carried out with Cotton Buds Liturgy and Sacraments

Our Parish Priest has been delegated by the bishop because of the virus to carry out the Confirmation of nearly 150 children. He will be not be using his thumb to sign the cross on the forehead of each candidate but instead will be using cotton buds instead. Can this be right?

As 1ke stated in that thread,

Yes. It is valid.

The USCCB sent a dubium to the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments on May 14, 2020, asking whether an instrument could be used to anoint with chrism in Confirmation and received an affirmative on June 2, 2020.

So if you’re in the USA then the Q tip is no problem.
I have no idea what Patrick Madrid was going on about.

 

[pj21stevenl]

Thank you, I just scrolled down and saw the similar post. Just slapped my own head (duffas) but thanks for the reply

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

I have no idea what Patrick Madrid was going on about.

Is he one of the growing (at an alarming rate?) list of popular personalities that have become less reliable than they may have once been because they’ve gone off the rails?

 

[1ke]

Did I get a valid Confirmation?

Yes.

I don’t know what program you listened to, but it was irresponsible of the host to say something like that.

The US Bishops sent a dubium (question) to the Vatican on this very question BEFORE they issued the directive to use a cotton swab. The Vatican confirmed that YES this is valid for Confirmation.

Be at peace. And take what you hear on radio programs with a grain of salt.

 

[1ke]

So if you’re in the USA then the Q tip is no problem.

Actually, if you are anywhere in the world it’s ok. The Dubium asked about validity. It wasn’t asking for permission to use the cotton swab (not needed).

 

[1ke]

and the big thing was the actual laying of hands and using THE THUMB to annoint the forehead

Also, just to be clear, the laying on of hands is not the same thing as the anointing. The laying on of hands comes first. It is done by the celebrant raising his hands and saying a prayer over all candidates. He doesn’t place his hands on you individually.

The anointing comes after the laying on of hands.

 

[Genesis315]

I didn’t think anything of the sort. Again I was overwhelmed with joy and not educated in Cannon law. But what I got from the radio consversation was basically to be confirmed the Bishop or Father as long as Bishop gave him the authority to do it (which in my case we knew advanced the Parish Priest was doing it and assuming he got the ok from Bishop) and the big thing was the actual laying of hands and using THE THUMB to annoint the forehead and NOT a TOOL like a Q tip.

As others have mentioned, the Church says it’s valid here. The Eastern confirmation rite traditionally uses a little anointing brush for Confirmation (Eastern Orthodox and Catholic, although more common today among EO) and their confirmations are unquestionably valid. In the Eastern rites, they omit the laying on of hands that’s at the beginning of the Western rite too, so even if the anointing is the laying on of hands, it is still valid with an instrument. Such a brush was also used in different places in the West, but less so.

Plus, for other sacraments that require the laying on of hands, direct skin to skin contact is not necessary. Bishops can wear gloves when ordaining, for example. The head of the CDW, Cardinal Sarah, is also pretty much the farthest thing from a loosey goosey liberal liturgist you can get.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of this stems from an irresponsible Fr. Z post where he opposed the ruling of the CDW totally neglecting the long tradition in the East (he even noted evidence of the brush being used in the west, but kind of just blew it off).

 

[Dovekin]

Thank you for your response. This is not the understanding of Divinae Consortium Naturae, St Paul VI’s apostolic constitution that defined the practice for the Letin Church.

Therefore, in order that the revision of the rite of Confirmation may fittingly embrace also the essence of the sacramental rite, by Our Supreme Apostolic Authority, We decree and lay down that in the Latin Church the following should be observed for the future:

The Sacrament of Confirmation is conferred through the anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by the laying on of the hand, and through the words: "Accipe signaculum doni Spiritus SanctV\

Although the laying of hands on the candidates, which is done with the prescribed prayer before the anointing, does not belong to the essence of the sacramental rite, it is nevertheless to be held in high esteem, in that it contributes to the full perfection of the same rite and to a clearer understanding of the sacrament. It is evident that this preceding laying on of hands differs from the laying on of the hand, whereby the anointing is done on the forehead.

I am not arguing that qtips are wrong or anything like that, I was more wondering if people thought of the anointing as a laying on of hands. It is how I picture the sacrament, with the rest of the hand on the head while the thumb signs the forehead. (though I think it says just the thumb is laying the hand on.)

 

[Genesis315]

I am not arguing that qtips are wrong or anything like that, I was more wondering if people thought of the anointing as a laying on of hands. It is how I picture the sacrament, with the rest of the hand on the head while the thumb signs the forehead. (though I think it says just the thumb is laying the hand on.)

Yes, this has become the accepted interpretation–the anointing IS the laying on of hands.

Here is how the old Catholic Encyclopedia sums it up:

There has been much discussion among theologians as to what constitutes the essential matter of this sacrament. Some, e.g. Aureolus and Petavius, held that it consists in the imposition of hands. Others, with St. Thomas, Bellarmine, and Maldonatus, maintain that it is the anointing with chrism. According to a third opinion (Morinus, Tapper) either anointing or imposition of hands suffices. Finally, the most generally accepted view is that the anointing and the imposition of hands conjointly are the matter. The “imposition”, however, is not that with which the rite begins but the laying on of hands which takes place in the act of anointing. As Peter the Lombard declares: Pontifex per impositionem manus confirmandos ungit in fronte (IV Sent., dist. xxxiii, n. 1; cf. De Augustinis, “De re sacramentaria”, 2d ed., Rome, 1889, I). The chrism employed must be a mixture of olive oil and balsam consecrated by a bishop. (For the manner of this consecration and for other details, historical and liturgical, see CHRISM.) The difference regarding the form of the sacrament, i.e. the words essential for confirmation, has been indicated above in the description of the rite. The validity of both the Latin and the Greek form is unquestionable. Additional details are given below in the historical outline.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Confirmation

The article also notes the “Eastern Church omits the imposition of hands and the prayer at the beginning.” And as I mentioned above, they often anoint with an anointing brush, and this has always been considered “unquestionably valid.” In general, the Eastern Churches consider the chirsm the valid matter (as does the Council of Florence and the Catechism of the Council of Trent, for what its worth).

 

[Dovekin]

Yes, this has become the accepted interpretation–the anointing IS the laying on of hands.

Thank you. The history in the Catholic Encyclopedia is similar to that in St Paul VI’s apostolic constitution.

Probably the only thing that needs to be cleared up is that the confirming minister lays hands on the confirmands by the use of the qtip. Tactile contact is not needed, the interaction of imposing the sign of the cross with the qtip is laying a hand on.

My earlier reply to @1ke was meant for the other thread, I got confused as I sometimes do.

 

[pj21stevenl]

Hi, thank you all for the response. After reading all of the post, I am very relieved and thankful for the info. Just want to say I really like Patrick Madrid Show on Relevant Radio. He is an expert on apologetics and I learned so much about the Faith from him. He might have clarified the response later in the show, not sure as I listen as I work and can’t catch the whole show. But he did use Fr. Z post as his reference for his answere which thus had me look up Fr. Z post on the Q tip issue which then shook me down to the core. All of this was going on while I read a newly ordained Father in Wisonsin found out his baptism wasn’t valid thus making his Confirmation and Holy Orders invalid. So all of this was going on in my mind and the thought that the Confirmatuon was not valid really had me in doubt. But reading how the U.S Bishops sent a dubium to the Vatican and getting the Ok from them; also that Cardinal Sarah head of CDW had to be ok with it really put me at ease. (I also think very highly of Cardinal Sarah, especially after the whole Amazon Synod Married Priest proposal). So again thank you all for the info and clarification. God Love You. Steve