Christian Classics
‹ Summa Theologica

Thomas Aquinas · 3132 of 3516

Article. 5 - Whether the oil ought to be consecrated?

Objection 1: It would seem that the oil need not be . Because there is a in the use of this , through the form of words. Therefore another is superfluous if it be applied to the matter.

Objection 2: Further, the efficacy and signification of the are in their very matter. But the signification of the effect of this , is suitable to oil on account of its natural properties, and the efficacy thereof is due to the Divine institution. Therefore its matter does not need to be .

Objection 3: Further, Baptism is a more perfect than Extreme . But, so far as the essentials of the are concerned, the baptismal matter needs no . Neither therefore does the matter of Extreme need to be .

On the contrary, In all other anointings the matter is previously . Therefore since this is an anointing, it requires matter.

I answer that, Some hold that mere oil is the matter of this , and that the itself is perfected in the of the oil by the bishop. But this is clearly false since we proved when treating of the Eucharist that that alone consists in the of the matter (Q[2], A[1], ad 2).

We must therefore say that this consists in the anointing itself, just as Baptism consists in the washing, and that the matter of this is oil. Three reasons may be assigned why matter is needed in this and in certain others. The first is that all efficacy is derived from Christ: those which He Himself used, derived their efficacy from His use of them, even as, by the contact of His flesh, He bestowed the force of on the waters. But He did not use this , nor any bodily anointing, in all anointings a matter is required. The second reason is that this confers a plenitude of , so as to take away not only sin but also the remnants of sin, and bodily sickness. The third reason is that its effect on the body, viz. bodily health, is not caused by a natural property of the matter. it has to derive this efficacy from being .

Reply to Objection 1: The first the matter in itself, but the second regards rather the use of the matter considered as actually producing its effect. Hence neither is superfluous, because instruments also receive their efficacy from the craftsman, both when they are made, and when they are used for action.

Reply to Objection 2: The efficacy which the derives from its institution, is applied to this particular matter when it is .

The Reply to the Third Objection is gathered from what has been said.