Angelus, I concede that while I studied Latin through home-schooling, I'm definitely no scholar. That said, I do not believe I have misunderstood Pope Eugene in this instance. "Given in place of" means exactly that. Please compare the three references below:

Council of Florence:

697 "Now, when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that the Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. Who, when they were come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. For He was not as yet come upon any of them: but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands upon them; and they received the Holy Ghost" [Acts 8:14 ff.]. But in the Church confirmation is given in place of this imposition of hands. Nevertheless we read that at one time, by dispensation of the Apostolic See for a reasonable and urgent cause, a simple priest administered this sacrament of confirmation after the chrism had been prepared by the bishop. The effect of this sacrament, because in it the Holy Spirit is given for strength, was thus given to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, so that the Christian might boldly confess the name of Christ. The one to be confirmed, therefore, must be anointed on the forehead, which is the seat of reverence, so that he may not be ashamed to confess the name of Christ and especially His Cross, which is indeed a "stumbling block to the Jews and unto the Gentiles foolishness" [cf.1 Cor. 1:23] according to the Apostle; for which reason one is signed with the sign of the Cross.

Summa - St. Thomas Aquinas - Confirmation

In like manner, too, when the apostles imposed their hands, and when they preached, the fulness of the Holy Ghost came down under visible signs on the faithful, just as, at the beginning, He came down on the apostles: hence Peter said (Acts 11:15): "When I had begun to speak, the Holy Ghost fell upon them, as upon us also in the beginning." Consequently there was no need for sacramental sensible matter, where God sent sensible signs miraculously.

However, the apostles commonly made use of chrism in bestowing the sacrament, when such like visible signs were lacking. For Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iv): "There is a certain perfecting operation which our guides," i.e. the apostles, "call the sacrifice of Chrism."


Acts 8:14-20
8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,

8:19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

Note: there is no mention of chrism or oils. It was clear to Simon that this early sacrament of Confirmation was conferred by the laying of hands and a miraculous sign - most likely a tongue of fire -came down as a visible sign.

Having read through it myself again, it is clear to me that Pope Eugene is saying that this early form of Confirmation which was conferred by the laying of hands, was replaced by the Church with the sacramental formula that involved chrism (olive oil).

Boru,

In the last part of the Aquinas quote (that you provided), he says the following:

However, the apostles commonly made use of chrism in bestowing the sacrament, when such like visible signs were lacking. For Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iv): "There is a certain perfecting operation which our guides," i.e. the apostles, "call the sacrifice of Chrism."

Aquinas, using the testimony of Dionysius, says that the use of Chrism (i.e., olive oil mixed with balsam) for the "matter" came from the Apostles themselves. That agrees with what we have been telling you. The "matter" of the Sacrament was instituted by the Apostles. Anything the Apostles did, in that regard, is considered to be infallible because it is part of Sacred Tradition. The Church cannot change that because "the Church" did not institute it. The Apostles instituted that.

I have already told you what Pope Eugene meant, so I will not go back into that in detail. Pope Eugene was speaking of a change in nomenclature, not a change in the "matter."
 

Pax, you could have saved yourself a lot of typing. In an earlier post - I'm too tired to look for it - I made it clear that the power and the authority of the Church has limits:

The two limits on the power of the Church are divine law, which is established by God and cannot be changed, and moral law, which guides the Church's actions in accordance with ethical principles. These laws ensure that the Church's authority is exercised within the framework of higher moral and divine standards.

No, there are more.  As I explained, with examples.

According to your over-simplistic explanation, a future pope could overturn the dogma of the Assumption.

What about dogmatic rulings?
What about infallible decrees?
What about ecuмenical councils and their decrees?
What about ordinary/universal magisterium?
What about the solemn magisterium?
What about Apostolic Tradition?
What about Scripture?

The Church/pope is limited by many things.  Your understanding is quite modernist.  You need to de-program.

Boru,
You have an over-simplistic way of understanding Church decisions.  There are various levels and various degrees of Church authority.  Examples

........................

Not every "church decision" is changeable.  Your over-simplistic view is your main problem.  Your secondary problem is your defense of V2.

Pax, you could have saved yourself a lot of typing. In an earlier post - I'm too tired to look for it - I made it clear that the power and the authority of the Church has limits:

The two limits on the power of the Church are divine law, which is established by God and cannot be changed, and moral law, which guides the Church's actions in accordance with ethical principles. These laws ensure that the Church's authority is exercised within the framework of higher moral and divine standards.

I have digitized some tapes that I had of the late Fr. Conrad Altenbach (d. 1901-1985) from Wisconsin.  There are ten talks in all, 45 min. each.  He was strong on the doctrine of No Salvation Outside Church, and also blasted the New Mass.  If there were more priests like him at the time of the Council modernism would have been smashed in America. He mentioned that in 1973 he got together with priests from eight other states and their intention was to preserve the Latin Mass.  I am sure Fr. Wathen was in that band, but I would be interested to know the others. 

These files are too large to upload, so I just put up a link to my Substack Page:

https://bryanshepherd.substack.com/p/the-new-mass-the-great-sacrilege?r=2cs6n4  New Mass

https://bryanshepherd.substack.com/p/one-true-church-of-jesus-christ-by?r=2cs6n4  No Salvation Outside Church

Boru,

You have misunderstood how Pope Eugene is using the phrase "in place of." Here is the Latin:

Loco autem illius manus impositionis in Ecclesia datur confirmatio.

Pope Eugene is simply saying that "we in the Church" don't call that Sacrament "the imposition of hands." Rather, we call it the Sacrament of "Confirmation." So the word "Confirmation" is used/given [datur] "in place of" the phrase "the imposition of hands" to refer to the Sacramental action.

Pope Eugene is not saying that Confirmation is something different from "the imposition of hands." The Sacrament certainly requires the "imposition of hands," which he describes later in that section as anointing on the forehead.

Here is the full quote:

Angelus, I concede that while I studied Latin through home-schooling, I'm definitely no scholar. That said, I do not believe I have misunderstood Pope Eugene in this instance. "Given in place of" means exactly that. Please compare the three references below:

Council of Florence:

697 "Now, when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that the Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. Who, when they were come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. For He was not as yet come upon any of them: but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands upon them; and they received the Holy Ghost" [Acts 8:14 ff.]. But in the Church confirmation is given in place of this imposition of hands. Nevertheless we read that at one time, by dispensation of the Apostolic See for a reasonable and urgent cause, a simple priest administered this sacrament of confirmation after the chrism had been prepared by the bishop. The effect of this sacrament, because in it the Holy Spirit is given for strength, was thus given to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, so that the Christian might boldly confess the name of Christ. The one to be confirmed, therefore, must be anointed on the forehead, which is the seat of reverence, so that he may not be ashamed to confess the name of Christ and especially His Cross, which is indeed a "stumbling block to the Jews and unto the Gentiles foolishness" [cf.1 Cor. 1:23] according to the Apostle; for which reason one is signed with the sign of the Cross.

Summa - St. Thomas Aquinas - Confirmation

In like manner, too, when the apostles imposed their hands, and when they preached, the fulness of the Holy Ghost came down under visible signs on the faithful, just as, at the beginning, He came down on the apostles: hence Peter said (Acts 11:15): "When I had begun to speak, the Holy Ghost fell upon them, as upon us also in the beginning." Consequently there was no need for sacramental sensible matter, where God sent sensible signs miraculously.

However, the apostles commonly made use of chrism in bestowing the sacrament, when such like visible signs were lacking. For Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iv): "There is a certain perfecting operation which our guides," i.e. the apostles, "call the sacrifice of Chrism."


Acts 8:14-20
8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,

8:19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

Note: there is no mention of chrism or oils. It was clear to Simon that this early sacrament of Confirmation was conferred by the laying of hands and a miraculous sign - most likely a tongue of fire -came down as a visible sign.

Having read through it myself again, it is clear to me that Pope Eugene is saying that this early form of Confirmation which was conferred by the laying of hands, was replaced by the Church with the sacramental formula that involved chrism (olive oil).