Do you have access to a history of this development? This is not asked in doubt but I don't know whether or not there is an historical account that compiles what we have of original documents that would illuminate the history of the addition of chrism to the ritual of conferring the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands. I can put it together in bits and pieces with what I have but that's all it is, bits and pieces.
I don't have access to any primary documents, if that's what you mean. I learned this from Fr. Seraphim Slobodskoy's The Law of God which says The first Apostles accomplished the Mystery of Chrismation through the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-17; 19:2-6). Then at the end of the first century, the Mystery of Chrismation came to be performed by anointment with holy oil, after the example of the Old Testament Church, as the Apostles themselves were not always able to perform the Mystery through the laying on of hands.
The first chrism was sanctified by the Apostles themselves and their successors, the bishops. Only bishops may consecrate this chrism. By anointing with the chrism sanctified by the bishops, priests are able to perform the Mystery of Chrismation.
The Catholic Encyclopedia article on Confirmation is also pretty informative. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04215b.htm
On no...I was not looking to have you access primary docs. at all. That is not necessary. I was looking for what you have here...an Orthodox generated estimation of the timing of the introduction of myron, which seems to me to be the beginning of looking at the two mysteries as something distinct from one another. I have some historical references but they are Catholic sources and so I was asking for Orthodox sources.
Also, I am thinking now of an Antiochian site that I was looking at earlier this morning where Baptism is taught, in part, as the introduction of the Holy Spirit in the regeneration of the soul, and Chrismation as the seal of the Holy Spirit where the action of Baptism is completed and perfected...if one does not look at perfecting as being a one time act in time....but as a strengthening of the initial grace of Baptism and the giving of the Holy Spirit indwelling, not just the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
So it is clear that although they are intimately and intrinsically connected Baptism and Chrismation are catechised distinctly now, whereas in the desert fathers, particularly I am thinking of the Philokalia now, the discussions of baptism presume the healing of soul and body and illumination all in one breath. There is no reference that I can find thus far to laying on of hands or anointing with myron. So the distinguishing catechesis seems to have occurred over longer time.
I honestly did not keep the url because I was looking at so many and had not intended to discuss any of them in particular. At any rate I don't think it is a false Orthodox view though I am open to correction.
I am also still interested in discussing the initial anointing with the oil of gladness in Baptism and the references in the desert fathers to the Holy Spirit, calling Him the "oil of gladness." That would indicate a strong mystical and real presence of the Holy Spirit in the sacramental act of Baptism, for the healing of soul and body.
There were a couple of other things from that list I posted above that I was thinking to mention, but my mind is distracted now by a related thought on the various catechetical homilies on mystagogy...so I'll just close this out here.
There is a Catholic liturgical historian who has analyzed the primary mystagogical texts of the first...what?...five centuries, and looks not only at the typological language used, but examines the extra-Scriptural language of realism introduced by SS. Cyril and John C. and also St. Ambrose of Milan. He also looks at Theodore of Mopsuestia's mystagogical writings as well, though I am weakest in knowing them.
I was also wondering if there is such a compilation of texts done by an Orthodox author or authors that might be similar or treat the same ancient texts?
I remember what I wanted to add to this.
One of the habits of the Fathers in the mystagogical homolies, as I have learned it, is the fact that at one moment they will refer to mysteries as the total rite as a whole and the next they will be speaking of the ritual elements, or a cluster of the ritual elements as mysteries.
For St. John Chrysostom one of the greatest most compelling mysteries of Baptism, and one that he spends time on in more than one of the Stavronikita homilies is the gleaming garment of Baptism and that expression of the sacramental reality of the new man prompts him to develop the Pauline prayer 'All you who have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ' as a central element of his catechesis on the mystagogy of the gleaming garment.
If there was to be no real distinction between Baptism and Chrismation, why would not the Baptismal garment not be held aside until the ritual laving AND the anointing with myron were both complete?
And if there truly is a new man after having been plunged into the baptismal waters, and a soul regenerated in the image and likeness of God, is that not indicative of a great grace? And if there is but one Baptism, for the forgiveness of sin and the healing of soul and body, does that not indicate that something of the grace of Baptism, and power of the Holy Spirit given in Baptism is already permanent within the newly regenerated soul? So that the gleaming Baptismal garment is representative of a clear sacramental reality already in evidence in the Baptised person.
Which brings me to a question that I've been meaning to ask here. I have been told that in Orthodoxy Baptism can only be administered once but Chrismation can be administered any number of times. I ask this as a point of information, not comparison...eh?