Anglican Confirmation?

[silverwings_88]

WOHOO!!:bounce: I’m officially a fully initiated Roman Catholic Christian (16 year old) adult! I feel very initiated now, and by the Holy Spirit, I actually feel the peace in myself strengthened. It’s a quaint feeling, but I’m quite happy! :bounce:

Okay, now one of the people in our RCIA group, he did not have to undergo confirmation, because his confirmation in the Anglican church was valid?? I was quite confused, when our priest did not give him the sacrament (I think he got it; I wasn’t paying much attention on everything as much as my Holy Spirit, but if not…), is Anglican confirmation acceptable? (I know this is a basic question, but I do need a solid answer).

God bless!

 

[Pious]

Hi and welcome to the Church,

I was Baptised in a Catholic Church and raised in an Anglican faith and had my confermation in an Anglican church, when I was 16 I reverted back to the flock of the Catholic Church. I took a form of RCIA did my first confession and recieved my first Holy Communion, but I was never confirmed again as my Bishop told my former Parish Priest that my original confermation was valid?, I have posted this question on here and many believe this to be an error; I am planning on talking to my current Priest about it, so it is interesting that it has occured to somebody els

Yours in the Spirit

Pious

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

It’s the first anniversary of my wife being received into the Church, and my 2 adult daughters (who were baptized Catholic) completing their initiation.

My wife, and younger daughter, both told the parish priest, when they started RCIA, that they had been confirmed in the Anglican Church. The parish priest smiled and said, no, at your reception and when you complete your initiation, then you will be confirmed.

This is very strange. Anglicans do not recognize confirmation as a sacrament, in spite of the statements of some “Anglo-Catholics,” because their Articles of Religion clearly state that only Baptism and Holy Communion are (to them) sacraments.

From the catechism in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer:

*Question: How many Sacraments has Christ ordained in his Church?

Answer. Christ has ordained two Sacraments, as generally necessary to salvation; that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord, which is the Holy Communion.*

From Article XXV:
*…
There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord.

Those five commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God.
…*

This is very strange indeed.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Psalm45_9]

The situation with the Angilcan/Episcopalian Church is a tricky one. It all starts with the schism between England and Rome. At that point the Anglican Church still had vailid sacraments. After Henry VIII died, the ordination of Anglican Priests was reformed from the traditional Roman form of ordination. When Mary Tudor became queen, she reinstituted the traditional form of ordination. The Catholic Church declared that the reformed ordination is not valid (I was told it denied the sacrifice of the Mass). If this is true then all the sacraments performned by these priests are also not valid. Because Mary Tudor reinstituted the old form of ordination, valid apostolic succesion returned. So it is possible that there are Anglican clergymen who have valid Apostolic succesion today. But inorder to find out if your confirmation was valid, it involves long extensive research to see if the priest that confirmed you has valid Apostolic Succesion. The only thing that never will lose its sacramental nature is baptism (as long as it is done in the trinitarian formula with flowing water.)

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

Not withstanding the questions of succession, how can a “bishop” validly administer a Sacrament when clearly, from the beliefs of his denomination, he does not seek to do what the church intends, namely, administer a Sacramant?

The nullification of Anglican orders noted that in ordaining Anglican priests, the Anglican bishops did not do what the church intended to do, and that was a significant contributer to their invalidity. (This has been twisted by some to refer to the spiritual state of the Anglican bishop, but it clearly applies to his intent, not his state.)

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

silverwings_88:

WOHOO!!:bounce: I’m officially a fully initiated Roman Catholic Christian (16 year old) adult! I feel very initiated now, and by the Holy Spirit, I actually feel the peace in myself strengthened. It’s a quaint feeling, but I’m quite happy! :bounce:

Okay, now one of the people in our RCIA group, he did not have to undergo confirmation, because his confirmation in the Anglican church was valid?? I was quite confused, when our priest did not give him the sacrament (I think he got it; I wasn’t paying much attention on everything as much as my Holy Spirit, but if not…), is Anglican confirmation acceptable? (I know this is a basic question, but I do need a solid answer).

God bless!

No Anglican Confirmation is NOT valid! Valid Confirmation required valid Holy Orders.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Psalm45:9:

The situation with the Angilcan/Episcopalian Church is a tricky one. It all starts with the schism between England and Rome. At that point the Anglican Church still had vailid sacraments. After Henry VIII died, the ordination of Anglican Priests was reformed from the traditional Roman form of ordination. When Mary Tudor became queen, she reinstituted the traditional form of ordination. The Catholic Church declared that the reformed ordination is not valid (I was told it denied the sacrifice of the Mass). If this is true then all the sacraments performned by these priests are also not valid. Because Mary Tudor reinstituted the old form of ordination, valid apostolic succesion returned. So it is possible that there are Anglican clergymen who have valid Apostolic succesion today. But inorder to find out if your confirmation was valid, it involves long extensive research to see if the priest that confirmed you has valid Apostolic Succesion. The only thing that never will lose its sacramental nature is baptism (as long as it is done in the trinitarian formula with flowing water.)

This is correct however If I remember correctly over one hundred years passed. When investigated by Leo XIII no valid bishops remained. There may have been a valid priest or two but since they cannot Confirm (without a valid Bishops directive) or Ordain. The Priesthood eventually ended as did Confirmation even before the priesthood. This is why Leo XIII in Apostolicae Curae said “We pronounce and declare that Ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been and are absolutely null and utterly void.” All Anglican priests are Ordained upon converting to the Catholic Church, if they wish to become Catholic clergy.

 

[Digitonomy]

Br. Rich SFO:

All Anglican priests are Ordained upon converting to the Catholic Church, if they wish to become Catholic clergy.

Do they do conditional ordinations, if there is some question about whether apostolic succession may have crept in by way of Orthodox or schismatic Catholic groups?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Digitonomy:

Do they do conditional ordinations, if there is some question about whether apostolic succession may have crept in by way of Orthodox or schismatic Catholic groups?

I imagine that if it was ever shown that Valid Holy Orders was somehow restored in one line by way of Orthodox or schismatic Bishops that Conditional Ordinations would take place.

 

[Russ_of_Tokyo]

I’m adding my post to this old thread rather than start a new one since this one already addresses the issue.

I will be initiated into the Catholic Church next Sunday, August 14. I brought my certificate of baptism to the priest, and he asked me about my certificate of Confirmation. I said that since it was an Anglican confirmation it was irrelevant now, but he replied that might not be so. So I’ll bring the certificate next week. Apparently there will be no confirmation involved next Sunday, but I will be allowed to take communion.

I live in Japan, and I wonder if there are different rules here concerning Anglican confirmation (though I was confirmed in America).

Is this a big deal or am I concerned about nothing? Should I somehow insist on confirmation next week or bring it up at a later time or just forget it?

 

[Digitonomy]

I live in Japan, and I wonder if there are different rules here concerning Anglican confirmation (though I was confirmed in America).

That seems unlikely.
Russ of Tokyo:

Is this a big deal or am I concerned about nothing? Should I somehow insist on confirmation next week or bring it up at a later time or just forget it?

There is no reason to rush this issue. But I would try to find out exactly what the logic is if they are accepting the Anglican confirmation. If further investigation is necessary, that may take a little while - but I definitely wouldn’t forget it. Be patient, but be diligent.

 

[puzzleannie]

Okay, now one of the people in our RCIA group, he did not have to undergo confirmation, because his confirmation in the Anglican church was valid?? I quote]

welcome home
it is best during RCIA not to compare your own experience with that of anyone else in the group because everyone starts from a different point and walks a different journey. You cannot nor should you know the personal details of his situation. No an Anglican Confirmation is not valid because their bishops do not have Apostolic Succession. Leave that to the pastor and RCIA director to sort out. You need have no concern whatever about any other person’s status.

 

[7_Sorrows]

i was baptized and confirmed in the episcopal church. i converted to Catholicism 3 years ago. i believe that confirmation is a sacrament in the episcopal church. in the 60’s, i had to be confirmed before being allowed to take holy communion.
the Catholic church accepted my baptism and i studied briefly (about 6 weeks) with the RCIA director individually before i was received into the Catholic church. i don’t think i had to be reconfirmed. it was called a “reception” into the Church, but i might be mistaken.
i did not enter the Church during the Easter vigil. i entered or was received into the Catholic church during the summer after 6 weeks of study.
not sure if this helps.

 

[Phemie]

i was baptized and confirmed in the episcopal church. i converted to Catholicism 3 years ago. i believe that confirmation is a sacrament in the episcopal church. in the 60’s, i had to be confirmed before being allowed to take holy communion.
the Catholic church accepted my baptism and i studied briefly (about 6 weeks) with the RCIA director individually before i was received into the Catholic church. i don’t think i had to be reconfirmed. it was called a “reception” into the Church, but i might be mistaken.
i did not enter the Church during the Easter vigil. i entered or was received into the Catholic church during the summer after 6 weeks of study.
not sure if this helps.

You don’t remember whether or not the priest anointed your forehead with Chrism? They are supposed to confirm those they receive into full communion.

 

[7_Sorrows]

You don’t remember whether or not the priest anointed your forehead with Chrism? They are supposed to confirm those they receive into full communion.

yes, my forehead was definitely anointed. we had a nice little ceremony with the priest, the rcia director i had studied with and her husband. they later took me out to lunch.
i wish that i could have had family or friends there, but my family live out of state and my friends are all protestants and weren’t thrilled that i was becoming Catholic. i was sort of fast tracked through since i was planning on moving. once i moved i sat in on regular rcia classes also at the new parish. i had studied 10 years before converting and continue to study and learn more of the Catholic faith. my conversion was the best thing that happened to me in a very turbulent decade of my life.

 

[AJV]

Unless there is some particular detail that the priest was privy too, in general, Anglicans should be confirmed when entering the Church. I was Confirmed along with other adults by the bishop when I was received - there was a delay between the time I made a profession of faith and my Confirmation, which might not be typical for many people.

 

[Russ_of_Tokyo]

Well, I brought my Anglican confirmation certificate to Church this morning and mentioned to the priest that I’d still like a Catholic confirmation someday. A few minutes later he came back and suggested we just go ahead and have the confirmation today. So I was confirmed with oil and initiated into the Catholic Church and took communion this morning! My prayers have been answered and I’m walking on air!