T
- Status
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
If I gave that appearance, I must surely have expressed myself poorly. Mea culpa.
tee
W
WetCatechumen
Guest
I find the thing puzzling, too.
I mean, we baptize our children for the remission of their sins, not that they have committed any, but that they might be reunited to God in spite of Adam’s sin, which separated them from him.
Likewise, confirmation is the visible seal of the Holy Spirit upon us. It makes no sense to me to wait, like the Protestants, until the child can make his own choice, because don’t we want the Holy Spirit to indwell the child and guide him from his infancy; not let him make the choice the run away from His power in their teens?
Baptism and confirmation have always gone together. That’s why the new Protestants don’t have it - it’s not explicitly mentioned in the Bible. Oh, it’s there, but because it’s not explicit, they don’t do it.
The Easterners understood. Honestly, it makes me want to have my kids brought into the church in an Eastern Rite just so they’ll be confirmed in infancy. It’s a big deal. It’s when the Holy Spirit indwells you. You need it as early as possible.
I personally think the same for communion, but I love the Latin Rite and I don’t want to abandon all of our innovative traditions. I could accept the compromise of early confirmation and late first communion.
I mean, we baptize our children for the remission of their sins, not that they have committed any, but that they might be reunited to God in spite of Adam’s sin, which separated them from him.
Likewise, confirmation is the visible seal of the Holy Spirit upon us. It makes no sense to me to wait, like the Protestants, until the child can make his own choice, because don’t we want the Holy Spirit to indwell the child and guide him from his infancy; not let him make the choice the run away from His power in their teens?
Baptism and confirmation have always gone together. That’s why the new Protestants don’t have it - it’s not explicitly mentioned in the Bible. Oh, it’s there, but because it’s not explicit, they don’t do it.
The Easterners understood. Honestly, it makes me want to have my kids brought into the church in an Eastern Rite just so they’ll be confirmed in infancy. It’s a big deal. It’s when the Holy Spirit indwells you. You need it as early as possible.
I personally think the same for communion, but I love the Latin Rite and I don’t want to abandon all of our innovative traditions. I could accept the compromise of early confirmation and late first communion.
C
CDNowak
Guest
[edited]
Actually Canon law sets the threshold in the Latin Rite, with bishops free to set guidelines higher (but not absolute, and not applicable to those being baptized over the age of reason).
The typical western understanding of the theology of Confirmation is fatally flawed by the perception that there is requisite knowledge that one must possess or that it is the Catholic equivalent of a Bar/Bat Mitzvah or similar coming-of-age ceremony. By breathing with “both lungs” before talking about the issue we can correct our understanding of the Sacrament.
The Latin Rite does not exist in isolation from the rest of the Church in its theology (nor, as some would have it, in isolation from its own history). It would be better for intelligent discussion if we were not defensive of “territory” on this site, and actually listened to the perspectives of other Catholics regardless of Rite or Usage.
Actually Canon law sets the threshold in the Latin Rite, with bishops free to set guidelines higher (but not absolute, and not applicable to those being baptized over the age of reason).
The typical western understanding of the theology of Confirmation is fatally flawed by the perception that there is requisite knowledge that one must possess or that it is the Catholic equivalent of a Bar/Bat Mitzvah or similar coming-of-age ceremony. By breathing with “both lungs” before talking about the issue we can correct our understanding of the Sacrament.
The Latin Rite does not exist in isolation from the rest of the Church in its theology (nor, as some would have it, in isolation from its own history). It would be better for intelligent discussion if we were not defensive of “territory” on this site, and actually listened to the perspectives of other Catholics regardless of Rite or Usage.
C
ciero
Guest
Why would you seperate the 2? All sacraments are “sealed” with the Eucharist.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
hear, hear
my personal preference until my prayers are heard and we return to the more ancient and theologically correct practice of the Eastern Church in conferring full initiation as early in infancy as possible, is that childen be prepared for and confirmed along with first communion not later than middle school, as we do with children of the same age in RCIA. It makes no sense, and is nearly impossible to explain intelligently either to children or parents, to treat two groups of children differently, and quite frankly, I have never seen a solid theological argument for delaying Confirmation. IMO in practice, delaying it until high school is de facto denial of the sacrament. Every year we delay we lose another 10-20% of candidates. Why not confer the sacrament and let the Holy Spirit do his job, instead of deluding ourselves that as DREs, catechists, sponsors etc. we somehow are going to replace the action of the Holy Spirit through our own efforts to “prepare” children for sacraments.
8 years ago over 120 children made first communion in this parish. Next week only 60 in this age group will be confirmed. Where are the other 60? Walking around and approaching adulthood most likely still nominally Catholic, but without the completion of their initiation and release of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. shocking.
W
WetCatechumen
Guest
I think that it would be best for the whole church to initiate all infants completely, yes.
V
Vico
Guest
The tradition is for the bishop to confirm (originally the imposition of hands) rather than for the priest to chrismate with the Holy Myron from the eparch.
Hippolytus’ Apostolic Tradition (earliest Verona edition 215 A.D.) describes this original initiation practice in this order:
Baptism
Infants were excluded from Latin communion when bread only began to be used (1215 A.D.).
West: emphasis on Christology.
East: emphasis on Spirit.
Exodus 30:22‑25 has the formula for the Holy Myron.
References:
Aidan Kavanagh, Confirmation: Origins and Reform (New York:
Pueblo, 1988).
Gerard Austin, Anointing with the Spirit: The Rite of Confirmation (New York: Pueblo, 1985).
Hippolytus’ Apostolic Tradition (earliest Verona edition 215 A.D.) describes this original initiation practice in this order:
Baptism
- bishop makes oil of thanksgiving and oil of exorcism
- anointing with oil of exorcism
- nude baptism (by triple immersion)
- anointing with oil of thanksgiving (then dry and get dressed)
Confirmation/Chrismation - then in the church, bishop says dismissal rite over the neophytes: “Lord God, you have made them worthy to receive remission of sins through the laver of regeneration of the Holy Spirit, etc.”
- laying on of hands together with oil
- sealing with oil on the forehead
- the kiss of peace prayer
Eucharist - deacons bring oblation (bread and wine, water, milk, and honey)
- the oblation is blessed
- the milk and honey are mixed together
- the bread is distributed
- each tastes of the water, milk, and wine, three times.
bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html
Infants were excluded from Latin communion when bread only began to be used (1215 A.D.).
West: emphasis on Christology.
East: emphasis on Spirit.
Exodus 30:22‑25 has the formula for the Holy Myron.
References:
Aidan Kavanagh, Confirmation: Origins and Reform (New York:
Pueblo, 1988).
Gerard Austin, Anointing with the Spirit: The Rite of Confirmation (New York: Pueblo, 1985).
P
puzzleannie
Guest
fascinating, thank you Vico
I had never heard the reference to milk and honey, is there any vestige of this in the Eastern rites today?
I had never heard the reference to milk and honey, is there any vestige of this in the Eastern rites today?
V
Vico
Guest
According to Maxwell Johnson, just the Ethiopian retains the milk and honey for first communion. Coptic and Ethiopian also have imposition of hands at first communion.
See: The rites of Christian initiation: their evolution and interpretation by Maxwell E. Johnson, PhD [minister of Evangelical Lutheran Church in America] (1999, revised in 2007) Note: Kilian McDonnell, O.S.B., called it “the best overall treatment of Christian initiation available”.
books.google.com/books?id=otQeg8-xSlEC
Johnson also relates, regarding the Eastern Catholic Churches (of seven categories – Armenian, Byzantine, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syrian, West Syrian, and Maronite) :
At baptism, the Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopian, East Syrian, and West Syrian, and Maronite use oil in some way.
Coptic, Ethiopian, and East Syrian still employ imposition of the hands at Chrismation.
L
littlblackangel
Guest
I was born in the Philippines and I was confirmed when I was very little. I really don’t know how old… maybe 2, 3, 4? I just know I was confirmed because I have a confirmation godmother and a confirmation godfather (well, more like witnesses since I don’t think you can call them ‘godparents’ for confirmation).
Now here in Canada where I live, I am really having a hard time replying when I am asked if I have been confirmed. I seem to shock people here.
I think Filipinos confirm their kids at a very early age in fear of the child not being confirmed Catholic if something ever happens to the child, i.e. death. They are scared the child might not go to heaven when something ever happens if not confirmed Catholic… not sure.
Now here in Canada where I live, I am really having a hard time replying when I am asked if I have been confirmed. I seem to shock people here.
I think Filipinos confirm their kids at a very early age in fear of the child not being confirmed Catholic if something ever happens to the child, i.e. death. They are scared the child might not go to heaven when something ever happens if not confirmed Catholic… not sure.
- Status