Confirmation & communion

[Merrick]

Why is it considered discipline, not doctrine, to receive confirmation befoore first communion yet baptism must absolutely be received before first cummunion?

If confirmation isn’t required before first cummunion in all circumstances, could a man in theory be ordained to the priesthood or episcopate without receiving the sacrament of confirmation?

 

[tee_eff_em]

Why is it considered discipline, not doctrine, to receive confirmation befoore first communion yet baptism must absolutely be received before first cummunion?

If confirmation isn’t required before first cummunion in all circumstances, could a man in theory be ordained to the priesthood or episcopate without receiving the sacrament of confirmation?

Only illicitly.

Can. 1033 A person is promoted licitly to orders only if he has received the sacrament of confirmation.

tee

 

[Merrick]

I apologize for the typos on my first post. I’m posting on my phone.

I don’t understand why the order of reception of sacraments is less important in regard to confirmation than baptism. Is there any logical reason communion can be received before confirmation?

 

[Evan]

Why is it considered discipline, not doctrine, to receive confirmation befoore first communion yet baptism must absolutely be received before first cummunion?

If confirmation isn’t required before first cummunion in all circumstances, could a man in theory be ordained to the priesthood or episcopate without receiving the sacrament of confirmation?

Baptism is the gateway sacrament. It MUST be received before any other sacrament. By baptism we are made children of God and become members of the Church that Christ established. Once you are a child of God, you may licitly or illicitly receive other sacraments if possible.

Impossibilities are (for example) marrying your physical son or having your daughter ordained.

 

[Merrick]

I understand baptism is the gateway but I don’t understand that communion can come before confirmation, especially when all the ancient churches require confirmation first and Catholicism did too until about 100 years ago. How can we know what is the right practice? Could it have been right to change a practice that was universal (confirmation, then communion?) In other words, how can I know this is discipline, not doctrine?

 

[Vico]

Why is it considered discipline, not doctrine, to receive confirmation befoore first communion yet baptism must absolutely be received before first cummunion?

If confirmation isn’t required before first cummunion in all circumstances, could a man in theory be ordained to the priesthood or episcopate without receiving the sacrament of confirmation?

Diocese of Fargo stated in the July/August 2011 issue of New Earth, that the children “receive first reconciliation in their parishes when they are in second grade. When they are in third grade, they receive both confirmation and first Eucharist during a Mass celebrated by the bishop”.

So second grade first Confession is about age 7-8. They wait one more year for sacraments of Confirmation and first Eucharist age 8-9.

1. From apostolic times until about the fifth century, for the Latin Church, the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation were given in one continuous rite of initiation, which culminated in a Christian’s admission to the Eucharist. This is still a norm in eastern churches, including eastern Catholic ritual churches.
2. In the Middle Ages (5th-13th centuries) Baptism and First Eucharist were administered together at infancy, with a later Confirmation by the bishop in very early childhood.
3. During the thirteenth to sixteenth century, infant Baptism was the norm but Confirmation was celebrated at the age of discretion (seven), with First Eucharist between the ages of ten and fourteen.
4. By the sixteenth century until the nineteenth century infant baptism was the norm, Confirmation was between seven and fifteen years, followed by First Eucharist.
5. In modern times infant baptism, First Eucharist at the age of discretion, and Confirmation between seven and eighteen became common.
6. The restored order for children is similar to that of the sixteenth century, but early, and for adults, RCIA, is like apostolic times, so it is not a full restoration to before the fifth century.
7. BCE
8. BE…C
9. B…C…E
   4) B…CE
10. B…E…C
11. B…CE

 

[Merrick]

Diocese of Fargo stated in the July/August 2011 issue of New Earth, that the children “receive first reconciliation in their parishes when they are in second grade. When they are in third grade, they receive both confirmation and first Eucharist during a Mass celebrated by the bishop”.

So second grade first Confession is about age 7-8. They wait one more year for sacraments of Confirmation and first Eucharist age 8-9.

1. From apostolic times until about the fifth century, for the Latin Church, the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation were given in one continuous rite of initiation, which culminated in a Christian’s admission to the Eucharist. This is still a norm in eastern churches, including eastern Catholic ritual churches.
2. In the Middle Ages (5th-13th centuries) Baptism and First Eucharist were administered together at infancy, with a later Confirmation by the bishop in very early childhood.
3. During the thirteenth to sixteenth century, infant Baptism was the norm but Confirmation was celebrated at the age of discretion (seven), with First Eucharist between the ages of ten and fourteen.
4. By the sixteenth century until the nineteenth century infant baptism was the norm, Confirmation was between seven and fifteen years, followed by First Eucharist.
5. In modern times infant baptism, First Eucharist at the age of discretion, and Confirmation between seven and eighteen became common.
6. The restored order for children is similar to that of the sixteenth century, but early, and for adults, RCIA, is like apostolic times, so it is not a full restoration to before the fifth century.
7. BCE
8. BE…C
9. B…C…E
   4) B…CE
10. B…E…C
11. B…CE

This is helpful. So how did this issue come to be discerned as a matter of discipline? Is it because there is no defining statement about this from the church?

 

[Vico]

This is helpful. So how did this issue come to be discerned as a matter of discipline? Is it because there is no defining statement about this from the church?

Baptism and Latin confirmation were separated due to insistence that the bishop must administer it. Pope Innocent I (d. 417) instituted the change to oil administered only by the bishop suggesting the Paraclete Spirit is given and only through the bishop.

Originally the bishop gave all the sacraments of Christian initiation at once. It was difficult for the bishop to get to all locations in a timely fashion so in the west the priest would baptize and the confirmation came later from the bishop, whereas in the east the priest used the oil blessed by the bishop. East and west started to diverge so that the west began to emphasize the connection with the bishop and the east the nurturing of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the east kept the initiation intact.

Hippolytus’ Apostolic Tradition (earliest Verona edition 215 A.D.) describes this original initiation practice in this order:

Baptism

1. bishop makes oil of thanksgiving and oil of exorcism
2. anointing with oil of exorcism
3. nude baptism (by triple immersion)
4. anointing with oil of thanksgiving (then dry and get dressed)

Confirmation/Chrismation
5. 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.”
6. laying on of hands together with oil
7. sealing with oil on the forehead
8. the kiss of peace prayer

Eucharist
9. deacons bring oblation (bread and wine, water, milk, and honey)
10. the oblation is blessed
11. the milk and honey are mixed together
12. the bread is distributed
13. each tastes of the water, milk, and wine, three times.

bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html

 

[sscott]

I have read the correct order is baptism, confirmation and first communion. In the US the bishops have delayed confirmation to the teen years to keep the children in church longer. That is not a bad thing. However, I have heard of kids receiving first communion without going to first confession. In addition there is a confusion by some that confirmation is the child accepting his place in the church, when the Catholic belief is that confirmation is something that happens to the person. Confirmation offers God’s special graces. Even a baby is aided by confirmation. I’ve also read some opinions that a child who is denied confirmation at the age of reason is being denied his basic sacramental rights. Technically a parent can force the issue of a child’s right to the sacrament.

 

[Merrick]

Baptism and Latin confirmation were separated due to insistence that the bishop must administer it. Pope Innocent I (d. 417) instituted the change to oil administered only by the bishop suggesting the Paraclete Spirit is given and only through the bishop.

Originally the bishop gave all the sacraments of Christian initiation at once. It was difficult for the bishop to get to all locations in a timely fashion so in the west the priest would baptize and the confirmation came later from the bishop, whereas in the east the priest used the oil blessed by the bishop. East and west started to diverge so that the west began to emphasize the connection with the bishop and the east the nurturing of the Holy Spirit. Therefore the east kept the initiation intact.

Hippolytus’ Apostolic Tradition (earliest Verona edition 215 A.D.) describes this original initiation practice in this order:

Baptism

1. bishop makes oil of thanksgiving and oil of exorcism
2. anointing with oil of exorcism
3. nude baptism (by triple immersion)
4. anointing with oil of thanksgiving (then dry and get dressed)

Confirmation/Chrismation
5. 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.”
6. laying on of hands together with oil
7. sealing with oil on the forehead
8. the kiss of peace prayer

Eucharist
9. deacons bring oblation (bread and wine, water, milk, and honey)
10. the oblation is blessed
11. the milk and honey are mixed together
12. the bread is distributed
13. each tastes of the water, milk, and wine, three times.

bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html

Thank you. I understand how baptism and confirmation came to be separated, but how did the order of the sacraments - confirmation before communion, or communion before confirmation – come to be perceived as a matter of discipline?

 

[Vico]

Thank you. I understand how baptism and confirmation came to be separated, but how did the order of the sacraments - confirmation before communion, or communion before confirmation – come to be perceived as a matter of discipline?

I don’t know how that was decided.

 

[Evan]

I don’t know how that was decided.

Probably from the time of the apostles. They received their first communion at the last supper. Confirmation came at Pentecost.

In the Acts, Baptism and Confirmation came together when the apostles started baptizing after Pentecost and first communion would come at the recipients first mass.

 

[Merrick]

Probably from the time of the apostles. They received their first communion at the last supper. Confirmation came at Pentecost.

In the Acts, Baptism and Confirmation came together when the apostles started baptizing after Pentecost and first communion would come at the recipients first mass.

That’s interesting. But were the apostles baptized at the last supper? Didn’t they only know John’s baptism?

 

[thistle]

Why is it considered discipline, not doctrine, to receive confirmation befoore first communion yet baptism must absolutely be received before first cummunion?

If confirmation isn’t required before first cummunion in all circumstances, could a man in theory be ordained to the priesthood or episcopate without receiving the sacrament of confirmation?

It is NOT a requirement that you have to be confirmed before receiving Communion.

I went through the RCIA program and became a Catholic at Easter 1992. Confirmation did not take place until 6 months later. All of us received Communion regularly before Confirmation.

 

[Vico]

That’s interesting. But were the apostles baptized at the last supper? Didn’t they only know John’s baptism?

It does seem that they did not receive baptism with the same rite as later established. The Church recognizes baptism of desire. Catechism of the Catholic Church 1259:“For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament”.
Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit (Comforter) after his death and resurrection, and we know that the Holy Spirit descended on the Apostles at Pentecost.

The Apostle Paul was active in Ephesus from the fall of 52 A.D. to the spring of 55 A.D. It was certainly the practice to baptize with water and the invocation (matter and form) by that time (**Acts 19:**1-7).

 

[TomKocherry]

All the Christians, both the Eastern as well as the Western Christians, used to receive, in the earlier centuries, the Sacraments of Baptism, Chrismation (or Confirmation, as the Westerners call it), and receive holy Communion, together as the Sacraments of Initiation. Due to non-availability of the bishops for administration of Confirmation, sacrament of Confirmation started getting delayed in the Latin Church, where only the bishops administer the Sacrament of Confirmation. However, the Eastern Churches have a tradition of the parish vicar, duly authorized, administer the sacrament of Chrismation. All the Eastern Churches have Sacraments of Initiation administered together. The Eastern children, once having received the Sacraments of Initiation are permitted to receive Holy Communion, at any Catholic Church.

Baptism is the basic Sacrament for admitting a person into the Church. By administering the seal of Chrismation, this person is sealed with the sign of life, and is permitted to be full participants of the Church. It is the Chrismation that makes a person eligible to part-take in the Holy Mysteries and receive the Holy Communion. According to the spirit of theology of the Eastern liturgy, a person who is not baptized and who is not sealed with the sign of life (Chrismation), and who is not receiving the Holy Communion in the same celebration, is not permitted to participate in the Liturgy of the Eucharist. They are dismissed from the assembly at the conclusion of the Liturgy of the Word. In modern times, this requirement is conveniently ignored by most Eastern Churches, in their eagerness to imitate the Westerners.

 

[sscott]

@Thistle-Your right to the sacraments was violated when you were received into the church. It is church law that a person who has reached the age of reason be given the three sacraments at the same time. There was no reason to delay your confirmation. The priest is usually given faculties to confirm you instead of having the bishop do it.

 

[Phemie]

@Thistle-Your right to the sacraments was violated when you were received into the church. It is church law that a person who has reached the age of reason be given the three sacraments at the same time. There was no reason to delay your confirmation. The priest is usually given faculties to confirm you instead of having the bishop do it.

Canon Law itself gives the priest the faculty to confirm those adults he baptizes or receives into full communion. OTOH, the bishop has to grant him the faculty to confirm Catholics who are not in danger of death.

 

[Juliet512]

All the Christians, both the Eastern as well as the Western Christians, used to receive, in the earlier centuries, the Sacraments of Baptism, Chrismation (or Confirmation, as the Westerners call it), and receive holy Communion, together as the Sacraments of Initiation. Due to non-availability of the bishops for administration of Confirmation, sacrament of Confirmation started getting delayed in the Latin Church, where only the bishops administer the Sacrament of Confirmation. However, the Eastern Churches have a tradition of the parish vicar, duly authorized, administer the sacrament of Chrismation. All the Eastern Churches have Sacraments of Initiation administered together. The Eastern children, once having received the Sacraments of Initiation are permitted to receive Holy Communion, at any Catholic Church.

Baptism is the basic Sacrament for admitting a person into the Church. By administering the seal of Chrismation, this person is sealed with the sign of life, and is permitted to be full participants of the Church. It is the Chrismation that makes a person eligible to part-take in the Holy Mysteries and receive the Holy Communion. According to the spirit of theology of the Eastern liturgy, a person who is not baptized and who is not sealed with the sign of life (Chrismation), and who is not receiving the Holy Communion in the same celebration, is not permitted to participate in the Liturgy of the Eucharist. They are dismissed from the assembly at the conclusion of the Liturgy of the Word. In modern times, this requirement is conveniently ignored by most Eastern Churches, in their eagerness to imitate the Westerners.

I received Baptism as an infant, received First Communion in 2nd grade and Confirmation in the 8th Grade (age 14). However, my daughter was never baptized as an infant and now she is in RCIA classes and they are going to give her all three sacraments at once at Easter Vigil.

I wish that I could have my daughter baptized now. I am just coming back to my Catholic faith after many years of absence. I regret not having her baptized as an infant and, although it is very unlikely, I worry about awful things happening before she receives her sacraments. (I know, I am a worrier.) I also wonder if receiving the sacrament of baptism now wouldn’t help her in her studies of the Faith and in attaining the other sacraments?

Could I? or should I? ask for her to be baptized before the Easter Vigil in 2015? Or should I just follow the guidance of the Church?

 

[Evan]

I received Baptism as an infant, received First Communion in 2nd grade and Confirmation in the 8th Grade (age 14). However, my daughter was never baptized as an infant and now she is in RCIA classes and they are going to give her all three sacraments at once at Easter Vigil.

I wish that I could have my daughter baptized now. I am just coming back to my Catholic faith after many years of absence. I regret not having her baptized as an infant and, although it is very unlikely, I worry about awful things happening before she receives her sacraments. (I know, I am a worrier.) I also wonder if receiving the sacrament of baptism now wouldn’t help her in her studies of the Faith and in attaining the other sacraments?

Could I? or should I? ask for her to be baptized before the Easter Vigil in 2015? Or should I just follow the guidance of the Church?

Your daughter is fine. The Church teaches those that are in formation (RCIA), should they die, receive a Baptism of desire upon death. So there is no need to worry. She’s good and will suffer neither hell or purgatory as Baptism forgives all sin and removes the temporal punishment associated with the sin.