Confirmation: What can be required?

[EasterJoy]

And in obediance to her ordinary, she should have waited.

No, her ordinary cannot deny her rights that the Church has said very clearly that she has. The bishop himself, after all, is also bound to be obedient, and the Church says he has an obligation in this case. How can he teach obedience, when he refuses to be obedient himself?

Of course the candidate has to show proper respect for the bishop and of course the faithful might decide there is spiritual profit that can come from bearing wrongs with patience, but that doesn’t mean the faithful are expected to allow their bishop to wrongly withhold the sacraments whenever he sees fit, with no right to object. We might as well say that the bishop can decide which Catholics may or may not marry each other, and that the faithful have to be “obedient” to his decisions about that. That is not how the rights of the faithful are to be handled.

 

[EasterJoy]

The faithful are obliged to receive this sacrament at the proper time. Parents and pastors of souls, especially pastors of parishes, are to take care that the faithful are properly instructed to receive the sacrament and come to it at the appropriate time.

Honestly, this section makes me think that the pastors and bishops have the responsibility to beat the bushes and take every chance they can get to *educate and convince *candidates to get confirmed, rather than to set up systems that will certainly discourage prospective candidates from coming forward!

 

[Hopey]

Fab, here is the widely circulated response from the holy see regarding one young girls request: btw, no one in our diocese bothered to even see how well ours were prepared - we just received a no. The parish priest said he doesn’t recommend people unless they have attended the classes nor was he going to see if ours were prepared. Other diocese did interviews of our children.

“In light of Your Excellency’s considered response, this Dicastery considers it necessary to respond in some detail to the considerations you raise, and so the case was submitted to a renewed and attentive examination. The Congregation was anxious to communicate the results of this study as soon as possible asking you to note the authoritative nature of the conclusions contained therein ….”

After clarifying that the Vatican congregation does have authority to examine the bishop’s decision not to allow the confirmation, the letter proceeds:

"In reply to this Congregation’s decision that appropriate steps be taken to provide for the girl’s confirmation in the near future, Your Excellency had proposed essentially two arguments:

"1. Though willingly admitting that the girl is well instructed and that her parents are very good Catholics, you point out that ‘instruction is not the sole criterion for recognizing the opportune time for confirmation … this evaluation is a pastoral one which involves much more than being instructed.’

"2. Your Excellency indicates that the Diocesan Policy establishing that conferral of the Sacrament is to be no earlier than the sophomore year of high school is within the right inherent in the law in light of the legislation complementary to can. 891 for the Conference of Bishops to which you belong.

“With respect to Your Excellency’s first point, it is no doubt true that there is a pastoral judgment to be made in such cases, provided that by ‘pastoral judgment’ one is speaking of the obligation of the Sacred Pastors to determine whether those elements required by the revised Code of Canon Law are indeed present, namely, that the person be baptized, have the use of reason, be suitably instructed and be properly disposed and able to renew the baptismal promises (cf. cann 843,1; 889,2) … it is clear this young girl has satisfied each of the canonical requisites for reception of the sacrament.”

In regard to the second point, while the selection of an older age for confirmation is within the bishop’s right, the congregation goes on to say:

“*t is also clear that any such complementary legislation must always be interpreted in accord with the general norm of law. As has been stated before, the Code of Canon Law legislates that Sacred Ministers may not deny the Sacraments to those who are not prohibited by law from receiving them (cf. can 843,1). Since it has been demonstrated that the girl possesses these requisite qualities, any other considerations, even those contained in the Diocesan Policy, need to be understood in subordination to the general norms governing the reception of the Sacraments.”

After pointing out that it is the role of parents as the primary educators, and then of the sacred pastors to see that children are properly instructed, the letter adds:

“Consequently, when a member of the faithful wishes to receive this Sacrament, even though not satisfying one or more elements of the local legislation (for example, being younger than the designated age …), these elements must give way to the fundamental right of the faithful to receive the Sacraments. Indeed, the longer the conferral of the Sacrament is delayed after the age of reason, the greater the number of candidates who are prepared for its reception but are deprived of its grace for a considerable period of time.”*

 

[FrDavid96]

No, her ordinary cannot deny her rights that the Church has said very clearly that she has. The bishop himself, after all, is also bound to be obedient, and the Church says he has an obligation in this case. How can he teach obedience, when he refuses to be obedient himself?

Of course the candidate has to show proper respect for the bishop and of course the faithful might decide there is spiritual profit that can come from bearing wrongs with patience, but that doesn’t mean the faithful are expected to allow their bishop to wrongly withhold the sacraments whenever he sees fit, with no right to object. We might as well say that the bishop can decide which Catholics may or may not marry each other, and that the faithful have to be “obedient” to his decisions about that. That is not how the rights of the faithful are to be handled.

At this point, you’re taking this too far. Way too far!

The Holy See has determined that in the US, the proper age for Confirmation is between the age of reason (ie 7) and about age 16 (not “by” or “before” but “about” age 16).

It is entirely within the bishop’s discretion to set the normative age for Confirmation anytime between those two ages, 7 and 16. He is 100% in the right.

On the other hand, you are way out of line by using the words you use in your post.

How dare you accuse bishops of “wrongly withhold[ing] the sacraments”? Who are you to decide that your personal preferences over-rule the norms that the Holy See has approved?

How dare you accuse a bishop (even an unnamed one) of being disobedient when he is following exactly the norms approved by the Holy See?

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/canon-law/complementary-norms/canon-891-age-for-confirmation.cfm

You don’t like it? Get over it! You aren’t the bishop and the Holy See did not ask for your opinion before granting recognitio to the particular law.

Now, since I posted the link earlier, I’m obligated to explain a few things:

1. The local bishop is entirely within his rights and within his authority to set the normative age for Confirmation within his diocese, so long as that range is between 7 and about 16.
2. If a situation arises where a Catholic already meets the requirements of the universal law while not meeting the requirements of the statutes of the episcopal conference or of the particular law of the diocese, the local law must give way to the universal law. The bishop is obligated to administer the Sacrament when all of the requirements have been met in a particular situation.
3. The bishop is not obligated to make any changes to the normative age for Confirmation within his own diocese unless and until the law for the US is changed by the Holy See.

 

[EasterJoy]

Indeed, the longer the conferral of the Sacrament is delayed after the age of reason, the greater the number of candidates who are prepared for its reception but are deprived of its grace for a considerable period of time."

This is my fear, right there. My kids will jump through whatever hoop they throw at them, but how many won’t? How many are being deprived of this sacrament because the system has discouraged them from asking for it? How many are going through Catholic education–K-12!!!–and yet not being prepared to receive confirmation, even the ones who are the best students? They get out of 8 years of classes able to read at 10th or 12th grade level, able to do algebra, able to recite the Preamble, and they aren’t ready for confirmation? How is that possible?!?

How many, because they are not getting that education, are missing out on so much of their faith? How many religious vocations are being lost because parish schools have neglected to make religion a real academic subject? How many leave the faith because that preparation wasn’t part of what a Catholic education was required to be in their diocese?

One has to wonder!

 

[Corki]

Just to clarify, are you talking about the service hours that are required to be fulfilled to be able to be confirmed? Because I’ve questioned that policy myself.

I’ve argued about this one until I am blue in the face. Requiring “service” hours before Confirmation smacks of using “works” to obtain the grace of the Sacrament. I hate it. I have no problem with Confirmation classes and even youth groups engaging in group service activities. But letting a Confirmation student get a check off for shelving books in the library is worthless.

Age is another sore point for me. The max age is supposed to be 16 but in our diocese, that’s the minimum. This means that in small parishes with every-other-year Confirmation, we have 18 and 19 year-old students receiving Confirmation.

As for the other requirements, I understand how they got started. In many parishes, the majority of the students in the Confirmation class are not practicing their faith. Many have not been at Mass since their First Communion. The DREs (now called PCLs in our diocese) make these rules in order to make sure that the students are getting something at least once a week in the hope that something will “stick”. If they were at Mass every Sunday and had been in CCE for the intervening years, it wouldn’t be necessary. Unfortunately, the children in practicing families get caught in the middle. The DREs don’t want to appear to have two standards. They are really in a no-win situation.

 

[Hopey]

This is my fear, right there. My kids will jump through whatever hoop they throw at them, but how many won’t? How many are being deprived of this sacrament because the system has discouraged them from asking for it? How many are going through Catholic education–K-12!!!–and yet not being prepared to receive confirmation, even the ones who are the best students? They get out of 8 years of classes able to read at 10th or 12th grade level, able to do algebra, able to recite the Preamble, and they aren’t ready for confirmation? How is that possible?!?

How many, because they are not getting that education, are missing out on so much of their faith? How many religious vocations are being lost because parish schools have neglected to make religion a real academic subject? How many leave the faith because that preparation wasn’t part of what a Catholic education was required to be in their diocese?

One has to wonder!

I think we should focus on our own and make requests if they ask for it. I think we should help those seeking it early than what is set out. That is what I am doing. I don’t like the prep courses they use.
We make our concerns known to our priest and bishop.
Bishop Aquila did see the errors he was holding regarding confirmation so there is hope.

 

[Corki]

This is my fear, right there. My kids will jump through whatever hoop they throw at them, but how many won’t? How many are being deprived of this sacrament because the system has discouraged them from asking for it? How many are going through Catholic education–K-12!!!–and yet not being prepared to receive confirmation, even the ones who are the best students? They get out of 8 years of classes able to read at 10th or 12th grade level, able to do algebra, able to recite the Preamble, and they aren’t ready for confirmation? How is that possible?!?

How many, because they are not getting that education, are missing out on so much of their faith? How many religious vocations are being lost because parish schools have neglected to make religion a real academic subject? How many leave the faith because that preparation wasn’t part of what a Catholic education was required to be in their diocese?

One has to wonder!

My own kids have been fortunate to have excellent Religious education in Catholic schools and at home. For this reason, they were excused from CCE but required to do all the Confirmation hoops. I seriously considered just waiting until they were out of high school and letting them do adult Confirmation. Miraculously, all of those “hoops” are no longer considered essential for the adult students. They bend over backwards to make it easy and convenient for adults to finish the program. But in the end, I caved, mostly because I knew the teachers very well.

Statistically, our Confirmation classes are about half the size of our FHC classes, even though the Confirmation class spans two grades. That means that only about 25% of the kids who make FHC come back for Confirmation at the appointed age. So sad.

 

[EasterJoy]

I think we should focus on our own and make requests if they ask for it. I think we should help those seeking it early than what is set out. That is what I am doing. I don’t like the prep courses they use.
We make our concerns known to our priest and bishop.
Bishop Aquila did see the errors he was holding regarding confirmation so there is hope.

I am not willing to do that, and here is why: The ones who know that this is a right of the faithful are very often the same ones who will patiently go through the classes and write down the service that they’re doing, anyway. If the complaints come from the people who are obviously willing and able to jump through all the hoops, then it will be harder to write them off as malcontents who want the bar lowered artificially.

That is not my point! I want the bar raised, and I want more students ready and able to clear it without a problem. There is not a reason in the world that cannot happen, because it seems quite clear to me that compared to the other subjects at parochial grade schools, the standards for religious education are artificially low–so low as to insult some of the students! Our students are very able to do all their preparation while still at the parish school, and since the bishops don’t seem to want them doing it at the regional Catholic high schools, then I see no excuse for why that isn’t happening. I can see reasons–for one, that too many Catholics in the generation of the parents and teachers never learned these things themselves–but I don’t see the reasons as excuses.

I think our new archbishop is also likely to make changes in this area, once he gets his legs under him. (He’s only been here since April.)

 

[EasterJoy]

My own kids have been fortunate to have excellent Religious education in Catholic schools and at home. For this reason, they were excused from CCE but required to do all the Confirmation hoops. I seriously considered just waiting until they were out of high school and letting them do adult Confirmation. Miraculously, all of those “hoops” are no longer considered essential for the adult students. They bend over backwards to make it easy and convenient for adults to finish the program. But in the end, I caved, mostly because I knew the teachers very well.

Statistically, our Confirmation classes are about half the size of our FHC classes, even though the Confirmation class spans two grades. That means that only about 25% of the kids who make FHC come back for Confirmation at the appointed age. So sad.

Yes, very sad. Why do the bishops not fear to fail meeting this obligation for over half of the faithful, I do not know. At least for the faithful who never darken the doors of a church, I can see their difficulty, but what of the students at the parochial schools, the ones they have had as captive academic audiences for eight years, for 30 weeks a year? I am dumbfounded, trying to think of an answer to that.

 

[Hopey]

I am not willing to do that, and here is why: The ones who know that this is a right of the faithful are very often the same ones who will patiently go through the classes and write down the service that they’re doing, anyway. If the complaints come from the people who are obviously willing and able to jump through all the hoops, then it will be harder to write them off as malcontents who want the bar lowered artificially.

That is not my point! I want the bar raised, and I want more students ready and able to clear it without a problem. There is not a reason in the world that cannot happen, because it seems quite clear to me that compared to the other subjects at parochial grade schools, the standards for religious education are artificially low–so low as to insult some of the students! Our students are very able to do all their preparation while still at the parish school, and since the bishops don’t seem to want them doing it at the regional Catholic high schools, then I see no excuse for why that isn’t happening. I can see reasons–for one, that too many Catholics in the generation of the parents and teachers never learned these things themselves–but I don’t see the reasons as excuses.

I think our new archbishop is also likely to make changes in this area, once he gets his legs under him. (He’s only been here since April.)

I am for a revamp in the curriculum.
Although I would love to see all have a fantastic understanding of our faith by the time they graduate, in reality, once a week for 50 minutes during school year isn’t going to cut it. Also, when you have parents who are poorly formed, given misinformation from their youth, they can hardly give what the don’t have.
For those reasons alone, although I would aim high, I would not be quick to deny someone a sacrament because they don’t get all answers correct. Plus, as bothersome as those service hours are which could put an improper emphasis on earning a sacrament, same could go in other direction.
In that regard, the only thing I have left to do, in addition to praying for them, is to help in ways I outlined - for me. My diocese is not open at all nor cares to understand our concerns. Part of wisdom is knowing when to let go and where help would be most beneficial.
I hope we get a new bishop soon.

 

[EasterJoy]

I am for a revamp in the curriculum.
Although I would love to see all have a fantastic understanding of our faith by the time they graduate, in reality, once a week for 50 minutes during school year isn’t going to cut it. Also, when you have parents who are poorly formed, given misinformation from their youth, they can hardly give what the don’t have.
For those reasons alone, although I would aim high, I would not be quick to deny someone a sacrament because they don’t get all answers correct. Plus, as bothersome as those service hours are which could put an improper emphasis on earning a sacrament, same could go in other direction.
In that regard, the only thing I have left to do, in addition to praying for them, is to help in ways I outlined - for me. My diocese is not open at all nor cares to understand our concerns. Part of wisdom is knowing when to let go and where help would be most beneficial.
I hope we get a new bishop soon.

I just want to know why social studies and language arts are 10 times harder than religion, and yet the children who went through that same school need a year of classes to be ready for confirmation. It is not as if they have to be able to recite the Easter Orations of St. Gregory by heart in order to be ready for confirmation. There are so many basic things they are not taught that they are totally capable of learning. It is very frustrating!

Again, though, I think our Archbishop is very much aware of all this. What I hope he does not do is decide that what is needed is* two* years of classes for the high school students. Our confirmation rate will drop like a rock, and more people who could have been readied for confirmation will have to go without.

 

[CDB1718]

Trent is known for setting a higher bar than necessary as a Latin discipline for the sacrament. It said that Confirmation wasn’t necessary for salvation so it didn’t need to be given until the age of discretion. Some tried to say it was not efficacious below the age of discretion and Trent rejected that idea saying it was efficacious, just not necessary. It explained that pastors should be preaching on this and if they were doing so that people would seek Confirmation from a young age.

Trent outright rejected the idea that Confirmation is for confirming a faith or understanding already present and reiterated that the sacrament imparts a character and grace, confirming the faith that was already embraced at Baptism.

This may also be easily inferred from the nature of the Sacrament itself. For they ought to be confirmed with the sacred chrism who have need of spiritual increase, and who are to be led to the perfection of the Christian religion. But this is, without exception, suited to all; because as nature intends that all her children should grow up and attain full maturity, although she does not always realize her wishes; so the Catholic Church, the common mother of all, earnestly desires that, in those whom she has regenerated by Baptism, the perfection of Christian manhood be completed. Now as this is accomplished through the Sacrament of mystic Unction, it is clear that Confirmation belongs alike to all the faithful.

The Proper Age For Confirmation
Here it is to be observed, that, after Baptism, the Sacrament of Confirmation may indeed be administered to all; but that, until children shall have attained the use of reason, its administration is inexpedient. If it does not seem well to defer (Confirmation) to the age of twelve, it is most proper to postpone this Sacrament at least to that of seven years.

Confirmation has not been instituted as necessary to salvation, but that by virtue thereof we may be found very well armed and prepared when called upon to fight for the faith of Christ; and for this conflict no one assuredly will consider children who as yet lack the use of reason to be qualified.

Trent went to great pains to explain why this is necessary and is not a graduation ceremony.

The Grace of Strength
But besides these things, which are common to this and the other (Sacraments), it is peculiar to Confirmation first to perfect the grace of Baptism. For those who have been made Christians by Baptism, still have in some sort the tenderness and softness, as it were, of new-born infants, and afterwards become, by means of the Sacrament of chrism, stronger to resist all the assaults of the world, the flesh and the devil, while their minds are fully confirmed in faith to confess and glorify the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Hence; also, originated the very name (Confirmation), as no one will doubt. For the word Confirmation is not derived, as some not less ignorantly than impiously have pretended, from the circumstance that persons baptized in infancy, when arrived at mature years, were of old brought to the Bishop, in order to confirm their faith in Christ, which they had embraced in Baptism, so that Confirmation would seem not to differ from catechetical instruction. Of such a practice no reliable testimony can be adduced. On the contrary, the name has been derived from the fact that by virtue of this Sacrament God confirms in us the work He commenced in Baptism, leading us to the perfection of solid Christian virtue.

Increase in Grace
But not only does it confirm, it also increases (divine grace), as says Melchiades: The Holy Ghost, whose salutary descent upon the waters of Baptism, imparts in the font fullness to the accomplishment of innocence, in Confirmation gives an increase of grace; and not only an increase, but an increase after a wonderful manner. This the Scriptures beautifully express by a metaphor taken from clothing: Stay you in the city, said our Lord and Savior, speaking of this Sacrament, until you be clothed with power from on high.

If pastors wish to show the divine efficacy of this Sacrament - and this, no doubt, will have great influence in affecting the minds of the faithful - it will be sufficient if they explain what occurred to the Apostles themselves. So weak and timid were they before, and even at the very time of the Passion, that no sooner was our Lord apprehended, than they instantly fled; and Peter, who had been designated the rock and foundation of the Church, and who had displayed unshaken constancy and exalted magnanimity, terrified at the voice of one weak woman, denied, not once nor twice only, but a third time, that he was a disciple of Jesus Christ; and after the Resurrection they all remained shut up at home for fear of the Jews. But, on the day of Pentecost, so great was the power of the Holy Ghost with which they were all filled that, while they boldly and freely disseminated the Gospel confided to them, not only through Judea, but throughout the world, they thought no greater happiness could await them than that of being accounted worthy to suffer contumely, chains, torments and crucifixion, for the name of Christ.

 

[Hopey]

I just want to know why social studies and language arts are 10 times harder than religion, and yet the children who went through that same school need a year of classes to be ready for confirmation. It is not as if they have to be able to recite the Easter Orations of St. Gregory by heart in order to be ready for confirmation. There are so many basic things they are not taught that they are totally capable of learning. It is very frustrating!.

When I went down this road before, what I found out is that the Diocese and parishes here only use materials/books that is on the USCCB approved list. I think it can still be accessed online. Most of these are lacking in substance. As Fr. Barron put it, when visiting his God daughter who was attending a local Catholic High School, he couldn’t believe that her Religion book, along with some very difficult courses, was like a photo/coloring book! It had a heavy emphasis on pictures with no substance, challenge.
Here, we were told that is was the parents duty to see their kids are properly instructed. In other words, if we found the materials to be sub par, it was our duty to supplement, not theirs.
I entered what I have called the merry-go-round of absurdity.
We were fortunate to use Seton and if you are familiar with the courses, they more than just cover the basics but go into depth and apologetic in nature, especially high school material. Although Seton has approval of their local Bishop (VA I believe), they are not on the approved list of the USCCB. I found out soon if I just wanted to use the latest version of the Baltimore Catechism, which is a treasure in compact theology, I would be in trouble.

This is where I was hoping with the election of Cardinal Dolan as President of the USCCB some things would be addressed. He may be looking at those who write/approve materials to be used and it may take years to be realized on a parish level.

This is also when we decided not to pay for our children to take the CCD classes at the parish ($25 a piece). They were getting 5 days of the good stuff. I had already invested a large sum of money in books and they wanted to be part of the youth group instead. We would find out soon if they didn’t belong to the CCD classes, they were not allowed at any of the functions of the youth. They could volunteer to clean the Church, etc, with the family or things of that nature. No exceptions. Our daughter did end up joining a neighboring parishes CYO that didn’t have the restrictions as this one did.

You can keep asking why but don’t be surprised to find out the parish is limited to what they can use because of the USCCBs approved list.

 

[Hopey]

Trent is known for setting a higher bar than necessary as a Latin discipline for the sacrament. It said that Confirmation wasn’t necessary for salvation so it didn’t need to be given until the age of discretion. Some tried to say it was not efficacious below the age of discretion and Trent rejected that idea saying it was efficacious, just not necessary. It explained that pastors should be preaching on this and if they were doing so that people would seek Confirmation from a young age.

Trent outright rejected the idea that Confirmation is for confirming a faith or understanding already present and reiterated that the sacrament imparts a character and grace, confirming the faith that was already embraced at Baptism.

Trent went to great pains to explain why this is necessary and is not a graduation ceremony.

Thanks for posting this! This is also why we stick with the age of discretion still to this day and how we differ from our Eastern brothers and sisters who confirm babies.

 

[CDB1718]

Thanks for posting this! This is also why we stick with the age of discretion still to this day and how we differ from our Eastern brothers and sisters who confirm babies.

It is part of the reason. The practice of the bishop confirming in an age when travel was no small undertaking led to big delays. Confirmation being moved out of order when the age for Eucharist was lowered adds to the idea that Confirmation is a graduation and not an initiation.

It is a discipline, but there’s nothing that stops the Latin Church from changing the discipline to it’s earlier practice of infant initiation.

 

[FAB]

Obedience doesn’t preclude a person making her needs and desires known or of seeking redress with appropriate authorities.

Obedience requires American Roman Catholic bishops to set a standard Confirmation between the age of discretion and age 16. Meaning the child’s 16th birthday is the upper limit and any time in the 16th year is outside the bounds of obedience.

Rome says that the norm is the age of discretion, but it makes an exception for the US to allow the wide range of ages. The education Rome expects is the basics that a child around age 7 requires. Time is not needed for years of service and high-level formation in the teen and adult years to meet this requirement.

While benefit might come from the extra service and learning for those who stick it out, it is not a greater benefit or a substitute for the sacramental grace that’s being deferred in favor of learning and service.

The local odianry has full authority to set the time for confirmation. Sacramental grace is given at the time of Baptizm and first eucharist. The is not a problem with waiting on confirmation until 15 or 16. The young catholic better understands the sacrament and can accept it freely.
You seem to want to sacramentalize, which does not help in the Formation of young Catholics.

 

[FAB]

My children requested it earlier than the policy established by bishop. We were granted permission to go to another diocese by our bishop.
Do you think those cases, in which the child is younger than what is set out, but get permission from th holy see are acting in disobedience? Would that be the holy see encouraging disobedience? The answers that have been given should provide you w enough information to know you are off base in your accusation as they state that denying a requested sacrament for a long time, when requested, could be harmful to the child. Plus, we are supposed to be able to go to our bishops w requests.

The Holy See does not micromanage each local church, your diocese. The managment is left to the local ordianary who has the full discrestion to make such decissions. Your obedinace is to the local ordianary.
I’ll put it this way, as a deacon I am sworn to obey my local bishop and his successors. I might disgree with his policy, that does not give me the right not to follow them. The same is for his preist. The same obedinace is called out in the canon for laiety, since your are quoting the Holy See.

 

[FAB]

No, her ordinary cannot deny her rights that the Church has said very clearly that she has. The bishop himself, after all, is also bound to be obedient, and the Church says he has an obligation in this case. How can he teach obedience, when he refuses to be obedient himself?

Of course the candidate has to show proper respect for the bishop and of course the faithful might decide there is spiritual profit that can come from bearing wrongs with patience, but that doesn’t mean the faithful are expected to allow their bishop to wrongly withhold the sacraments whenever he sees fit, with no right to object. We might as well say that the bishop can decide which Catholics may or may not marry each other, and that the faithful have to be “obedient” to his decisions about that. That is not how the rights of the faithful are to be handled.

He cannot deny her the rights, but he can by his descresion delay them. We do the same with baptism, first Echarist and even to some extent marriage. To many Catholics have a I want it NOW, I want it MY WAY, attitude.

 

[Hopey]

The local odianry has full authority to set the time for confirmation. Sacramental grace is given at the time of Baptizm and first eucharist. The is not a problem with waiting on confirmation until 15 or 16. The young catholic better understands the sacrament and can accept it freely.
You seem to want to sacramentalize, which does not help in the Formation of young Catholics.

What do you mean by sacramentalize?
A child’s age doesn’t determine whether they freely accept it but their willingness to cooperate w God and his grace. I have found those younger are more eager.