Do you think the Confirmation age is too young?

[Corki]

I am going to be a sponsor for a friend’s son who is in a diocese where they confirm in 3rd grade. I received a lot of information and they have a nice plan. The kids receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation in Grade 2 and sign a promise with their parents to go to Mass and Confession for the next year. After a year, they can go to the pastor or DRE and request entrance into the Sacrament Prep classes for First Communion and Confirmation which are in addition to the regular CCE classes for the grade. In the Spring of 3rd grade (or older if the parents feel the child isn’t ready or they haven’t been fulfilling the “contract”) they are Confirmed and receive First Communion at the same Mass.

Where I live, the age is 10th/11th grade for Confirmation. Too late IMHO. The kids are much more able to absorb information younger and they are often indifferent about the sacrament by the teen years.

I teach 9th grade CCE and every year we have a few kids who were already confirmed as infants. These are invariably people who were born and baptized in Mexico. I don’t know if this is a regional peculiarity or if there are parts of the Latin church that have retained the close association between Baptism and Confirmation.

 

[ralphinal]

I teach the Confirmation class in my parish. It is a tenth grade class. In some ways, this is too old, as some of the kids have become cynical and somewhat jaded. It is a good age, however, in that we can discuss topics that you would not touch with elementary school kids. I am not sure how I feel about changing the age. Both have advantages.

 

[1ke]

I think all three Sacraments of Initiation should be conferred together in infancy.

 

[pprimeau1976]

I teach the Confirmation class in my parish. It is a tenth grade class. In some ways, this is too old, as some of the kids have become cynical and somewhat jaded. It is a good age, however, in that we can discuss topics that you would not touch with elementary school kids. I am not sure how I feel about changing the age. Both have advantages.

Do you think kids would be cynical if they wanted to be confirmed? I taught 8th grade religious ed classes this year and was disturbed at what I saw. Some kids never even went to church on a regular basis because their parents were essentially Christmas and Easter Catholics. I had another kid in my class who was on the schedule to attend confirmation prep and who also claimed to be an agnostic. No one can tell me that he was seeking to be confirmed out of his own free will.

 

[jmcrae]

I think it should be at baptism or right before first eucharist.

That makes perfect sense to me.

I don’t see any reason not to have First Reconciliation, Confirmation and First Holy Communion (in that order) all within the years between age seven and ten.

Keep in mind, it’s a Sacrament; not a grade or reward for studying.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I think it should be at baptism or right before first eucharist.

In our Eastern Rite, infants received baptism, confirmation and eucharist on the same day. The infant received the blood since they cannot consumed the leaven bread (Eastern Rite always used leaven bread))

 

[Phemie]

That makes perfect sense to me.

I don’t see any reason not to have First Reconciliation, Confirmation and First Holy Communion (in that order) all within the years between age seven and ten.

Keep in mind, it’s a Sacrament; not a grade or reward for studying.

As I’ve said in other posts, Confirmation in our parish has been before First Communion since 1999 when we stopped having Catholic schools. As part of the preparation to complete initiation they made their first Reconciliation. In our parish it was working well because our main catechist was dedicated to this model. Unfortunately, such was not the case in other parishes where catechists complained they had to teach too much. FWIW, there is less to learn for confirmation at 7 than for Eucharist.

Late last year, when our diocese was suppressed and our area combined with another that confirmed in grade 10 the bishop set Confirmation between gr. 6 & gr 10.

 

[THutch04]

Although I can understand why people would want the Sacrament of Confirmation delayed until people can understand it better, I think the original order should be maintained. Quite frankly, the way it is now, a lot of people don’t understand what the point is in being confirmed, if they’re able to receive the Eucharist without it (and I can’t say I blame them for feeling that way).

Just because one is confirmed does not mean that the learning stops. I wonder what it’s like in other cultures, because at least in the United States (and maybe western culture in general) you study a subject in order to receive something in the end (a diploma, a certification, and in this context, a Sacrament). So I agree that it’s a good thing to keep the education going after Confirmation, but I don’t know how exactly one would encourage students (and parents) to take advantage of that since learning for the sake of learning is not nearly as common in our culture as the other way around.

 

[kaygee]

I think all three Sacraments of Initiation should be conferred together in infancy.

Amen. DD (now 16) was baptised, chrismated (confirmed), and received her first Holy Communion at 8 weeks (in our Eastern church). She received an abundance of graces that day, which, we as her parents and her Godparents, and our parish in general were required to teach her how to appropriate and use for herself. It’s not about a rite of passage, but about receiving the gifts she will need and use over a lifetime. It’s about beginning a relationship that will be nurtured and will deepen over a lifetime. (BTW, she did her first Confession at about 4 1/2, when she was old enough to know that something she did was wrong and that she was sorry for it.)

As her friends are confirmed in Jr. and Sr. High, it’s more like a formal rite of passage with scant preparation and no follow-up. Some of them express amazement that she attends Divine Liturgy every week and makes her confession on a regular basis. As far as they’re concerned, they’ve graduated. As far as dd is concerned, her practice of the faith is who she is and who she has always been for as long as she can remember. I trust the graces given at her baptism and chrismation and her weekly Holy Communion to keep it that way and move her forward as she gets older.
:byzsoc:

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

Amen. DD (now 16) was baptised, chrismated (confirmed), and received her first Holy Communion at 8 weeks (in our Eastern church). She received an abundance of graces that day, which, we as her parents and her Godparents, and our parish in general were required to teach her how to appropriate and use for herself. It’s not about a rite of passage, but about receiving the gifts she will need and use over a lifetime. It’s about beginning a relationship that will be nurtured and will deepen over a lifetime. (BTW, she did her first Confession at about 4 1/2, when she was old enough to know that something she did was wrong and that she was sorry for it.)

As her friends are confirmed in Jr. and Sr. High, it’s more like a formal rite of passage with scant preparation and no follow-up. Some of them express amazement that she attends Divine Liturgy every week and makes her confession on a regular basis. As far as they’re concerned, they’ve graduated. As far as dd is concerned, her practice of the faith is who she is and who she has always been for as long as she can remember. I trust the graces given at her baptism and chrismation and her weekly Holy Communion to keep it that way and move her forward as she gets older.
:byzsoc:

:clapping: Yes!!! The result I sought!!!

 

[ralphinal]

Do you think kids would be cynical if they wanted to be confirmed? I taught 8th grade religious ed classes this year and was disturbed at what I saw. Some kids never even went to church on a regular basis because their parents were essentially Christmas and Easter Catholics. I had another kid in my class who was on the schedule to attend confirmation prep and who also claimed to be an agnostic. No one can tell me that he was seeking to be confirmed out of his own free will.

No, they would not be so cynical, and I have had kids whose parents only enter church grounds to drop them off and pick them up. All that I can do is try to reach them. In reality, I think that the 16 year old who has doubts about the faith would have them anyway. I do stress the importance of it, and that they should be sure that this is their choice.

This may not make sense, but I am glad that I remember my confirmation. I was in 8th grade. The sad part is that most of the kids in my class (18 total) ahve either left the faith or do not practice. The most common reason: a marrage to a non-Catholic.

 

[Melissa]

Where I am, the age is 10th grade (15 to 16), but it’s a two-year program to prepare. I think it’s way too old.

IMO, it shouldn’t be later than maybe 5th grade at the outside (10-11yo). I think our children should have all possible graces before puberty.

Likewise, I think that religious education should be continuing long past confirmation. The way it is now, it’s kind of a ‘graduation’ and you find far too many people thinking that religious education and study of the Faith can end.

 

[puzzleannie]

I have prepared people for Confirmation who range in age from 7 to mature adult, and “readiness” is in no way determined by age, but by receptivity to the grace of Christ and action of the Holy Spirit.

at the basis of most concerns expressed on this and similar posts is failure of parents to educate their children in the faith and to model Christian life, failure of parishes to fulfill their mission to catechize and evangelize, and failure of adult Catholics to engage in mature faith formation and to heed the call to continuing conversion. Don’t blame the sacraments, blame the Catholics who fail to petition Christ for the grace of the sacraments, and who fail to respond to the grace with which he is pleased to gift them.

 

[Jenny_Z]

Catechisis is important, but it’s the parents responsibility to teach the faith to their children. Too many parents rely on their schools and/or catechisis classes to do it.

 

[Phemie]

Catechisis is important, but it’s the parents responsibility to teach the faith to their children. Too many parents rely on their schools and/or catechisis classes to do it.

Unfortunately, many of today’s parents are not properly catechized so are unable to properly transmit the faith to their children.

When a woman who is entrusted with the ‘children’s liturgy’ gave the reflection at a Mass with children and called Communion a symbol of Christ no one blinked.

When a devout woman argued with me that Jesus wasn’t “REALLY” there in the consecrated species, that we received a “SYMBOL” of Jesus, nothing I could say would change her mind.

When another woman complains that there’s too much singing at Mass (responses and 4 hymns) and she can’t pray, what does that say about the catechesis she received?

I don’t think it’s any worse today than it has been in the past centuries. We were taught religion in school by teachers who had to teach the subject just because they were the teachers. They had no special training, no study of religion or liturgy. We learned to answer question 1 with answer 1 and any request for further explanation was ignored because the teacher had studied in the same way and knew no more than us.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

If we fully initiate infants and children, and new adult Catholics, we can focus our energies on the mystagogical and post baptismal catechesis where it belongs.

I’m glad you brought up mystagogy because I thought that particular practice sheds a lot of light on what our expectations of “readiness” and “understanding” should be. After all, infants are one case, but we all agree that once we’re not dealing with infants anymore we have to have some sort of higher standard - which I think early practice provides.

In the early Church, Christian initiation was preceeded by a period of catechesis in order to learn about the faith. This usually comprised a weeks-long exposition of Scripture by the bishop for the catechumens, during which they would eventually, relatively shortly before initiation, “receive” the Our Father and Creed from the bishop. What this catechesis did NOT contain, however, was teaching on the sacraments (their rites, their theologies, etc.). This knowledge was reserved for Christians (the initiated), and would be handed on only after reception into the Church. So a catechumen underwent catechesis, was baptized, confirmed, and admitted to the Eucharist, and only THEN had his “classes” on the sacraments.

To receive confirmation it should not be required that one be able to articulate a decent theology of the sacrament (as if we even have one ), rather that one simply know it (followed by and along with reception of the Eucharist) completes one’s initiation into the Church. If this is what they desire, bring 'em on. The details can come later.

 

[East_Anglican]

Us Anglicans do not class confirmation as a sacrament. But we do have confirmation services. I’ve looked up some stuff and have come to the conclusion that Baptism and Communion are sacremments because they relate to the covenant we have with God through the blood of Christ.

The Anglican Church I attend are debating if baptised children should take the bread and wine. I think they should. Then we have the problem of a lot of parents dedicating their children because they do not believe in infant baptism.

As Jewish children were circumcised as circumcision was a sign of the covenant, so should Christian children be baptised as baptism is a sign of the covenant.

The Anglican line seems to be (by my interpretation of the 39 articles) that the other five of what the RC Church calls sacraments are not wrong in themselves but will not effect ones eternal destiny, therefore they are optional.

 

[60s_Catholic]

One thing apparent from this thread is that there is no generally accepted age for confirmation. In my parish, my daughter will not be confirmed until she is 17. In my opinion, as a practicing pediatrician, this is too old. Kids face a lot of hard choices in their teen years and they tend to get very cynical. Confirmation and instruction in your faith can combat these tendencies. However, as we find in medicine, it is far better to inoculate to prevent disease than to cure the disease once established. For this reason, Confirmation at the dawn of maturity (7th or 8th grade) is going to work better for most kids I know. Unfortunately, no one asks people like me and, when I speak up, I given no fair hearing. The parish says it is a diocesan policy and the diocese says I should talk to people in my parish.

And what about that Catechesis? It is largely non-existent. The kids sit it workshops structured around largely secular presentations about making good choices regarding sex, drugs or relationships. All my daughter knows about Catholic doctrine and history and teaching comes from me or her high school. So, if I sound angry, I am. Unfortunately, when I voice these concerns in my parish, I get nowhere with anyone in the education program. It is very frustrating and disheartening.