First Holy Communion and Confirmation on the same day?

[FrDavid96]

No, I did not miss it, but wanted to show that the order restoration was an issue between the two Vatican councils, which would naturally lead to incorporation into the synod. Neither document is Vatican II. Usige said"Vatican II called for the return of not only the permanent diaconate, but also the original order of the sacraments."

These documents from Vatican II do emphasize the original ordering of Christian Initiation and are always shown in that order, and the purpose and relationship are elaborated.SC 71. The rite of confirmation is to be revised and the intimate connection which this sacrament has with the whole of Christian initiation is to be more clearly set forth; for this reason it is fitting for candidates to renew their baptismal promises just before they are confirmed. Confirmation may be given within the Mass when convenient; when it is given outside the Mass, the rite that is used should be introduced by a formula to be drawn up for this purpose.

LG 11. It is through the sacraments and the exercise of the virtues that the sacred nature and organic structure of the priestly community is brought into operation. Incorporated in the Church through baptism, the faithful are destined by the baptismal character for the worship of the Christian religion; reborn as sons of God they must confess before men the faith which they have received from God through the Church (4*). They are more perfectly bound to the Church by the sacrament of Confirmation, and the Holy Spirit endows them with special strength so that they are more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith, both by word and by deed, as true witnesses of Christ (5*). Taking part in the eucharistic sacrifice, which is the fount and apex of the whole Christian life, they offer the Divine Victim to God, and offer themselves along with It.(6*)

OC 13. The established practice in respect of the minister of Confirmation that has obtained from most early times in the Eastern Church should be fully restored. Therefore, priests validly confer this sacrament, using chrism blessed by a patriarch or a bishop.(14)

OE 14. All Eastern Rite priests, either in conjunction with Baptism or separately from it, can confer this sacrament validly on all the faithful of any rite including the Latin; licitly, however, only if the regulations both of the common and the particular law are observed.(15) Priests, also, of Latin Rite, in accordance with the faculties they enjoy in respect of the administration of this sacrament, validly administer it also to the faithful of Eastern Churches; without prejudice to the rite, observing in regard to licitness the regulations both of the common and of the particular law.(16)

PO 5. … the Eucharist shows itself as the source and the apex of the whole work of preaching the Gospel. Those under instruction are introduced by stages to a sharing in the Eucharist, and the faithful, already marked with the seal of Baptism and Confirmation, are through the reception of the Eucharist fully joined to the Body of Christ.

AG 36. As members of the living Christ, incorporated into Him and made like unto Him through baptism and through confirmation and the Eucharist, all the faithful are duty - bound to cooperate in the expansion and spreading out of His Body, to bring it to fullness as soon as may be (Eph. 4:13).
ewtn.com/library/councils/v2all.htm

And in none of those documents do we see the Council Fathers talk about making any changes to the order in which the Sacraments should be administered.

The statement made was this:

Vatican II called for the return of not only the permanent diaconate, but also the original order of the sacraments.

The Council made no such call (I’m talking about Confirmation here, the diaconate is, of course, not the topic.)

Again, at no point in any of the quotes you’ve provided, does the Second Vatican council make any “call” to make any changes to the order in which the sacraments are administered. None. No such thing exists.

If you can show us where the Council made any such call, please do.

You’ve even gone so far as to take the quote from Presbyterorum Ordinis (the Decree on Priests) out of context. The quote you’ve provided is not speaking about any “order” of the Sacraments, but is instead giving instruction on the priest’s ministry toward 2 groups of people: those who are under instruction (today we would say catechumens and candidates) and those who are already practicing Catholics. As for the practicing Catholics, the Council is not talking about them receiving the Eucharist in some kind of chronological order, but rather saying that they are receiving the Eucharist at any given Mass. The point of that paragraph is to remind priests of their obligations to minister (and specifically preach) to both groups of people–those seeking, and those already Catholic.

 

[Brendan]

Preparation time and organizational issues. We’ve already decided to cram two sacraments into one ceremony and one year of preparation, isn’t it a bit much to ask kids to prepare for all three all at once?

Our children had their entire lives as preparation for the Sacraments. Why would a parent wait until the year prior to begin explaining the Faith?

 

[robwar]

My daughter will be doing the sacramental programme this year, and the priest wants to hold her first Holy Communion and Confirmation on the same day as part of the Sunday mass.

In my experience, the sacraments are usually done separately and something about this arrangement doesn’t feel right to me - it will be done by a visiting priest as our parish is very small and it feels like the sacraments are being crammed in to fit into his busy schedule.

I’m just looking for some opinions really - do you think it is better to have confirmation and first Holy Communion separate, or is it just me over-analysing it?

How old is your daughter? Discuss your feelings with the priest but you are probably over analysing it.

 

[Vico]

And in none of those documents do we see the Council Fathers talk about making any changes to the order in which the Sacraments should be administered.

The statement made was this:

The Council made no such call (I’m talking about Confirmation here, the diaconate is, of course, not the topic.)

Again, at no point in any of the quotes you’ve provided, does the Second Vatican council make any “call” to make any changes to the order in which the sacraments are administered. None. No such thing exists.

If you can show us where the Council made any such call, please do.

You’ve even gone so far as to take the quote from Presbyterorum Ordinis (the Decree on Priests) out of context. The quote you’ve provided is not speaking about any “order” of the Sacraments, but is instead giving instruction on the priest’s ministry toward 2 groups of people: those who are under instruction (today we would say catechumens and candidates) and those who are already practicing Catholics. As for the practicing Catholics, the Council is not talking about them receiving the Eucharist in some kind of chronological order, but rather saying that they are receiving the Eucharist at any given Mass. The point of that paragraph is to remind priests of their obligations to minister (and specifically preach) to both groups of people–those seeking, and those already Catholic.

In each case it shows the order Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist. It is not a specific call, rather an affirmation. That direction had already been given by 1932. The context that you mention is not the point of what I posted from PO, rather “sharing in the Eucharist, and the faithful, already marked with the seal of Baptism and Confirmation, are through the reception of the Eucharist fully joined to the Body of Christ.” As expressed in the Apostolic Constitution on the Sacrament of Confirmation of Pope Paul VI, which refers to Vatican II:This makes clear the specific importance of Confirmation for sacramental initiation by which the faithful “as members of the living Christ are incorporated into him and made like him through baptism and through Confirmation and the Eucharist.”4 In baptism, the newly baptized receive forgiveness of sins, adoption as sons of God, and the character of Christ, by which they are made members of the Church and for the first time become sharers in the priesthood of their Saviour (see 1Peter 2:5, 9). Through the Sacrament of Confirmation, those who have been born anew in baptism receive the inexpressible Gift, the Holy Spirit himself, by which “they are endowed … with special strength.”5 Moreover, having received the character of this sacrament, they are “bound more intimately to the Church”6 and “they are more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith both by word and by deed as true witnesses of Christ.”7 Finally, Confirmation is so closely linked with the holy Eucharist8 that the faithful, after being signed by holy baptism and Confirmation, are incorporated fully into the body of Christ by participation in the Eucharist.9

Vatican source: vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19710815_divina-consortium_lt.html

 

[FrDavid96]

In each case it shows the order Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist. It is not a specific call, rather an affirmation. That direction had already been given by 1932. The context that you mention is not the point of what I posted from PO, rather “sharing in the Eucharist, and the faithful, already marked with the seal of Baptism and Confirmation, are through the reception of the Eucharist fully joined to the Body of Christ.” As expressed in the Apostolic Constitution in 1971, which refers to Vatican II:This makes clear the specific importance of Confirmation for sacramental initiation by which the faithful “as members of the living Christ are incorporated into him and made like him through baptism and through Confirmation and the Eucharist.”4 In baptism, the newly baptized receive forgiveness of sins, adoption as sons of God, and the character of Christ, by which they are made members of the Church and for the first time become sharers in the priesthood of their Saviour (see 1Peter 2:5, 9). Through the Sacrament of Confirmation, those who have been born anew in baptism receive the inexpressible Gift, the Holy Spirit himself, by which “they are endowed … with special strength.”5 Moreover, having received the character of this sacrament, they are “bound more intimately to the Church”6 and “they are more strictly obliged to spread and defend the faith both by word and by deed as true witnesses of Christ.”7 Finally, Confirmation is so closely linked with the holy Eucharist8 that the faithful, after being signed by holy baptism and Confirmation, are incorporated fully into the body of Christ by participation in the Eucharist.9

And once again, you have still not shown where the Second Vatican Council made any such statements calling for any changes in the order in which the sacraments are administered.

That was the point of my original question. Vatican II made no such statement, no such call.

I’ll invite you again to quote the document and paragraph number of the Second Vatican Council wherein the Council Fathers make a “call” (since that was the word used in the original statement) that there should be any changes in the order in which the Sacraments of Initiation are administered.

So far, you’ve come up empty.

 

[Vico]

And once again, you have still not shown where the Second Vatican Council made any such statements calling for any changes in the order in which the sacraments are administered.

That was the point of my original question. Vatican II made no such statement, no such call.

I’ll invite you again to quote the document and paragraph number of the Second Vatican Council wherein the Council Fathers make a “call” (since that was the word used in the original statement) that there should be any changes in the order in which the Sacraments of Initiation are administered.

So far, you’ve come up empty.

It was not a call for a change in order as a transitive verb “to give orders for”. It did show that the Eucharist completes the sequence of Christian initiation after Baptism and Confirmation. It suggests a benefit in emphasis of the original ordering.

 

[FrDavid96]

It was not a call for a change in order as a transitive verb “to give orders for”. It did show that the Eucharist completes the sequence of Christian initiation after Baptism and Confirmation. It suggests a benefit in emphasis of the original ordering.

And none of what you’ve posted shows where the Council made any call (I’ve chosen that word because the original statement used “calling”) to change the order in which the Sacraments of Initiation are to be administered (or received, which is perhaps the better choice).

You keep trying to prove that the Council said something which the Council did not say. And that’s my point here. We must, as a Church, put entirely aside the practice of making statements that begin with “Vatican II said…” and following those words with something that the Council did not in fact actually say.

The Council never said it.

If you want to present a position where you feel that there should be a specific sequence, by all means go right ahead. I’m listening (or reading, as the case may be)…

My question was this: Can you tell me which Vatican II document(s) speak about changing the order of the sacraments? Could you give me the name of the document and the paragraph number, please?

But you’re not answering my question, you’re answering an altogether different question.

I was not asking “what do people think should be the order and why?” I was asking the one who first posted that “Vatican II called for … the original order of the sacraments.” to show which Council document makes such a statement. Again, no such thing exists.

 

[Vico]

And none of what you’ve posted shows where the Council made any call (I’ve chosen that word because the original statement used “calling”) to change the order in which the Sacraments of Initiation are to be administered (or received, which is perhaps the better choice).

You keep trying to prove that the Council said something which the Council did not say. And that’s my point here. We must, as a Church, put entirely aside the practice of making statements that begin with “Vatican II said…” and following those words with something that the Council did not in fact actually say.

The Council never said it.

If you want to present a position where you feel that there should be a specific sequence, by all means go right ahead. I’m listening (or reading, as the case may be)…

My question was this: Can you tell me which Vatican II document(s) speak about changing the order of the sacraments? Could you give me the name of the document and the paragraph number, please?

But you’re not answering my question, you’re answering an altogether different question.

I was not asking “what do people think should be the order and why?” I was asking the one who first posted that “Vatican II called for … the original order of the sacraments.” to show which Council document makes such a statement. Again, no such thing exists.

I do not say that Vatican II made a call to restore the order, for the Latin Church, in the sense you intend it, what was called for was for the rite of confirmation to be revised. I can see that I am not answering your question.

 

[TimothyH]

Preparation time and organizational issues. We’ve already decided to cram two sacraments into one ceremony and one year of preparation, isn’t it a bit much to ask kids to prepare for all three all at once?

I want to respond to this. My daughter was confirmed last year in the Archdioces of Altanta so I have first hand experience. The preparation for confirmation is absurd. 90% of it is a waste of time.

It is two years long! They do plays where they talk about St. Francis the monk confused and write long reports on their chosen saints and go to retreats where they stay up all night and overdose on pizza and candy. And the mothers go crazy, driving the kids here and there and organizing all kinds of events and making little gift baskets. All of it has very little to do with the sacrament itself.

When they are taught about the sacrament itself, it is didactic, dry and often just plain wrong. There is zero mystery. They fruits of the sacrament are taught but not how to manifest those fruits in the real world. They are taught the errors that Confirmation is a confirming of Baptism or that it is an initiation into Christian adulthood. No one teaches them to pray. They don’t open a Bible. No one takes them out evangelizing - teaches them how to speak out boldly in the name of Jesus without being afraid like St. Peter and St. Stephen after Pentecost. That is what confirmation is about.

It is really quite a waste of time - busy doing this and that - with little of the frenetic activity having anything to do with confirmation itself.

This is my personal opinion and my own experience. I know people work hard to prepare our kids. I am not denigrating them. I just see little of it having anything to do with the actual sacrament itself.

-Tim-

 

[pianistclare]

I want to respond to this. My daughter was confirmed last year in the Archdioces of Altanta so I have first hand experience. The preparation for confirmation is absurd. 90% of it is a waste of time.

It is two years long! They do plays where they talk about St. Francis the monk confused and write long reports on their chosen saints and go to retreats where they stay up all night and overdose on pizza and candy. And the mothers go crazy, driving the kids here and there and organizing all kinds of events and making little gift baskets. All of it has very little to do with the sacrament itself.

When they are taught about the sacrament itself, it is didactic, dry and often just plain wrong. There is zero mystery. They fruits of the sacrament are taught but not how to manifest those fruits in the real world. They are taught the errors that Confirmation is a confirming of Baptism or that it is an initiation into Christian adulthood. No one teaches them to pray. They don’t open a Bible. No one takes them out evangelizing - teaches them how to speak out boldly in the name of Jesus without being afraid like St. Peter and St. Stephen after Pentecost. That is what confirmation is about.

It is really quite a waste of time - busy doing this and that - with little of the frenetic activity having anything to do with confirmation itself.

This is my personal opinion and my own experience. I know people work hard to prepare our kids. I am not denigrating them. I just see little of it having anything to do with the actual sacrament itself.

-Tim-

Sorry you had such a lousy experience. Did you step up and offer to teach?
I am a DRE and I can assure you that our instruction is dedicated, intense, and NOT two years. The Archdiocese of Atlanta requires students to be catechized for two years prior to reception of a Sacrament. You can’t just show up and expect to be admitted in the class if you are not practicing your faith or involved in religious education. The Sacramental prep itself is to be intense and singular. Meaning, a separate class outside of the regular catechism classes. We do 5 Saturdays.
Just completed our first session, and the morning was a review of all the Sacraments using the CCC and the Catholic Faith Handbook as reference books for each student. We reviewed what are the requirements for worthy reception of all the Sacraments. Who can administer them, do you know when our parish offers reconciliation. etc.? They had homework.
We reviewed what items, vessels, and Scripture passages are spoken when you receive a Sacrament. The afternoon was spent on Patron saints.
Individual DRE’s bend the rules to suit what they perceive the parents will tolerate.
We don’t. We go with the guidelines and stick to them, no exceptions. That’s why people “shop around” for a confirmation program. They seek one with fewer classes, a generic retreat, and something that fits their sports schedule. Our retreat includes Adoration, and the Pastor interviews each student prior to the date of Confirmation to make sure they are ready and their sponsors are properly vetted.
Sounds to me like parents should also ask a lot of questions of the DRE prior to enrolling their students. Our kids do have fun at times, but it’s not some big sleepover party.

As I said before…I think that is why the OP is worried about the change in some locales to the younger age. For years we have been saying Confirmation is a teen thing with lots of classes and now, it’s something for younger children. People tend to equate that with “my kid won’t know, understand, or value what’s happening.”
I had a woman who was never Baptized come by the office seeking Baptism because she thought maybe she ought to go ahead and “get it done.” When she found out that she would have to go through RCIA for a year, possibly two, she was enraged. “You people baptize babies! They don’t take classes, they have no clue what is going on. Why should I have to take classes, forget it.”
Unfortunately she didn’t allow me to explain the process, its theology or benefits.
Sometimes people view Sacraments as “rules we must comply with” or “cards that need to be punched”. It’s a struggle for priests and DRE’s to educate the WHOLE parish about what the Church’s obligation is to them. and what they need for nourishment and grace.
Again, I’m sorry you had such a bad experience. But I wish it was uniform across the U.S. One way or the other. Come up with a policy, stick to it, and educate ALL OF US so that we can serve the parishes better.

 

[maryjk]

It is really quite a waste of time - busy doing this and that - with little of the frenetic activity having anything to do with confirmation itself.

This is my personal opinion and my own experience. I know people work hard to prepare our kids. I am not denigrating them. I just see little of it having anything to do with the actual sacrament itself.

-Tim-

Ours was the same way.

Oh, and my son got two notes essentially saying, “Why aren’t you opening up with your classmates.”

My son’s response? “Because they gossip about everyone in the class, and I don’t want to be a topic. Thanks anyway.”

Sorry you had such a lousy experience. Did you step up and offer to teach?

Yes, I did. And I was already teaching another class. But I was willing to put forth the effort.

I was also told I couldn’t home school for the class. Even though I was already home schooling for the rest of his education. Which was kind of sad considering during the entire two years of class there was never a mention of “hell.” Confession was offered on their “retreat.” But there was no mention of going before receiving the Sacrament.

The “retreat” spent a lot of time for “ice breakers.” One consisted of the guys picking up the girls. No one could ever tell me how that prepared them in any way. (Other than showing them how to carry a bride over the threshold. And shouldn’t we be teaching respect and chastity? )

We regularly attended Mass, including daily Mass. My son was an altar server. We were very involved in Church and Parish life. It wasn’t as if we showed up and demanded Confirmation. We were certainly willing to do the work. But there wasn’t work. Just “happy, happy, joy, joy, Jesus loves me,” attitude.

Some programs are just bad. It isn’t because they don’t have volunteers. It isn’t because there aren’t good program materials. Sometimes the program is just bad.

 

[TimothyH]

Sorry you had such a lousy experience. Did you step up and offer to teach?
I am a DRE and I can assure you that our instruction is dedicated, intense, and NOT two years. The Archdiocese of Atlanta requires students to be catechized for two years prior to reception of a Sacrament. You can’t just show up and expect to be admitted in the class if you are not practicing your faith or involved in religious education. The Sacramental prep itself is to be intense and singular. Meaning, a separate class outside of the regular catechism classes. We do 5 Saturdays.
Just completed our first session, and the morning was a review of all the Sacraments using the CCC and the Catholic Faith Handbook as reference books for each student. We reviewed what are the requirements for worthy reception of all the Sacraments. Who can administer them, do you know when our parish offers reconciliation. etc.? They had homework.
We reviewed what items, vessels, and Scripture passages are spoken when you receive a Sacrament. The afternoon was spent on Patron saints.
Individual DRE’s bend the rules to suit what they perceive the parents will tolerate.
We don’t. We go with the guidelines and stick to them, no exceptions. That’s why people “shop around” for a confirmation program. They seek one with fewer classes, a generic retreat, and something that fits their sports schedule. Our retreat includes Adoration, and the Pastor interviews each student prior to the date of Confirmation to make sure they are ready and their sponsors are properly vetted.
Sounds to me like parents should also ask a lot of questions of the DRE prior to enrolling their students. Our kids do have fun at times, but it’s not some big sleepover party.

As I said before…I think that is why the OP is worried about the change in some locales to the younger age. For years we have been saying Confirmation is a teen thing with lots of classes and now, it’s something for younger children. People tend to equate that with “my kid won’t know, understand, or value what’s happening.”
I had a woman who was never Baptized come by the office seeking Baptism because she thought maybe she ought to go ahead and “get it done.” When she found out that she would have to go through RCIA for a year, possibly two, she was enraged. “You people baptize babies! They don’t take classes, they have no clue what is going on. Why should I have to take classes, forget it.”
Unfortunately she didn’t allow me to explain the process, its theology or benefits.
Sometimes people view Sacraments as “rules we must comply with” or “cards that need to be punched”. It’s a struggle for priests and DRE’s to educate the WHOLE parish about what the Church’s obligation is to them. and what they need for nourishment and grace.
Again, I’m sorry you had such a bad experience. But I wish it was uniform across the U.S. One way or the other. Come up with a policy, stick to it, and educate ALL OF US so that we can serve the parishes better.

Hi Clare.

Yes, I teach RCIA and Adult Faith Formation classes. I am a sacristan, altar server, reader and EMHC. I have hosted Bible Study in my home for five years. I was invited to diaconate inquiry a few years ago. My daughters were formed by the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia who run her school and teach them personally. I have also formed them myself, personally. Both of my children are altar servers who have served the Archbishop. They know what the vessels are because they handle them regularly. They know what the scriptures are because they study them regularly.

So… yeah.

I did not shop around for a confirmation program nor did I “just show up and expect to be admitted.” I have paid over $120,000 in Catholic School tuition and moved half-way across the country to a parish where the School is run by the Nashville Dominicans so that my daughters could be educated in the faith properly. Both of my children go to adoration and monthly confession.

No one is saying that confirmation is a teen thing nor is anyone saying that it is for younger children. The Church is simply reasserting that the proper order of the sacraments are baptism → confirmation → communion. Confirmation should proceed first communion. That is the proper order. Baptism brings someone into God’s family, confirmation strengthens and completes baptism and the Eucharist completes initiation. Bishop Aquila of Fargo ND restored the order of the sacraments and the Pope praised him for it. catholicnewsagency.com/news/bishop-aquila-receives-popes-praise-for-reordering-sacraments/

Given that infants are regularly confirmed in the Eastern Churches and that the same was done in the early Church, I see no reason why an eight year old cannot be formed for confirmation and first communion in one year. I sat through only ten classes for my confirmation as an adult.

It’s too much, that’s all.

-Tim-

 

[pianistclare]

Hi Clare.

Yes, I teach RCIA and Adult Faith Formation classes. I am a sacristan, altar server, reader and EMHC. I have hosted Bible Study in my home for five years. I was invited to diaconate inquiry a few years ago. My daughters were formed by the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia who run her school and teach them personally. I have also formed them myself, personally. Both of my children are altar servers who have served the Archbishop. They know what the vessels are because they handle them regularly. They know what the scriptures are because they study them regularly.

So… yeah.

I did not shop around for a confirmation program nor did I “just show up and expect to be admitted.” I have paid over $120,000 in Catholic School tuition and moved half-way across the country to a parish where the School is run by the Nashville Dominicans so that my daughters could be educated in the faith properly. Both of my children go to adoration and monthly confession.

No one is saying that confirmation is a teen thing nor is anyone saying that it is for younger children. The Church is simply reasserting that the proper order of the sacraments are baptism → confirmation → communion. Confirmation should proceed first communion. That is the proper order. Baptism brings someone into God’s family, confirmation strengthens and completes baptism and the Eucharist completes initiation. Bishop Aquila of Fargo ND restored the order of the sacraments and the Pope praised him for it. catholicnewsagency.com/news/bishop-aquila-receives-popes-praise-for-reordering-sacraments/

Given that infants are regularly confirmed in the Eastern Churches and that the same was done in the early Church, I see no reason why an eight year old cannot be formed for confirmation and first communion in one year. I sat through only ten classes for my confirmation as an adult.

It’s too much, that’s all.

-Tim-

Well I wish they would change it to the original order so all this would be moot.
I’m still surprised though that a parish with the Dominican Sisters would have a lousy Confirmation program. Was it at another parish? maybe
I think the whole problem of Confirmation “programs” began when we upped the age of reception. Or rather those who make these decisions upped the age in an attempt to keep the teens in catechism classes. Not a good reason, and the bottom line is, it flat doesn’t work.
I only see kids reluctantly returning to church in order to their card punched so to speak. It’s great for some, but for most…not real great at all.

If we need to fix it, why doesn’t the church just fix it? Everywhere. There’s little inconsistency with the other sacraments…why leave Confirmation as the only one that gets shifted around? I don’t get the reasoning.

 

[ProVobis]

I sat through only ten classes for my confirmation as an adult.

Respectfully, it seems as if you’re making a case for later confirmation, not earlier. Just saying.

 

[TimothyH]

Well I wish they would change it to the original order so all this would be moot.
I’m still surprised though that a parish with the Dominican Sisters would have a lousy Confirmation program. Was it at another parish? maybe
I think the whole problem of Confirmation “programs” began when we upped the age of reception. Or rather those who make these decisions upped the age in an attempt to keep the teens in catechism classes. Not a good reason, and the bottom line is, it flat doesn’t work.
I only see kids reluctantly returning to church in order to their card punched so to speak. It’s great for some, but for most…not real great at all.

If we need to fix it, why doesn’t the church just fix it? Everywhere. There’s little inconsistency with the other sacraments…why leave Confirmation as the only one that gets shifted around? I don’t get the reasoning.

The school is run by the Dominican Sisters from the St. Cecilia congregation in Nashville. The school is part of the parish but the parish is run by secular priests. The sisters have nothing to do with the parish in general except for their own reception of the sacraments.

The “Nashville Dominicans” are a teaching community, It is what they do. nashvilledominican.org/

[Beloved: The Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia](Beloved: The Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia) on youtube. Every woman in the video has a PhD or Masters in education.

I agree that the confirmation age doesn’t work in our modern society and am in favor if restoration of the order of the sacraments across the western Church.

-Tim-

 

[pianistclare]

The school is run by the Dominican Sisters from the St. Cecilia congregation in Nashville. The school is part of the parish but the parish is run by secular priests. The sisters have nothing to do with the parish in general except for their own reception of the sacraments.

The “Nashville Dominicans” are a teaching community, It is what they do. nashvilledominican.org/

[Beloved: The Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia](Beloved: The Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia) on youtube. Every woman in the video has a PhD or Masters in education.

I agree that the confirmation age doesn’t work in our modern society and am in favor if restoration of the order of the sacraments across the western Church.

-Tim-

Oh we’re well aware of the Sisters. We’re in the same Archdiocese!
Wish they were in ALL the schools…you’re blessed!

 

[TimothyH]

Respectfully, it seems as if you’re making a case for later confirmation, not earlier. Just saying.

My point is that for an engaged, practicing Catholic who has an active spiritual life, formation for the sacrament of confirmation does not have to be two years. No formation is needed at all for infants to receive confirmation as was done in the early Church.

I don’t see why two years of formation is required for a practicing teenager to be confirmed. I also do not see why children who are eight years old cannot be given adequate instruction for the both confirmation and first communion in the space of two years, or even one.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

Oh we’re well aware of the Sisters. We’re in the same Archdiocese!
Wish they were in ALL the schools…you’re blessed!

I thought so.

Expensive but worth it.



-Tim-

 

[Joe_5859]

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

My little girl has made her first confession, so our parish is following the revised reconciliation followed by confirmation, followed by communion pattern.

It does seem to be just me who feels that having confirmation and First Holy Communion on the same day would somehow result in her experience of confirmation being overshadowed by communion. And so, she would have less of a regard for the 2 sacraments.

I wasn’t aware that the 2 sacraments were done at the same time in other churches.

I think I may also need to read up a bit on the sacraments themselves, as (after reading this thread) I probably don’t have enough understanding of eg. confirmation as I should have!

I only skimmed the other replies, so sorry if I am repeating things.

You can certainly take up any qualms you may feel with your priest. Perhaps he may put your mind at ease.

If this is the way it is going to be, I would just encourage you to look at it positively. It’s not just about having a wonderful experience of the sacraments on that day. That is just the beginning of a new phase of our Christian life. And all the beauty of both sacraments ought to unfold more and more for the rest of our lives.

When you think about it, we baptize babies who have no understanding of what is taking place. That understanding comes later. Certainly, we want to do the best we can to prepare our children. But the grace is still received. And we can never cease exploring the depths of it.

 

[pianistclare]

QUOTE=TimothyH;11602524]I thought so.

Expensive but worth it.



-Tim-

:clapping: