Help! Confirmation Class full of unvbelievers!

[Philthy]

yes it is part of the rite for Confirmation
the pastor stands up and affirms this

practically, the pastor either conducts interviews himself with the candidates, or delegates that to the coordinator and catechists. He most definitely has personal interviews with those candidates who have issues either in moral conduct of their lives (a boy gets a girl pregnant or is arrested for instance), or in their belief, by expressing they don’t accept the teachings and don’t feel ready.

I repeat ad nauseum however only the pastor can decide which souls under his care are candidates for sacraments at this time, the DRE, coordinator, catechist, sponsor and parents can give their (name removed by moderator)ut but may not make that decision…
It’s great to know that “only the pastor can decide which souls under his care are candidates” for Confirmation. The problem is that the facts seem to suggest that the decision process being used is suspect, and simply alleging that since the pastor has the responsibility of deciding that we should ignore all experience which calls into question the validity of this procedural fact does little to mitigate the concern that pastors are not taking this responsibility seriously.

I am compelled to point out that OP is giving a general rant against an unspecified number of students of unspecified age following unspecified words or actions on their part.

I am likewise compelled to point out that many children receiving sacraments come from homes where neither parent practices their faith, where they receive a Sacrament and disappear from the parish only to reappear when they "need " another Sacrament. It’s so rampant that the OP didn’t bother to go into all these details that are painfully obvious to those who help out in CCD and RCIA. Let me relate a non-rant for you. I watched in dismay this fall during the Confirmation Mass as one of the candidates quickly gestured to her companion on how she was supposed to receive Holy Communion. She didn’t know. One can only assume she had not received Communion in a very long time - like not since she made her first Holy Communion.
Let us pray

please, please, please Holy Spirit move the Catholic Church in the USA (or at least this diocese) to adopt the restored order for the sacraments of initiation, following the RCIA model as all catechetical documents recommend, and please do it before these teens and their parents drive me nuts

On this - where you seem to acknowledge that there is a problem that needs attention - we can agree.

Blessings!

 

[brb3]

I’m not sure what you are saying - what “tenets-standards” are you referring to?? Those articulated by the Church or those of your own making?

The Catholic Encyclopedia gives the full details … under the topic Confirmation.

But, specifically, in regards to what Mike is up against … scripture deals with the matter … and the Church accepts this passage in Acts as PRIMO ‘tenent/standard’ evidence for Catholic’s need for Confirmation & why it is administered by Bishops only.

Acts 8:14-24 //// Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter & John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit; for IT HAD NOT YET FALLEN ON ANY OF THEM, but they had ONLY BEEN BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS. Then they laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles hands, he offered them money, saying “Give me also this power, that any one on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” But Peter said to him “Your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money ! You have neither PART NOR LOT IN THIS MATTER, FOR YOUR HEART IS NOT RIGHT BEFORE GOD. Repent and pray to the Lord that, if possible, THE INTENT OF YOUR HEART MANY BE FORGIVEN YOU. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity.” And Simon answered, “Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said many come upon me.”

Now, Simon had previously believed and been Baptized … yet the Apostles Peter & John [the Church Bishops] … would not allow him Confirmation, given his Mortal sin and unrepentant state.

 

[brb3]

Are you saying that the Bishop should and will refuse confirmation of these un-believing teens because they are in mortal sin and unrepentant??

The Council of Laodicea [363-364 AD] dealt with the issue of those who had been converted from heretical beliefs and were entering the Church.

“Those who have been converted from the heresies … are not to be received before they anathematize every heresy … and then AFTER THAT, THOSE WHO WERE CALLED FAITHFUL AMONG THEM, HAVING LEARNED THE CREEDS OF THE FAITH, and having been anointed with the holy chrism [Confirmed], shall so communicate of the holy mystery”

Can only a Bishop confirm ? … NO. In the early Church, priests performed Confirmation on regular basis … due to lack of sufficient # of Bishops.

St. Thomas Aquinus, studied this matter and agreed priests can validly Confirm candidates … in cases of need, and when either the Pope or a Bishop allows a priest to do so.

Even Protestant pastors can validly confirm a Baptized believer … but, this is controversial topic for Catholics … for obvious reasons. Nevertheless, God in his mercy, allows Graces to flow within Protestantism … and Protestants are confirmed in the Holy Spirit via prayer and laying on of hands … even when they don’t call or recongnize it as a Sacrament.

The Key matter is that Christ can/does confirm Protestants when they seek the H.S. … and of no fault of their own [ignorance] don’t know its roots/origins are instituted in Catholicism. The Catholic Church admits that it’s Christ who annoints the believer/receipient with the Holy Spirit, when they are validly Baptized, Fully Confessed, and desirous to be sanctified by Christ into discipleship. And when Protestant church Elder [or Pastor] hands are placed on the one to receive enlightenment, and receipt of H.S. is prayed for … God does not withhold his grace from someone who desires spiritual rebirth, and has been validly baptized. Whereever two or three are gathered in His name … He is there.

 

[Miriam1947]

I’m home and I found the book I mentioned earlier. It’s called BECAUSE GOD IS REAL by Peter J. Kreeft. He actually wrote it with confirmands in mind and it’s very good. Of course if you can find anything via a DVD version of this kids respond to that better than lecture. (I know, I’m a teacher) But…this is your mission field and you will need some prayer warriors backing you up. I will pray but get a whole group praying for you because it truely IS a battle.

My love in Him,
mlz

Soon to be Catholic!!! Welcome home.

 

[brb3]

So…again…trying to clarify your words here:

Are you saying the kids are ignorant when they say they don’t believe in God, so therefore, they should be confirmed anyway?

Or are you saying the kids are not honestly desiring “rebirth” --even tho they have been informed–so the priest/bishop should deny them?

IMO … only Mike and his Pastor can determine that. How can you/I … at long-distance know the full facts ?

But, the scriptures teach that if our hearts aren’t right, if we haven’t contrition for our errs, God does not truely Baptize or Confirm us. Our Baptisms and Confirmations are our APPEAL to God for a new heart, and for receipt of his Holy Spirit. [Peter speaks to this matter in regards to Baptism, in scripture].

So, in order to receive an EFFICACIOUS baptism or confirmation … our hearts must be right before God. Christ is the ultimate administrator of his 7 Sacraments. He along can dispense to us his true graces relating to these sacraments.

 

[Michaeljc4]

I am a teacher who works with kids around this age (in a public school). One thing I can tell you is that–whether we like it or not–kids respond to video images. There are numerous videos out there that would be of tremendous assistance to you in showing children what people do who believe in God.

For example, I saw a short news video about a man in India who gave up everything he owned to dedicate his life to feeding the poor. It was incredibly moving, and the man’s reason? His belief that God wanted him to live in this way. You can see my point: show them something contemporary and moving that points toward how those who believe in God behave, then ask them why they are moved. You will be amazed how well they will respond.

There may be young adults who can read Aquinas and Augustine and wrestle with their ideas. Most cannot. Meet these kids where they are–in a media saturated culture–and begin there.

Good luck.

 

[1ke]

Even Protestant pastors can validly confirm a Baptized believer … but, this is controversial topic for Catholics …

No, it is not “controversial” it is simply UNTRUE.

 

[mpartyka]

But, the scriptures teach that if our hearts aren’t right, if we haven’t contrition for our errs, God does not truely Baptize or Confirm us.

I was under the impression that a Sacrament is considered legitimate so long as the proper form is followed, only that its effects do not necessarily “activate” unless the person is properly disposed to enjoy them. So a priest could Baptize and Confirm someone who conceals hardcore atheist beliefs, and that Baptism and Confirmation would be considered valid and unrepeatable, and all that the atheist would have to do Sacramentally after true conversion of the heart is go to Confession.

 

[brb3]

No, it is not “controversial” it is simply UNTRUE.

So, you would say they ‘invalidly’ confirm the H.S. upon the Protestant Baptized ?

 

[brb3]

So a priest could Baptize and Confirm someone who conceals hardcore atheist beliefs, and that Baptism and Confirmation would be considered valid and unrepeatable, and all that the atheist would have to do Sacramentally after true conversion of the heart is go to Confession.

Perhaps …

I would think that if someone received either Sacrament w/o the proper dispositions/intentions … they should later confess thereof to a Priest. But, if either Sacrament was not initially efficacious, since they cannot receive them a second time … the Priest would need to Absolve them of their sins,… and probably petition the Bishop to personally perform a valid sacrament upon them.

Probably the Bishop would defer this connundrum all the way to the Pope … and let Papa make the call.

I’m sure Priests have gotten this confession on occasion … and somewhere in the Vatican literature it has been discussed.

 

[Joe_5859]

So, you would say they ‘invalidly’ confirm the H.S. upon the Protestant Baptized ?

The bishop is the ordinary minister of the Sacrament of Confirmation. He can delegate this power to a priest (as happens on the Easter Vigil in most places).

But anyone who is not a priest is simply incapable of confirming. They might follow a similar ceremony or even call it the same thing, but it would not be the Sacrament of Confirmation and it would not impart an indellible mark on the recipient’s soul.

 

[mpartyka]

Here are the sections of the CCC regarding the ministers of Baptism and Confirmation:

1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize, by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.

1313 …the ordinary minister of Confirmation is the bishop. If the need arises, the bishop may grant the faculty of administering Confirmation to priests, although it is fitting that he confer it himself, mindful that the celebration of Confirmation has been temporally separated from Baptism for this reason. Bishops are the successors of the apostles. They have received the fullness of the sacrament of Holy Orders. The administration of this sacrament by them demonstrates clearly that its effect is to unite those who receive it more closely to the Church, to her apostolic origins, and to her mission of bearing witness to Christ.

1314 If a Christian is in danger of death, any priest can give him Confirmation. Indeed the Church desires that none of her children, even the youngest, should depart this world without having been perfected by the Holy Spirit with the gift of Christ’s fullness.

But, if either Sacrament was not initially efficacious, since they cannot receive them a second time … the Priest would need to Absolve them of their sins,… and probably petition the Bishop to personally perform a valid sacrament upon them.

I don’t think this represents a correct understanding of how Sacraments “work.” For example, when infants are baptized, it is not the dispositions of the infants that make the Sacrament of Baptism efficacious. Rather, it is the form of the Baptism that has its effect on the infant no matter what. And what is true for infants is equally true for adults – if an adult is validly baptized, that baptism is efficacious even if the baptized person is an unbeliever who willfully persists in unbelief before, during, and after the baptism. Sacraments are efficacious in and of themselves. (Someone please correct me if I’m wrong on this.)

As for the unbeliever who willfully persists in unbelief before, during, and after the baptism, I surmise that while the Baptism momentarily cleanses the unbeliever of all sin original and actual and places the unbeliever in a state of grace, the unbeliever’s persistence in unbelief immediately puts the unbeliever back in a state of mortal sin.

And I would think this applies to Confirmation, too, except I see in the Catechism that “To receive Confirmation one must be in a state of grace.” (1310) The usual way of making sure the candidate is in a state of grace is to have the candidate undergo Confession immediately prior to Confirmation, but this does raise the question of what would happen if a candidate were to undergo Confession, then suddenly the fire alarm in the church goes off, during the confusion of which time the candidate were to commit a mortal sin, and then the candidate were to undergo Confirmation – what then? I suppose the candidate would have to Confess if he/she expected to be saved, and then the priest would have to recognize that the candidate’s Confirmation was invalid and schedule a new one for him/her?

 

[1ke]

So, you would say they ‘invalidly’ confirm the H.S. upon the Protestant Baptized ?

Only true particular Churches, those with valid Holy Orders, can confer the Sacrament of Confirmation. It requires one with episcopal holy orders-- a valid bishop-- or the permisison of faculties for a priest under that bishop. Again, holy orders required.

An ecclesial community without valid holy orders may have something called confirmation (for example Episcopalians, Lutherans, etc), but it is **not **the sacrament of confirmation.

 

[1ke]

And I would think this applies to Confirmation, too, except I see in the Catechism that “To receive Confirmation one must be in a state of grace.” (1310) The usual way of making sure the candidate is in a state of grace is to have the candidate undergo Confession immediately prior to Confirmation, but this does raise the question of what would happen if a candidate were to undergo Confession, then suddenly the fire alarm in the church goes off, during the confusion of which time the candidate were to commit a mortal sin, and then the candidate were to undergo Confirmation – what then? I suppose the candidate would have to Confess if he/she expected to be saved, and then the priest would have to recognize that the candidate’s Confirmation was invalid and schedule a new one for him/her?

The sacrament is still valid. Remember it is the bishop who does the confirming. Valid matter, valid form, valid sacrament.

The graces are not received until one is back in a state of grace through Confession.

 

[1ke]

I was under the impression that a Sacrament is considered legitimate so long as the proper form is followed, only that its effects do not necessarily “activate” unless the person is properly disposed to enjoy them. So a priest could Baptize and Confirm someone who conceals hardcore atheist beliefs, and that Baptism and Confirmation would be considered valid and unrepeatable, and all that the atheist would have to do Sacramentally after true conversion of the heart is go to Confession.

*Can. 889 §1. Every baptized person not yet confirmed and only such a person is capable of receiving confirmation.

§2. To receive confirmation licitly outside the danger of death requires that a person who has the use of reason be suitably instructed, properly disposed, and able to renew the baptismal promises.*

If a person presents themselves to the bishop for confirmation and renews their baptismal promises (Q&A form of the Creed during the Rite) then their outward actions are considered to demonstrate their intention to receive the sacrament.

Disposition goes to licity, not validity.

 

[puzzleannie]

The Now, Simon had previously believed and been Baptized … yet the Apostles Peter & John [the Church Bishops] … would not allow him Confirmation, given his Mortal sin and unrepentant state.

and Peter was the bishop, not the DRE, catechist, sponsor, parent, or parish secretary.
I wish we stop saying “they” when talking about some teens in some confirmation classes who in the judgment of some catechists are not “ready” for the sacrament. There is no “they” there are individual candidates in individual situations, in individual places in their faith formation, with individual needs and individual challenges militating against their practice of and growth in the faith.

 

[brb3]

Only true particular Churches, those with valid Holy Orders, can confer the Sacrament of Confirmation. It requires one with episcopal holy orders-- a valid bishop-- or the permisison of faculties for a priest under that bishop. Again, holy orders required.

An ecclesial community without valid holy orders may have something called confirmation (for example Episcopalians, Lutherans, etc), but it is **not **the sacrament of confirmation.

1ke —

In the Catholic Church … yes.

But, outside the Catholic church … there is also a confirmation equivalent. Now, I termed it valid … you say ‘invalid’. Perhaps I should rephrase my description of it … and just say it is efficacious. For it conveys the same HolySpirit that Catholic Confirmation does. One sacramental, one non-sacramental … yet both are efficacious. Ask any of the thousands of Protestants who have come into the Catholic Church about this matter. Ask them if they had not been previously enlightened, fortified, sealed, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit … prior to their receiving the Sacramental Catholic Confirmation. Indeed, it was this prior enlightenment …that led them to the original Univeral Church of the Apostles.

Perhaps 15-20 % of CAF contributors have backgrounds with Protestant beginnings. We all gladly accepted our Catholic Sacramental Confirmations. But, it only added additional graces to our Protestant H.S. enlightenment.

Scott Hahn could answer you very well on this matter … he being a Presbyterian minister. Same goes for Marcus Grodi, etc, etc, etc.

And, Tim Tebow … still a Protestant Evangelical, but clearly confirmed by H.S. in his Christian faith. Christ takes care [guides] the sincere, true-seeking Protestants, … who thru no fault of their own, found their initial beginnings in Protestant churches.

But, back on topic … it’s our ‘cradle’ Catholics that we are concerned for in this thread

 

[1ke]

1ke —

In the Catholic Church … yes.

But, outside the Catholic church … there is also a confirmation equivalent. Now, I termed it valid … you say ‘invalid’. Perhaps I should rephrase my description of it … and just say it is efficacious. For it conveys the same HolySpirit that Catholic Confirmation does. One sacramental, one non-sacramental … yet both are efficacious. Ask any of the thousands of Protestants who have come into the Catholic Church about this matter. Ask them if they had not been previously enlightened, fortified, sealed, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit … prior to their receiving the Sacramental Catholic Confirmation. Indeed, it was this prior enlightenment …that led them to the original Univeral Church of the Apostles.

Perhaps 15-20 % of CAF contributors have backgrounds with Protestant beginnings. We all gladly accepted our Catholic Sacramental Confirmations. But, it only added additional graces to our Protestant H.S. enlightenment.

Scott Hahn could answer you very well on this matter … he being a Presbyterian minister. Same goes for Marcus Grodi, etc, etc, etc.

And, Tim Tebow … still a Protestant Evangelical, but clearly confirmed by H.S. in his Christian faith. Christ takes care [guides] the sincere, true-seeking Protestants, … who thru no fault of their own, found their initial beginnings in Protestant churches.

But, back on topic … it’s our ‘cradle’ Catholics that we are concerned for in this thread

We receive the Holy Spirit at baptism.

Non Catholic ecclesial communities do not have the sacrament of Confirmation.

 

[brb3]

We receive the Holy Spirit at baptism.

Non Catholic ecclesial communities do not have the sacrament of Confirmation.

Yes, but not fully at Baptism … or else we would not need Confirmation.

We both know that the RCC desires to wait til the age of accountability, at least age 7, to SEAL the baptized ‘cradle’ Catholics with the Holy Spirit. We wish them to demonstrate FAITH and REASON in the matter. And, consider this. Anyone, even a Protestant or a heathen, could validly baptize a Catholic Convert … if the proper Trinitarian formula were used.

Now, if we Catholics did as the Easter Church, and had Confirmation at the same time … it would not be valid for that laity Protestant, or a heathen, to administer the Sacrament, via laying on of hands, &/or oil. The RCC has good reason to temporally separate the Sacraments, … vis-a-vis the way the Eastern Church tradition does it.

Nevertheless, most Non-Catholic Christian churches wait til the age of accountability to both Baptize and Confirm their converts in the Holy Spirit. While they lack ministers ordained by Catholic priesthood, they do call upon our High Priest Christ to perform the washing & annointing for them … which He DOES !!!

Pray for Ecumenism Brother 1ke … we need to reverse the heresy our Catholic priest Luther started. :grouphug:

 

[1ke]

Yes, but not fully at Baptism … or else we would not need Confirmation.

Correct. Which you do not receive unless a validly ordained bishop or priest lays hands on you.

We both know that the RCC desires to wait til the age of accountability, at least age 7, to SEAL the baptized ‘cradle’ Catholics with the Holy Spirit. We wish them to demonstrate FAITH and REASON in the matter.

Latin Rite only. All the other Rites and the Orthodox chrismate infants.

And, consider this. Anyone, even a Protestant or a heathen, could validly baptize a Catholic Convert … if the proper Trinitarian formula were used.

No one has said otherwise. They certainly can baptize.

They certainly cannot confirm.

Now, if we Catholics did as the Easter Church, and had Confirmation at the same time … it would not be valid for that laity Protestant, or a heathen, to administer the Sacrament, via laying on of hands, &/or oil. The RCC has good reason to temporally separate the Sacraments, … vis-a-vis the way the Eastern Church tradition does it.

Nevertheless, most Non-Catholic Christian churches wait til the age of accountability to both Baptize and Confirm their converts in the Holy Spirit. While they lack ministers ordained by Catholic priesthood, they do call upon our High Priest Christ to perform the washing & annointing for them … which He DOES !!!

Nope. this is NOT compatible in any way with Catholic teaching on the sacrament of Confirmation.

Those without Holy Orders do not have valid confirmation. Period. Non-Catholics from such ecclesial communities simply do not receive this sacrament unless and until they come into communion with a Church with valid Orders.

Pray for Ecumenism Brother 1ke … we need to reverse the heresy our Catholic priest Luther started. :grouphug:

I am not a “he”.