H
Holly3278
Guest
Hey everyone. If a person was Confirmed in a state of mortal sin, do they need to be Confirmed again?
If one was Confirmed in a state of Mortal Sin do they need to be Confirmed again?
- Status
J
James_Miller
Guest
No the confirmation was valid but this needs to be confessed. I don’t understand why someone would not prepare for confirmation spiritually and be prepared.
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
Think about the age of the person, family and social expectations… I’m sure you will realize that there may not be any choice but to just get it over with in some cases. Or, get kicked out of your home, or treated like a person with black death.
You live in India. I’m guessing you already are aware of religious pressures to confrom.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
the sacrament is valid, but the graces of the sacrament and its effects will not be available until the person confesses and is absolved in sacramental confession and returns to the state of sanctifying grace.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
You cannot know if you are in a state of mortal sin (you can be *pretty *sure, but you cannot actually *know *- only God knows for sure).
Is this the teaching of the Church? Consider Eucharist - if we recieve while in a state of mortal sin, we eat and drink damnation upon ourselves (1Cor 11:29). For this reason, Catholics are advised not to receive Eucharist if they think they may be in a state of mortal sin. That’s because mortal sin kills the soul, and renders us incapable of receiving the Grace of the Eucharist (and our participation is a mockery). We are not free to receive Eucharist, and later confess our sin, and thus have our (sinful and destructive) reception imputed to us as Grace.
Is Confirmation somehow different? Can a person who is not in a state of Grace validly receive ANY Sacrament? (besides Baptism, of course.) My understanding is that it is not possible. You must be in a state of Grace to receive Grace. You can’t receive “conditional Grace” which awaits your next Confession to become “actual” Grace.
Does Church teaching contradict my understanding?
M
MtnDwellar
Guest
Interesting question and interesting responses:
I found the following in the Catholic Encyclopedia:
"They should also be in the state of grace; for the Holy Ghost is not given for the purpose of taking away sin but of conferring additional grace. This condition, however, refers only to lawful reception; the sacrament is validly received even by those in mortal sin. "
So, it is valid but not lawful.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (#1310):
Thus, according to the plain reading of the Catechism, a person who is in a state of mortal sin does NOT receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, and thus must undergo the rite again while properly disposed to accept the Grace of the Sacrament.
The Catechism does not mention any sort of deferred or conditional Grace for those who are not in a state of Grace upon reception.
Thus, according to the plain reading of the Catechism, a person who is in a state of mortal sin does NOT receive the Sacrament of Confirmation, and thus must undergo the rite again while properly disposed to accept the Grace of the Sacrament.
S
Spirithound
Guest
They are different and similar in a couple ways. First, Confirmation and Eucharist are the same in that they give us the opportunity to receive grace from God. However, think of grace as a stream. If you put a faulty net into a stream, you won’t be able to catch anything. If you later fix that net and put it back into the stream, you will then catch fish, but they won’t be the same fish that you missed out on earlier.
On the other hand, Confirmation is different from Eucharist according the very nature of these sacraments. Confirmation makes an indelible mark on the soul, and cannot be repeated. Eucharist does not impart an indelible mark on the soul, but rather lasts about 15 minutes, and may be received many times. So, using the symbol of the stream, we see that if either sacrament is received in mortal sin, grace is indeed missed out on. It is simply the very nature of the sacrament of Confirmation that it cannot be repeated.
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Understood. But the question regards the sacramental validity of the recipient (one of the five criteria for any valid Sacrament). If the recipient is not valid, the Sacrament is not valid (and makes no mark on the soul whatsoever).
The OP asked if a person who was in a state of mortal sin was a valid recipient in the first place. I quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which says such a person is not a valid recipient, and thus the Sacrament of Confirmation could not possibly be bestowed upon such a person.
puzzleAnnie claimed that the Sacrament was valid, but the Grace was deferred until such time as the recipient had received absolution. While there may be some merit to this regarding Matrimony, I do not believe this is consistent with Church teaching regarding Confirmation (and the Catechism seems to agree with me).
I believe that a candidate for Confirmation who is in a state of mortal sin cannot actually receive the Sacrament. I believe that CCC 1310 confirms my belief. The phrase “must be in a state of Grace” does not allow much room for alternate interpretation.
H
Holly3278
Guest
Thanks everyone. 
L
Little_One0307
Guest
If I may quote Canon 845 and accompanying paragraphs to maybe shed some light one this. This is found in the Code of Canon Law
Canon 845 - Paragrapgh 1. The sacraments of baptism, confimation, and orders cannot be repeated since they imprint a character.
Paragraph 2 - If, after diligent investigation, there is still a prudent doubt whether these sacraments mentioned in paragraph 1 have been truly or validly conferred, they are to be conferred CONDITIONALLY.
The same principles as Canon 869 would apply here as well. I again quote.
Canon 869 - Paragraph 1 - If there is a doubt whether one has been baptized or whether baptism was validly conferred and the doubt remains after serious intvestigation, baptism is to be conferred conditionally.
Paragraph 3 - If the conferral or the validlity of the baptism in the cases mentioned in Paragraphs 1 and 2 remains doubtful, baptism is not to be conferred until the doctrine of the sacrament of baptism is explained to the person, if an adult, and the reasons for the doubtful validity of the baptism have been explained to the adult recipient or, in the case of an infant, to the parents.
Yes David you are correct. We cannot receive any of the Sacraments in a state of non-grace.
S
Spirithound
Guest
Thank you, I understand your objection to my view now. I cannot find a canon law or catechism article that contradicts you, but a Q&A from EWTN does not share your view. ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=385195&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=
It seems to me that the Church itself does not operate on your understanding. I have never heard of someone being conditionally Confirmed, or Confirmed absolutely due to their first attempt at the sacrament being done in a state of mortal sin. Also, this would cause so much confusion about who had really received it, not to mention some scrupulous people would refuse to believe that they could ever receive it. Couldn’t this come under the principle of ex opere operato?
L
Little_One0307
Guest
Hi,
Of course you do not hear of one being confirmed conditionally. When one is baptized or confirmed conditionally it is not done in a public Mass, it is done privately. But this does happen but it is rare.
Little One0307
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
Indeed, Fr. Robert J. Levis seems to support the idea of deferred Grace. However, Father’s opinions are less authoritative than the Catechism (though neither represent infallible doctrine).
When I was RCIA director, it was customary for the Elect to receive the Sacrament of Penance (which would include a lifetime confession) on Holy Saturday afternoon (they would be received and Confirmed the next morning). Being lifetime confessions, the priest usually allocated a half-hour for each of them. Given so little time between their Confession and their Confirmation, they were assumed to be in a state of Grace. So it seems the Church DOES operate on my understanding - otherwise the Confessions could be held a week or two in advance. Instead, they are held as close as practical to the rite of Confirmation.
I agree that I have never heard of a conditional Confirmation. I think the need for such would be rare, due to the proximity of the Confession. But, if deemed necessary, I am sure it would be handled in a private manner, to avoid public disgrace of the recipient.
And it’s not “my understanding.” It’s the plain wording of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Well, the doctrine of the Church is not guaranteed not to confuse anybody. Especially people who are already confused in the first place.
No - the issue is the Sacramental validity of the recipient, not the minister.
S
Spirithound
Guest
I just found this Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
269 says “To receive Confirmation efficaciously, the candidate must be in the state of grace.”
vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html
P
puzzleannie
Guest
OP did not ask about Eucharist, she asked about Confirmation, a sacrament of intiation, which like Baptism, can be received only once. Its validity depends on the action of the minister, not on the disposition of the candidate. Yes Confirmation is different. The sacrament is conferred validly because the minister acted properly, but its graces and effects are not available to the candidate until he returns to the state of sanctifying grace through sacramental confession and absolution.
no the CCC does not state this. in any case, your reference should be canon law.
what is this penchant on CAF for placing burdens on people heavier than what the Church herself imposes?
D
DavidFilmer
Guest
But Canon Law does not clearly define the Sacramental eligibility of the recipient (except to say that the recipient should be “properly disposed” to receive the Sacrament - and I could effectively argue that a person who is in a state of mortal sin is not “properly disposed” to receive Confirmation).
However, the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly states that the recipient of Confirmation “must be in a state of grace.” There is no basis in Canon Law, or the Catechism, or in any doctrine that I am aware of which allows for the possibility of deferred Grace with regard to the Sacrament of Confirmation, as you alluded to. We cannot simply invent doctrine which is convenient or agreeable to the OP.
What burden is this, exactly? Is it the burden of approaching a priest and disclosing that one might have undergone a Sacramental rite under false pretenses? And thus has maybe not actually received the Grace of this rite?
Is this a “burden” or a “gift?” If a brother or sister were ignorant of the invalid state of his/her own Confirmation, would you prefer he/she remain blissfully ignorant of the fact that they have not received this Grace, and thus never have the opportunity to correct this mistake?
Of course, this dilemma (potentially) applies only to those who were previously Baptized in some protestant faith. For those who enter the Church unbaptized, they are Baptized and then very quickly confirmed. Their Baptism erases all sin. It is difficult to imagine that they could fall into mortal sin in the meantime (though, of course, it is possible).
puzzleannie - you and I have both been here for a long time (you joined two months before I did). I have never disagreed with anything you have said, as far as I can recall. But I think you are absolutely wrong on this point. I have cited the CCC (which is authoritative but not infallible). Can you cite *anything * - anything at all - that supports your position?
B
Brooklyn
Guest
Well, the Compendium does use the word “efficaciously”, which means to have the desired effect. It does not say confirmation is not valid. Also, this passage also says: “Only those already baptized can and should receive this sacrament which can be received only once.” So it would seem that even though illicit, if received in a state of mortal sin, it is not invalid. But it would certainly have to be confessed that one was confirmed while in a state of mortal sin.
Since most are confirmed in Mass, it would mean you must not receive communion in that Mass.
W
Windmill
Guest
Let’s not be Janesnists, here. The Catechism does not say that the validity of the sacrament is affected. You are reading way too much into this. The sacrament cannot be repeated because it imprints an indelible mark on the soul. If you were in doubt about your state of grace, you would be constantly worrying that your confirmation was invalid, so you’d repeat it conditionally. But even then, how do you KNOW you are in a state of grace. Maybe you were deluding yourself in the confessional and you weren’t REALLY forgiven. No one KNOWS for certain, so they would be perpetually in doubt about the CERTAINTY of their confirmation (or ordination, or marriage, etc…).
Do you see where this leads: perpetual doubt.
In Fr. Heribert Jone’s classic Catholic moral theology textbook (which, incidentally, many of the SSPX priests keep in confessionals because it is the traditional “pocket” standard for evaluating Catholic morality), he clearly states:
Do you see where this leads: perpetual doubt.
In Fr. Heribert Jone’s classic Catholic moral theology textbook (which, incidentally, many of the SSPX priests keep in confessionals because it is the traditional “pocket” standard for evaluating Catholic morality), he clearly states:
W
Windmill
Guest
- Status