MERGED: Confirmation before First Communion?/Restoration of Order

[Sophronius]

I am not advocating infant communion or even infant confirmation as with the Byzantines. But rather, the flow should be preserved. That after a few years, the child should be confirmed, and then after that, and only after that, at 8 or 10 or 12 years (Or whatever age), they can receive Holy Communion.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The point though is why would the Catholic Church want to administer Confirmation to a person in mortal sin–even knowing that LATER the effects of it would be revived?

Wouldn’t the remembrance of the sacrament of Confirmation be a much greater comfort later in life if the child distinctly remembered it because at the time it was given they were in a state of grace and received the graces of confirmation THEN?

If it were up to me–and it isn’t–and I back whatever the Catholic Church chooses to do–the order would be infant Baptism–first confession at age seven–then Confession followed by Confirmation at age 10 or fourth grade-- and finally Eucharist at the end of eight grade.

Why confirmation at age 10 or fourth grade? Because for the vast majority of kids that is the last age that is pre-puberty. Many kids start acting out and sinning with puberty and they would come through that much better if they already had Confirmation.

Some might argue that it would be wrong to deny Eucharist until eight grade. I can understand that sentiment.

I believe that many bishops oppose confirmation until eight grade because they don’t want Catholic kids abandoning Catholic school and they dangle the carrot of Confirmation until the end of eight grade so that they will keep going.

Would it be wrong to delay Eucharist until the end of eight grade?

Even if that would be wrong I DO believe that Confirmation should take place at the end of fourth grade or age 10 at the latest because children NEED the SEAL given by the Holy Spirit that comes with Confirmation and the ability to be christian soldiers against the devil.

Why?

How many times have you heard of pregnancy as young as age 10 or of middle school age children doing drugs?

I think that is why Confirmation needs to be moved up.

I don’t know if delaying Eucharist until the end of eight grade would be right or wrong?

Maybe Eucharist and confession should both take place at age 10 regardless of trying to keep Catholic kids in Catholic school at least until the end of the eight grade?

 

[Cider]

**The term “restoration” means to put it back the way it was originally, normal, or unimpaired. So I do not think restoration, with regards to timing, would be the correct terminology. ** St Pius X, in his encyclical QUAM SINGULARI ( papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10quam.htm ), is very clear that in establishing the age of reason at 7 to be the correct age for first communion was itself a restoration.

After describing the ancient Church practice of very early reception of communion in the encyclical, he refers to the definition by the Council of Trent and the misapplication of it:

So let us not think that the restoration of the order of the sacraments of initiation has anything to do with the timing of first communion. It was never a problem in the past.

The sacraments should be restored. Our parish did it for a while, until the Bishop standardized the age of 8th grade a couple of years ago. I was quite disappointed. When our parish started confirming kids in the second grade, it caused a little uproar. Even devout and knowledgable Catholics did not recogonize it as a good thing. Quite disappointing, as my immediate reaction when it was implemented was to compliment the pastor (who expected me to complain, as he had been hearing so many other complaints).

We need to have faith in the efficacy of the sacraments. Everytime I see or hear about a teenager who has lost the faith, I wonder if several more years of being strengthened by the Holy Spirit with the graces of confirmation could have prevented it.

Well originally all three were given in infancy or whenever one was received into the Church, so I don’t see how the timing isn’t part of proper restoration of the sacraments. I agree that that Trent’s changes were a misapplication. The east has maintained the practice of all three sacraments of initiation at birth ( or reception into the Church) and kids receive all along but start going to confession when they reach the age of reason, which makes much more sense to me.

 

[Cider]

I think the EASTERN churches have the right idea. Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist all at one time. Why did the Western church get away from this? I’m told that this was done in the whole church many centuries ago.

Look at Trent, that is when the timing of the sacraments was officially changed in the west. It’s a discipline so it can be changed back. The fact that the argument is made using “age of reason” shows influence from the reformation to me. Age of reason is not the oldest tradition of the Church, except as it applies to confession. The west has moved confession to be tied with first communion which is also a change.