MERGED: Must go on a retreat to be confirmed?

[benedictgal]

A couple of thoughts…

1.) *“I don’t want to” *is never a good enough reason to not do something. Even Jesus, in the garden, asked that He not have to drink the cup. He then said to his Father, *"***Your ****will be done."

2.) OP- have you talked with your sponsor, parents,or your Priest about this? If not, I humbly suggest that you do so, in a respectful manner, and not with the attitude *“I don’t want to do this and you are not gonna make me.” *

3.) I find it very odd that there are people here who are actually advocating disobedience to a Bishop (if indeed the is is a “Bishop’s mandate”. It seems to me that it has not been proven, as we only have the words of someone who doesn’t want to do something) While I question the necessity of a “confirmation retreat” as an absolute requirement, I do see the value of a retreat. In my experience, most people who are dead-set against them are the ones who usually get the most out of them (God is funny that way! )

So, OP, unless you are willing to give us more information, other than “I don’t want to”, I have to agree with everyone else who has said maybe you are not ready for Confirmation yet.
Life is not always about what*** I ***want, but about what ***God’s will is ***for me, and IMHO, until you can come to grips with that idea, maybe you should take a step back from confirmation prep.

Actually, I think it is a serious mischaracterization to say that those of us who are questioning the retreat as being disobedient, or advocating the same. I hope that I am reading your post wrong, but, that is how I am reading it.

While you, too, seem to have a concern about the retreat, bear in mind that it does go beyond the bounds of the local authority to mandate the retreat as a requisite for receiving the Sacrament, based on what Rome has issued. It seems to me that we forget that Rome has the final say in these matters.

 

[benedictgal]

Tepeyac;7735397:

Depends on what part of Church, It may not be required by the layer in the Vatican, but it is required by my ordinary, to whom I am responsible to answer to.

Depends on how traditional you are, some people would say yes. I’m no one of them.
I have though witnessed very possitive results year after year from confirmation retreats.

No but the USCCB has decided in the US that is the age for confirmation. THe age of understanding.

The reason often was the ordinary had to travel great distances and only made it to a parish once a year, so children were confirmed at baptism, the Canon as well as transportation has changed.

Proper and comlete formation aslo has a great deal to do with it.

there are things that I do not find effective, requred service projects for one, but retreats as I sais before have real results.

I have an issue about an “open Church” some people want to take this to mean same sex marriage, women preist, a softening on the stants of abortion.
An 'open Church" leads people to the cafateria style of being Catholic. I’m against abortion, but I’m going to use birth control.
We nened to be less worried about causing people to jump through hoops and more to stand by our doctrins and principles.

With all due respect, you seem to not regard the authority of the Holy See as that of having the final word. The CDWDS said that the Universal law must be taken into account when formulating administrative policy. They used Pastor Bono as a reference.

Second, obedience to Rome is not an issue of Cafeteria Catholicism; we are called to obey the Holy See. The bishops, too, are also under a vow of obedience to the Holy Father and his successors. The Holy See acts in and with the authority of the Holy Father. That is why the CDWDS stated that it is within their competency to rule on administrative decisions that the local ordinary makes concerning the sacraments.

Standing by doctrines and principles is important, especially when one of the principles concerns the administering of the Sacraments.

 

[CatholicZ09]

I can remember my Confirmation retreat. While they may not be fun all of the time, you need to go to them. These help prepare you for Confirmation, and most of the time they give you information on to what is going to happen as Confirmation approaches. So, they are not only a gathering for Confirmation candidates, but they are also a time to get information about upcoming events. Just accept the fact that they are necessary and go. It will not be as bad as you think. Mine was actually fun most of the time.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I really think that this CHILD needs our adult guidance rather than postings back and forth about canon law!

Look at it this way, if you go and get nothing from it you’ve only wasted a day or two. You waste that much on TV, video games and texting in a day.

Please, open yourself up to a new experience, that is how we grow.

 

[surfinpure]

I really think that this CHILD needs our adult guidance rather than postings back and forth about canon law!

Look at it this way, if you go and get nothing from it you’ve only wasted a day or two. You waste that much on TV, video games and texting in a day.

Please, open yourself up to a new experience, that is how we grow.

 

[Spirithound]

I think that using the legal arm of the Church to justify immature and arrogant behaviors is not helpful to a teenager because it only validates bad behaviors.

So teens are simply to be denied every request, lest they get the idea they have rights?

Psst… is it me, or did the OP leave this thread quite some time ago?

It’s been literally less than 48 hours…we’re just very productive!

 

[Spirithound]

Everyone makes great point…BUT and its a big one is that I don’t have to spend a weeekend away somewhere I can just learn about God in church why cant we just learn about god in church We have to go on a retreat because we will open up wow it makes no sense I can open up anytime i want wether it be at home, church, or anywhere else church cofirmation should not even call for a retreat I think it is a waist of money paying the church $200 dollars to sign up itts always been like this the roman catholic church wanting money in my eyes confirmation should be free anyone who want to be catholic should have a free choice and insytead of using the money for a retreat that no one wants to go to do other things in church
so i will fight this no mater what it takes i do wnt to confirm but im am not going on that retreat i say no!!!

Dear brother, I hear two main points coming from your post. First one, that you’re not comfortable opening up. That’s pretty common. You’re with a whole bunch of people, more than just your smaller group of friends. I probably wouldn’t be too cool with having to be open with them either.
The second point is that you don’t really know what you don’t have. What I mean is that, yes, you have a relationship with God now, but you have no idea how much more intimate it can be. And I really mean that for all of us, no matter how deep in our relationship with God we are, there is always an infinitely deeper length to go. The other thing is that you don’t know how God wants to bring you to this deeper relationship. Perhaps there will be someone on that weekend that will say something that will just CLICK for you, and you’ll see God in a new and exciting way. But you know…this one thing that someone says, could be said by one of those someones you don’t know very well, who you’re uneasy opening up to.

Peace

 

[FAB]

This bothers me, bause it’s not just “the layer in the Vatican” these are general norms. It bothers me because it almost sounds like you’re setting up the local church against the universal church. It also seems to contradict what you say below about ‘open church’ and ‘cafeteria catholicism’.

Nobody is asking you to take on your bishop, or to suddenly change what you’re doing. What is being pointed out is if people are being required to attend a retreat in order to receive Confirmation, they can legitimately decline to attend that retreat. If someone insists that person attend, that person has legitimate grounds to challenge that requirement.

In my interview with my ordinary before my ordinary he stated that It was alright to disagree with him in discussion, but at the end of the day his word was final.
At ordination he held my folded hands and asked “do you promise you loyalty to me and my successors” to which I answered “I do”.

Now I might bring up one of the these opinions from a canon lawyer, and he might take it under consideration, but at the end of the day he will give his decision and myself and all who work and live in minister in his diocese are to follow it.

 

[Cristiano]

So teens are simply to be denied every request, lest they get the idea they have rights?..

Can you please show me the correlation between my statement and your statement. I have the impression that you are making a haste generalization when you go from not encouraging bad behaviors to deny every request. As a parent I can tell you that there is an abyss of difference between the two situations.

 

[benedictgal]

In my interview with my ordinary before my ordinary he stated that It was alright to disagree with him in discussion, but at the end of the day his word was final.
At ordination he held my folded hands and asked “do you promise you loyalty to me and my successors” to which I answered “I do”.

Now I might bring up one of the these opinions from a canon lawyer, and he might take it under consideration, but at the end of the day he will give his decision and myself and all who work and live in minister in his diocese are to follow it.

However, with all due respect, this viewppoint fails to take into account Pastor Bono, as referenced by the CDWDS. As was the case in the situation with the 11-year-old confirmand, the Holy See has the final word.

The ruling that I have consistently quoted does not come from a mere Canon lawyer; it comes from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the supereme authority here.

 

[PerfectTiming]

So teens are simply to be denied every request, lest they get the idea they have rights?

Someone already made the very good point that if these things were optional, then how could you ensure that those taking Confirmation have been properly instructed? It was the same when I took RCIA, if you did not attend classes and retreats you ran the risk of not being allowed the sacrament (whether it be baptism or confirmation) because the priest had to know that the candidates had been properly instructed and could only do this if they had fully attended all that they were required to attend.

 

[Tepeyac]

In my interview with my ordinary before my ordinary he stated that It was alright to disagree with him in discussion, but at the end of the day his word was final.
At ordination he held my folded hands and asked “do you promise you loyalty to me and my successors” to which I answered “I do”.

Now I might bring up one of the these opinions from a canon lawyer, and he might take it under consideration, but at the end of the day he will give his decision and myself and all who work and live in minister in his diocese are to follow it.

I appreciate the position you are in. As I said, I don’t think anybody is asking you or someone in your position to suddently take on your bishop.

If you were asking my advice I would say, if someone at your parish declines to participate in a retreate you ought to be aware that they have a right to decline to participate. If you or your pastor feel you don’t have the authority to waive that requirement, you can explain what your situation is to them and suggest they approach the diocese about it. They can then pursue the issue if they want to.

*edited to add: *I suppose you could bring this up beforehand with your pastor and your diocese’s religious education office now and possibly save yourself some future grief, but as I said I don’t think anyone expects you to make this your issue. I’m just saying you ought to be aware of it, and it’s something that ought to be handled carefully, because as noted above the decision on this came from the highest level.

 

[benedictgal]

Someone already made the very good point that if these things were optional, then how could you ensure that those taking Confirmation have been properly instructed? It was the same when I took RCIA, if you did not attend classes and retreats you ran the risk of not being allowed the sacrament (whether it be baptism or confirmation) because the priest had to know that the candidates had been properly instructed and could only do this if they had fully attended all that they were required to attend.

However, even in the RCIA program, the requirement that the Church (Universal, as in Rome) mandates is that the catechumens and the candidates be instructed in the Faith. There are no mandates for retreats. One does not need to participate in a retreat, let alone, required to participate in a retreat, to give evidence that he or she is properly formed.

 

[Lapey]

However, with all due respect, this viewppoint fails to take into account Pastor Bono, as referenced by the CDWDS. As was the case in the situation with the 11-year-old confirmand, the Holy See has the final word.

The ruling that I have consistentlypersistantly more like it quoted does not come from a mere Canon lawyer; it comes from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the supereme authority here.

Please bury the dead horse and listen to the bishop.

 

[Spirithound]

I think that using the legal arm of the Church to justify immature and arrogant behaviors is not helpful to a teenager because it only validates bad behaviors.

Can you please show me the correlation between my statement and your statement. I have the impression that you are making a haste generalization when you go from not encouraging bad behaviors to deny every request. As a parent I can tell you that there is an abyss of difference between the two situations.

Your former post begs the question as to whether the OP is truly being immature and arrogant. Arrogance is according to yourself that which belongs to your superior. If the right to mandate a retreat does not in fact belong to the bishop, then this teen is not being arrogant. I believe that is part of what this thread is debating.

 

[PerfectTiming]

However, even in the RCIA program, the requirement that the Church (Universal, as in Rome) mandates is that the catechumens and the candidates be instructed in the Faith. There are no mandates for retreats. One does not need to participate in a retreat, let alone, required to participate in a retreat, to give evidence that he or she is properly formed.

Some parishes may use retreats to teach important things. So in that case if someone misses a retreat they have missed important instruction and therefore the candidate has not been properly instructed. I know that if I had missed my retreats then I would have missed very important instruction.

 

[benedictgal]

Please bury the dead horse and listen to the bishop.

Deacon, this is not a dead horse issue. I have tried to be respectful towards you, but, sarcasm is not necessarily the most charitable approach to take.

Obedience flows both ways. Just as deacons and priests take a vow of obedience to the bishop, so, too, is the bishop obliged to obey the Holy See, in this case, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

The CDWDS has already noted that it has the authority to act on appeals of administrative acts made by the local Ordinary. Furthermore, the CDWDS has also noted that the local law must take into account the Universal law. In other words, if the Universal law does not mandate something, then, it’s not mandated.

 

[benedictgal]

Some parishes may use retreats to teach important things. So in that case if someone misses a retreat they have missed important instruction and therefore the candidate has not been properly instructed. I know that if I had missed my retreats then I would have missed very important instruction.

I have been to such retreats and, frankly, they are not instructional. Some have had team-building exercises and very bad liturgies that are full of abuses. I went on a Cursillo retreat that had a mixed population of 10 adult women and 20 teen-aged girls. While the Cursillo is not meant for sacramental purposes, the catechesis was lacking. The retreat occurred on Pentecost weekend, but, there was no mention of this grand feast of the Church. The liturgies were bad. Adoration was noisy and not at all conducive to prayer. When it came to the Open Mike sharing portion, I tried to explain to the group what Pentecost was and why we should be celebrating it. Even though I got to go to Confession, there were still a few things that were amiss. The younger girls certainly did not learn anything.

I went back to the meetings for a few months and was very concerned about the lack of understanding of the Mass that both the spiritual director (a religious brother) and the leadership had. When you start teaching the kids that the “sermon” is the most important part of the Mass, then you’ve missed the boat entirely.

 

[benedictgal]

I think that part of the reason our young OP has, perhaps, elected not to participate might be because of the name-calling we’ve directed towards him. I do not think that we gave him much of the benefit of the doubt and, rather than trying to help, we resorted to perhaps mischaracterizations, judgments and uncharitable responses.

It took guts, I believe, for someone so young to come here. Maybe he didn’t express himself in the best possible way. However, he is a teenager. Some may be able to express themselves better than others. Nonetheless, rather than name-calling and judgmental statements, we could have handled him and his question a little better.