NH Diocese Latest to Restore Order of Sacraments

[_Abyssinia]

MANCHESTER, N.H. — In the name of raising up lifelong disciples of Jesus Christ, another U.S. Latin-rite diocese has decided to restore confirmation to its traditional place before first Holy Communion.

Bishop Peter Libasci of Manchester, New Hampshire, has begun the process of restoring the reception of the sacraments of initiation in the diocese to their theological sequential order of baptism, then confirmation and first Eucharist.

Most U.S. dioceses, for more than 100 years, have followed a sequence of baptism, first Communion and then confirmation, ever since Pope St. Pius X made the age of reason (typically around age 7) the threshold for receiving Communion.

m.ncregister.com/daily-news/nh-diocese-becomes-latest-diocese-to-restore-order-of-sacraments

 

[omgriley]

This is just awesome-sauce.

As the “source and summit of Christian life” it’s right to have Holy Communion be the final step in Christian initiation.

 

[twf]

Praise God! Why on earth the order of the sacraments was changed in the first place is beyond me. How did they simply ignore 1900 years of tradition? These are the sacraments of initiation, the order is fundamental.

 

[Casilda]

Now what’s left is the full restoration, the sequence of a trinity of sacraments, baptism-chrismation(confirmation)-communion for infants.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This is the one time I wish the Bishops of the US could get their acts together. :hypno:

In my diocese, our previous Bishop had left the decision about restored order to the individual Pastors. We had about 1/3 of our parishes do RS, the rest had Confirmation between 5-7th grade.

We have a new Bishop (3, almost 4 years now) who has changed our Confirmation program to a 2-year program that doesn’t begin until 8th grade, so kids are at the end of their 9th-grade or beginning their 10th-grade year before they are Confirmed.

I don’t understand why this is something that can’t be more standardized, and why Confirmation is still exclusively the “Bishop’s Sacrament”, especially when a Pastor can do it in special circumstances or during the Easter Vigil for RCIA.

I also don’t believe in making kids & parents “jump through hoops” which is what our program basically is.
Sadly, our Bishop saw that the Catechesis is our diocese in our diocese has been not up to par (is it anywhere??) and decided to take it out on the teenagers.

I wish he would make Marriage & Baptism prep as strenuous.

 

[Xystus]

I don’t understand why this is something that can’t be more standardized, and why Confirmation is still exclusively the “Bishop’s Sacrament”, especially when a Pastor can do it in special circumstances or during the Easter Vigil for RCIA.

My understanding is that confirmatin was “seperated” from baptism specifically so that the Bishop can administer the sacrament in most cases because they are the original ministers. If priests start dong the majority of confirmatins then the reason for the “seperation” goes away and infants should start being confirmed agian. just my two cents.

 

[Casilda]

My understanding is that confirmatin was “seperated” from baptism specifically so that the Bishop can administer the sacrament in most cases because they are the original ministers. If priests start dong the majority of confirmatins then the reason for the “seperation” goes away and infants should start being confirmed agian. just my two cents.

Exactly!

Mass baptisms/chrismations, babies as far as the eye can see
m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qb6SHhHbKyA

 

[Blessedwithfive]

This is the one time I wish the Bishops of the US could get their acts together. :hypno:

In my diocese, our previous Bishop had left the decision about restored order to the individual Pastors. We had about 1/3 of our parishes do RS, the rest had Confirmation between 5-7th grade.

We have a new Bishop (3, almost 4 years now) who has changed our Confirmation program to a 2-year program that doesn’t begin until 8th grade, so kids are at the end of their 9th-grade or beginning their 10th-grade year before they are Confirmed.

I don’t understand why this is something that can’t be more standardized, and why Confirmation is still exclusively the “Bishop’s Sacrament”, especially when a Pastor can do it in special circumstances or during the Easter Vigil for RCIA.

I also don’t believe in making kids & parents “jump through hoops” which is what our program basically is.
Sadly, our Bishop saw that the Catechesis is our diocese in our diocese has been not up to par (is it anywhere??) and decided to take it out on the teenagers.

I wish he would make Marriage & Baptism prep as strenuous.

Ditto:thumbsup:

 

[Padres1969]

m.ncregister.com/daily-news/nh-diocese-becomes-latest-diocese-to-restore-order-of-sacraments

Can’t say I’d think this was a good idea. So you’ll get all their sacraments of initiation done by age 7 or 8. And then… what? They’ll enter the teen years and they’ll have nothing left that can keep them rooted to the church during even a part of that questioning time in their life…

For comparison I like what’s recently started becoming the norm in many churches such as my own parish. Confirmation has been moved out to the late teens (17/18) and in place where it used to be a non-sacramental Rite 13 has been placed around age 13. Rite 13 being a public affirmation that the child is now a young adult in the church community and ready to begin taking on adult roles. Saving their final endowment with the holy spirit and adult commitment to the church for when they are adults at 17/18. And thus far it’s seemingly worked, as our parish has been growing, particularly with youth in recent years.

 

[pianistclare]

I’ve said it a zillion times.

**Get ready to have the Religious Education programs die. **

Ask any Catechist how many kids get signed up for Religion Ed after First Holy Communion.

I suppose the parishes will save a ton of money on books, materials and salaries.
Maybe that’s what it’s really about. Getting volunteers to teach is a nightmare.

I don’t see it as a good thing. We reach thousands of teenagers who have already been catechized by popular media growing up by having them receive in their teens. There is NO WAY they would be in class unless they had to. Parents don’t even want to bring them after First Communion. It’s just sad.

Then everyone can bemoan that the parishes are dying and there are no more young people around to bury us.
Yeah, that will happen. The hothouse that is CAF ain’t going to save the Church in the U.S. Don’t teach your young people? Don’t expect them to care. Having the Sacrament later is what keeps them coming. Maybe you all think that’s a bad reason, but it’s the real reason and it works, frankly. We’ve had some beautiful conversions…YES, conversions of heart by teaching them, retreating with them, and having them make service a part part of their lives. Most teens can’t even remember the proper way to make the sign of the cross. They text in the restroom during Mass, or they slump over until it’s time for breakfast.

Before anyone starts saying they need the Holy Spirit…one has to be OPEN to receiving. Confirm them and hope for the best? How much better for them to desire and know what they are receiving. Children really don’t truly grasp much of what we teach them for while before the light bulb goes off. Couple that with hardly worshiping parents (Mass when there’s no soccer tournament, and never on vacation! We’re on VACATION!) and you leave the kids to secular world. The Holy Spirit gets placed in a cage.
Of course all things are possible with God…but we have to cooperate.
If it’s not a priority for parents, it’s not going to be easy for the children to stay in the faith.

Time to wake up.

Y’all can start yellin at me now.
20 years a DRE. I’ve seen it. Lived it.
I really hope that it never comes to pass in our Archdiocese.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

In theory, I do not disagree with you.
In practice, I think it is wrong to make kids do something because their parents are dropping the ball.

The catechesis needs to be with couples who want to get married and want their children Baptised.

Parents are supposed to be the primary catechists of their children. They promise that when they wed, and when they have children. Maybe it’s time to start expecting more from the adults who want something from the Church when it comes to marriage & Baptism than from teenagers who had no choice in the matter.

Just my :twocents:

I’ve said it a zillion times.

**Get ready to have the Religious Education programs die. **

Ask any Catechist how many kids get signed up for Religion Ed after First Holy Communion.

I suppose the parishes will save a ton of money on books, materials and salaries.
Maybe that’s what it’s really about. Getting volunteers to teach is a nightmare.

I don’t see it as a good thing. We reach thousands of teenagers who have already been catechized by popular media growing up by having them receive in their teens. There is NO WAY they would be in class unless they had to. Parents don’t even want to bring them after First Communion. It’s just sad.

Then everyone can bemoan that the parishes are dying and there are no more young people around to bury us.
Yeah, that will happen. The hothouse that is CAF ain’t going to save the Church in the U.S. Don’t teach your young people? Don’t expect them to care. Having the Sacrament later is what keeps them coming. Maybe you all think that’s a bad reason, but it’s the real reason and it works, frankly. We’ve had some beautiful conversions…YES, conversions of heart by teaching them, retreating with them, and having them make service a part part of their lives. Most teens can’t even remember the proper way to make the sign of the cross. They text in the restroom during Mass, or they slump over until it’s time for breakfast.

Before anyone starts saying they need the Holy Spirit…one has to be OPEN to receiving. Confirm them and hope for the best? How much better for them to desire and know what they are receiving. Children really don’t truly grasp much of what we teach them for while before the light bulb goes off. Couple that with hardly worshiping parents (Mass when there’s no soccer tournament, and never on vacation! We’re on VACATION!) and you leave the kids to secular world. The Holy Spirit gets placed in a cage.
Of course all things are possible with God…but we have to cooperate.
If it’s not a priority for parents, it’s not going to be easy for the children to stay in the faith.

Time to wake up.

Y’all can start yellin at me now.
20 years a DRE. I’ve seen it. Lived it.
I really hope that it never comes to pass in our Archdiocese.

 

[M-Dent]

We are very blessed to have Bishop Libasci.

 

[FirstFiveEighth]

I’ve said it a zillion times.

**Get ready to have the Religious Education programs die. **

Ask any Catechist how many kids get signed up for Religion Ed after First Holy Communion.

I suppose the parishes will save a ton of money on books, materials and salaries.
Maybe that’s what it’s really about. Getting volunteers to teach is a nightmare.

I don’t see it as a good thing. We reach thousands of teenagers who have already been catechized by popular media growing up by having them receive in their teens. There is NO WAY they would be in class unless they had to. Parents don’t even want to bring them after First Communion. It’s just sad.

Then everyone can bemoan that the parishes are dying and there are no more young people around to bury us.
Yeah, that will happen. The hothouse that is CAF ain’t going to save the Church in the U.S. Don’t teach your young people? Don’t expect them to care. Having the Sacrament later is what keeps them coming. Maybe you all think that’s a bad reason, but it’s the real reason and it works, frankly. We’ve had some beautiful conversions…YES, conversions of heart by teaching them, retreating with them, and having them make service a part part of their lives. Most teens can’t even remember the proper way to make the sign of the cross. They text in the restroom during Mass, or they slump over until it’s time for breakfast.

Before anyone starts saying they need the Holy Spirit…one has to be OPEN to receiving. Confirm them and hope for the best? How much better for them to desire and know what they are receiving. Children really don’t truly grasp much of what we teach them for while before the light bulb goes off. Couple that with hardly worshiping parents (Mass when there’s no soccer tournament, and never on vacation! We’re on VACATION!) and you leave the kids to secular world. The Holy Spirit gets placed in a cage.
Of course all things are possible with God…but we have to cooperate.
If it’s not a priority for parents, it’s not going to be easy for the children to stay in the faith.

Time to wake up.

Y’all can start yellin at me now.
20 years a DRE. I’ve seen it. Lived it.
I really hope that it never comes to pass in our Archdiocese.

I will be honest, I was STOKED when I found out that after confirmation (7th-8th grade) I would no longer have to attend Sunday School after Mass. And I had no intentions of doing youth group, either. Not because I hated learning or anything, I was just a rebel without a cause and if I was forced to be somewhere I’d try any excuse to try and get out of it, on principle. And I hated being couped up in a classroom for an hour after I had already attended Mass on a Sunday afternoon when, in my 13yr old mind, I could be doing better things like playing stickball with the neighborhood kids in the front yard. Now, I wish I had continued to learn about the faith, lol.

I certainly agree that we should try and find ways to keep kids learning the faith. In what other subject would you stop teaching a kid in 7th grade and call it good, they are ready to face the world?

 

[twf]

I’ve said it a zillion times.

**Get ready to have the Religious Education programs die. **

Ask any Catechist how many kids get signed up for Religion Ed after First Holy Communion.

I suppose the parishes will save a ton of money on books, materials and salaries.
Maybe that’s what it’s really about. Getting volunteers to teach is a nightmare.

I don’t see it as a good thing. We reach thousands of teenagers who have already been catechized by popular media growing up by having them receive in their teens. There is NO WAY they would be in class unless they had to. Parents don’t even want to bring them after First Communion. It’s just sad.

Then everyone can bemoan that the parishes are dying and there are no more young people around to bury us.
Yeah, that will happen. The hothouse that is CAF ain’t going to save the Church in the U.S. Don’t teach your young people? Don’t expect them to care. Having the Sacrament later is what keeps them coming. Maybe you all think that’s a bad reason, but it’s the real reason and it works, frankly. We’ve had some beautiful conversions…YES, conversions of heart by teaching them, retreating with them, and having them make service a part part of their lives. Most teens can’t even remember the proper way to make the sign of the cross. They text in the restroom during Mass, or they slump over until it’s time for breakfast.

Before anyone starts saying they need the Holy Spirit…one has to be OPEN to receiving. Confirm them and hope for the best? How much better for them to desire and know what they are receiving. Children really don’t truly grasp much of what we teach them for while before the light bulb goes off. Couple that with hardly worshiping parents (Mass when there’s no soccer tournament, and never on vacation! We’re on VACATION!) and you leave the kids to secular world. The Holy Spirit gets placed in a cage.
Of course all things are possible with God…but we have to cooperate.
If it’s not a priority for parents, it’s not going to be easy for the children to stay in the faith.

Time to wake up.

Y’all can start yellin at me now.
20 years a DRE. I’ve seen it. Lived it.
I really hope that it never comes to pass in our Archdiocese.

Artificially delaying the sacraments of initiation, in defiance of ancient tradition and sound theology, does nothing to address the root of the problem. By your reasoning, we might as well delay first Communion to age 15 and confirmation to age 18…

We need to find other ways to keep people engaged. Perhaps we could institute some sort of “coming of age” rite for older / teen kids, such as a public profession of faith, without messing with the proper order of the sacraments. Confirmation / Christmation is not such a rite, though that’s how a lot of people treat it. This century old novelty needs to go…its just bad sacramental theology.

 

[pianistclare]

In theory, I do not disagree with you.
In practice, I think it is wrong to make kids do something because their parents are dropping the ball.

The catechesis needs to be with couples who want to get married and want their children Baptised.

Parents are supposed to be the primary catechists of their children. They promise that when they wed, and when they have children. Maybe it’s time to start expecting more from the adults who want something from the Church when it comes to marriage & Baptism than from teenagers who had no choice in the matter.

Just my :twocents:

Yes, I agree, wholeheartedly. But that’s nearly impossible to enforce. Only the mandates for Religious Ed have any impact on most families.

 

[pianistclare]

Artificially delaying the sacraments of initiation, in defiance of ancient tradition and sound theology, does nothing to address the root of the problem. By your reasoning, we might as well delay first Communion to age 15 and confirmation to age 18…

We need to find other ways to keep people engaged. Perhaps we could institute some sort of “coming of age” rite for older / teen kids, such as a public profession of faith, without messing with the proper order of the sacraments. Confirmation / Christmation is not such a rite, though that’s how a lot of people treat it. This century old novelty needs to go…its just bad sacramental theology.

OK, go for it.
Let me know how it turns out. I’m so tired of fighting the fight with no support from pastors and anger from parents.
It is called the Rite of Confirmation, and it is sort of coming of age.
People decry that too.
You can’t have it both ways.
I doubt if the Lord worries too much about the “proper order”. By that rationale, no one can get anointed until they are almost dead.

 

[M-Dent]

The Bishop has a good sense of his diocese and knows what’s best.

 

[pianistclare]

The Bishop has a good sense of his diocese and knows what’s best.

Nobody has criticized this cleric. Be clear.

It’s just a disaster for Religious Education. I think nearly every CAF member truly believes that people are not well catechized. What plan is in place to replace those years of teaching for our youth? That is what I am interested in. And how are they going to get the parents on board? Most kids don’t drive.
But…it will take time for that to become apparent.
peace.

 

[gracepoole]

Nobody has criticized this cleric. Be clear.

It’s just a disaster for Religious Education. I think nearly every CAF member truly believes that people are not well catechized. What plan is in place to replace those years of teaching for our youth? That is what I am interested in. And how are they going to get the parents on board? Most kids don’t drive.
But…it will take time for that to become apparent.
peace.

Yep – totally agree that most Catholics are incredibly poorly catechized. My oldest two will participate in the usual 2-week catechism program at our parish this summer – and my oldest will also be doing Baltimore Catechism at home. Rote memorization and all. Hopefully she won’t end up like me, who after completing 12 years in Catholic schools didn’t learn that it’s a mortal sin to receive the Sacrament while in a state of mortal sin until I was an adult. Is there really any reason not to go back to the BC? I’m absolutely certain that it won’t solve all of the problems we experience. But maybe it would solve some? Perhaps wishful thinking on my part.

 

[commenter]

Can’t say I’d think this was a good idea. So you’ll get all their sacraments of initiation done by age 7 or 8. And then… what? They’ll enter the teen years and they’ll have nothing left that can keep them rooted to the church during even a part of that questioning time in their life…

For comparison I like what’s recently started becoming the norm in many churches such as my own parish. Confirmation has been moved out to the late teens (17/18) and in place where it used to be a non-sacramental Rite 13 has been placed around age 13. Rite 13 being a public affirmation that the child is now a young adult in the church community and ready to begin taking on adult roles. Saving their final endowment with the holy spirit and adult commitment to the church for when they are adults at 17/18. And thus far it’s seemingly worked, as our parish has been growing, particularly with youth in recent years.

The above sounds interesting.
BTW, I tend to get suspicious when I hear “We need to restore the ancient practice of…”
First, I don’ t know how widespread the "ancient practice was, and for how long. What other circumstances were going on at that time, that may or may not be true now?

For example, I believe a high percentage, probably a majority, of children died when they were young. Furthermore, I bet most Catholics were married by 17; certainly most were already in their lifetime career long before then.

Ancient Christians, to my knowledge, rarely read the Bible alone. It was used in Church. Would we want to restore that ancient “uncommon solo Bible reading” practice? Ancient Christians were pacifist (which meant they did not want to fight in the anti-Christian Roman army). Does pacifism then become an “ancient practice” that should have been restored by Americans in WWII?

I also was concerned about something I have read, that supposedly the “outdated” practice of Confirmation around 6th grade was devised by American bishops as preparation to be a “soldier of Jesus Christ” and to be ready to defend your faith in a hostile environment; as if the environment today is free and easy for Christians.

The early Christians developed practices based on the gospel, and **their current **circumstances. So should we.