Question regarding Confirmation

[a_pilgrim]

Communion involves more. In order to receive Communion, children must be able to recognize that the ‘bread’ that they will be given is different from the bread that they eat at home and that, although it may look and taste like bread, it is in fact the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. They have to want to receive Jesus, not just accompany their parents to Communion.

How, then, do you reconcile this statement with the fact that infants in the Eastern Catholic Churches receive Our Lord in Holy Communion from the day that they are baptized, and continue to do so through their toddler years? Since Our Lord is present in the Eastern Catholic Eucharist the same as He is present in the Latin Catholic Eucharist, are you saying that you believe the Eastern Catholic practice to be in error?

 

[Phemie]

How, then, do you reconcile this statement with the fact that infants in the Eastern Catholic Churches receive Our Lord in Holy Communion from the day that they are baptized, and continue to do so through their toddler years? Since Our Lord is present in the Eastern Catholic Eucharist the same as He is present in the Latin Catholic Eucharist, are you saying that you believe the Eastern Catholic practice to be in error?

No, I’m just telling her what the Roman Catholic Church teaches and I guess I should have been clearer that that rule was for the RCC.

I don’t believe that the Easter Catholic practice is in error, since the RCC practice is not dogma but canon law. I know that our Code of Canon Law differs from that of our Eastern Catholic bothers & sisters in many ways.

 

[Corki]

Does this mean that just being a citizen of the Catholic church and receiving the Sacraments is all the person needs to do to initially receive Eternal Salvation in Heaven?

Actually, I would say is that only the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for Eternal Salvation. The other Sacraments of Initiation (Eucharist and Confirmation) complete the bond but even without them, a person could attain Heaven.

But, a Catholic member does have the choice later whether or not they stay right with God.

A Catholic always has a choice. He/she could turn his/her back on the Church and on God.

(Through works, and attending mass, and receiving the Holy Eucharist, etc…) and by remaining an active member of the Catholic church and obeying the church laws and receiving the remaining Sacraments as they apply?

That’s the most normal but still not essential. For example, a person could be homebound or living in a remote area without access to a priest or to Mass. That person would not go to Mass, receive the Eucharist, be active in the Church or receive any more Sacraments after Baptism but he/she is still going to Heaven **as long as **he/she remains free of mortal sin.

That the blessings of the Sacraments are bestowed Divinely by God through the priests as long as the individual is physically present?

Physically present with who? It is not necessary for the person to be physically present with a priest for all of the Sacraments. Confirmation, Holy Orders, Confession and Sacrament of the Sick - yes. But Matrimony can be completed without a priest as can the reception of Holy Communion. Baptism doesn’t need a priest either but for the sake of this conversation I am assuming you mean those already Baptized.

 

[Phemie]

For baptism and confirmation you are right – children need not know anything since the Church says that infants who are in danger of dying must be baptized & should be confirmed at the same time.

Communion involves more. In order to receive Communion , children must be able to recognize that the ‘bread’ that they will be given is different from the bread that they eat at home and that, although it may look and taste like bread, it is in fact the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. They have to want to receive Jesus, not just accompany their parents to Communion.

Sorry to reply to my own post but I should have specified that the requirement to know that you are receiving Jesus in Communion is a canon of the Roman Catholic Church. It’s not dogma but one of the Church’s laws which she could change this if she wished.

 

[jmcrae]

Sorry to reply to my own post but I should have specified that the requirement to know that you are receiving Jesus in Communion is a canon of the Roman Catholic Church. It’s not dogma but one of the Church’s laws which she could change this if she wished.

It is also not binding on the Eastern rites, which commune their infants, as well.

 

[Pokedaughter]

“Physically present with who? It is not necessary for the person to be physically present with a priest for all of the Sacraments. Confirmation, Holy Orders, Confession and Sacrament of the Sick - yes. But Matrimony can be completed without a priest as can the reception of Holy Communion. Baptism doesn’t need a priest either but for the sake of this conversation I am assuming you mean those already Baptized”

When I mentioned that you have to be ‘physically present’ I meant you can’t be eating Jelly Belly’s at SuperTarget at get baptized at the same time.

That’s all.

 

[benedictgal]

“Physically present with who? It is not necessary for the person to be physically present with a priest for all of the Sacraments. Confirmation, Holy Orders, Confession and Sacrament of the Sick - yes. But Matrimony can be completed without a priest as can the reception of Holy Communion. Baptism doesn’t need a priest either but for the sake of this conversation I am assuming you mean those already Baptized”

When I mentioned that you have to be ‘physically present’ I meant you can’t be eating Jelly Belly’s at SuperTarget at get baptized at the same time.

That’s all.

You do need to have an ordained minister present for the Sacrament of Matrimony. A deacon can officiate at weddings. There are some seriously extreme circumstances (covered by canon law) where a layman can witness a marriage, but, that only happens if you are living in a missionary outpost where the priest comes once in a blue moon (literally).

Now, you may not necessarily receive Holy Communion in the presence of the priest. But, he must be the one to confect the consecration that transubstantiates the bread into the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. My father is an EMHC to the elderly and the home-bound. He brings Holy Communion to about 40 residents of a senior citizens home and visits 10 other people every Sunday.

The ordinary minister for Baptism is the priest. A deacon or bishop also administers the Sacrament. The only time that a layman can administer the Sacrament is when the person wanting baptism is in danger of death. At that point, anyone can baptize so long as they use water and the appropriate Trinitarian formula as handed down by Jesus, Himself: “Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” The Trinity, using that form, must be invoked: “I baptize you in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

And, as far as Holy Orders are concerned, only a Bishop may confer that sacrament to a candidate for the diaconate and a transitional deacon who is going to be a priest. The fullness of the Sacrament of Holy Orders rests in the bishop because by virtue of his Episcopal Ordination, he has received the complete essence of the Sacrament.

 

[Corki]

You do need to have an ordained minister present for the Sacrament of Matrimony. A deacon can officiate at weddings. There are some seriously extreme circumstances (covered by canon law) where a layman can witness a marriage, but, that only happens if you are living in a missionary outpost where the priest comes once in a blue moon (literally).

It is my understanding (and I might be wrong since my personal experience with this is almost 30 years old) is that, with a dispensation, a Catholic can be married in another church and that the marriage can be presided over by the minister of that church - for example, if a Catholic man is marrying a non-Catholic woman in her parent’s church. Since the couple are the ministers of the Sacrament, the role of witness doesn’t have to be someone with Holy Orders.

 

[Phemie]

It is my understanding (and I might be wrong since my personal experience with this is almost 30 years old) is that, with a dispensation, a Catholic can be married in another church and that the marriage can be presided over by the minister of that church - for example, if a Catholic man is marrying a non-Catholic woman in her parent’s church. Since the couple are the ministers of the Sacrament, the role of witness doesn’t have to be someone with Holy Orders.

You’re correct. A dispensation for lack of canonical form will allow that.

 

[benedictgal]

It is my understanding (and I might be wrong since my personal experience with this is almost 30 years old) is that, with a dispensation, a Catholic can be married in another church and that the marriage can be presided over by the minister of that church - for example, if a Catholic man is marrying a non-Catholic woman in her parent’s church. Since the couple are the ministers of the Sacrament, the role of witness doesn’t have to be someone with Holy Orders.

That is incorrect. A Catholic priest must be present at the wedding. The dispensation allows the Catholic party to marry in another Protestant ecclesial community or Sister Church (orthodox), but, the priest must be present.

 

[Aramis]

I am not Catholic and was wondering if during the confirmation process the confirmand must promise to pursue their faith in the Catholic church in order to be confirmed. Also, my children have many friends who are in their second year of confirmation and one of them does not believe in God, another is totally questioning the Catholic faith, and then several are just going through confirmation because their parents are making them. My other question is if these children do not believe in the confirmation process and what it stands for do they still receive the blessing of the Sacrament? (if that is how you say it?)
Thanks.

In the Latin Church, yes.

In the various Eastern Churches, only if confirmed as an adult. Eastern Catholic infants are baptised, confirmed, and communed in a single ceremony.

 

[Aramis]

That is incorrect. A Catholic priest must be present at the wedding. The dispensation allows the Catholic party to marry in another Protestant ecclesial community or Sister Church (orthodox), but, the priest must be present.

No, a priest or deacon. Not just priests.

 

[benedictgal]

You’re correct. A dispensation for lack of canonical form will allow that.

Phemie, somehow, that doesn’t seem right. One of my priest friends has gone to witness the marriages of several Catholics at Protestant ecclesial communities. In fact, one such occasion arose when a friend of mine (Catholic) married a Jewish man. At least in my diocese, it is very common for a priest to do this.

 

[Phemie]

That is incorrect. A Catholic priest must be present at the wedding. The dispensation allows the Catholic party to marry in another Protestant ecclesial community or Sister Church (orthodox), but, the priest must be present.

There is no such requirement in canon law.

Can. 1127 §1. The prescripts of ⇒ can. 1108 are to be observed for the form to be used in a mixed marriage.

Nevertheless, if a Catholic party contracts marriage with a non-Catholic party of an Eastern rite, the canonical form of the celebration must be observed for liceity only; for validity, however, the presence of a sacred minister is required and the other requirements of law are to be observed.

§2. If grave diYculties hinder the observance of canonical form, the local ordinary of the Catholic party has the right of dispensing from the form in individual cases, after having consulted the ordinary of the place in which the marriage is celebrated and with some public form of celebration for validity. It is for the conference of bishops to establish norms by which the aforementioned dispensation is to be granted in a uniform manner.

Based on the canon the bishop’s conference could order that a priest be present but that certainly hasn’t been my experience in Canada. In my experience it is the Catholic party’s responsibility to bring to his/her parish proof that the wedding has taken place. That information will be entered in the register and the baptismal parish informed.

 

[benedictgal]

There is no such requirement in canon law.

Based on the canon the bishop’s conference could order that a priest be present but that certainly hasn’t been my experience in Canada. In my experience it is the Catholic party’s responsibility to bring to his/her parish proof that the wedding has taken place. That information will be entered in the register and the baptismal parish informed.

However, the caveat here is sacred minister. That is why I find it odd that a priest (or deacon, and, no I didn’t forget that a deacon is also clergy) would not have to be present.

Maybe my diocese is the oddball in the group, given the fact that 98% of my city is Catholic and the Catholic parties (in a mixed marriage) are very insistent (at least the ones I used to deal with regarding weddings when I helped the wedding coordinator) that there be a Nuptial Mass (a lot of this also comes from the families of the Catholics involved). Thus, the instances where the wedding would take place in a Protestant ecclesial community would still invovle having the priest go and witness (the priests in my diocese do the majority of the weddings here, that’s why my statement defaults to the priest) the marriage.

 

[Phemie]

Phemie, somehow, that doesn’t seem right. One of my priest friends has gone to witness the marriages of several Catholics at Protestant ecclesial communities. In fact, one such occasion arose when a friend of mine (Catholic) married a Jewish man. At least in my diocese, it is very common for a priest to do this.

It’s not uncommon for the priest to attend the wedding of one of his parishioners in the circumstances you describe. Often the bride or groom will request his presence and he will offer a blessing at the ceremony. But I’ve known the pastor to decline if the bride or groom wasn’t really known to them.

 

[jmcrae]

There is no such requirement in canon law.

Nevertheless, if a Catholic party contracts marriage with a non-Catholic party of an Eastern rite, the canonical form of the celebration must be observed for liceity only; for validity, however, the presence of a sacred minister is required and the other requirements of law are to be observed.

Your quote is referring to the Eastern Rite not in communion with the Church. It is probably assuming that a priest of the Eastern Orthodox Church (who has valid Holy Orders from our point of view) is present at the wedding.

The rules for Protestants and non-Christians are probably different from this, since their ministers and leaders do not have Holy Orders; this is probably why a priest has to be present at these weddings, even if they take place off of Church property.

 

[Phemie]

However, the caveat here is sacred minister. That is why I find it odd that a priest (or deacon, and, no I didn’t forget that a deacon is also clergy) would not have to be present.

Part 1 of the canon refers only to mixed marriages not lack of canonical form and it refers to non-Catholics of the Eastern Rite. Only part 2 refers to lack of canonical form.

Maybe my diocese is the oddball in the group, given the fact that 98% of my city is Catholic and the Catholic parties (in a mixed marriage) are very insistent (at least the ones I used to deal with regarding weddings when I helped the wedding coordinator) was that there be a Nuptial Mass (a lot of this also comes from the families of the Catholics involved). Thus, the instances where the wedding would take place in a Protestant ecclesial community would still involve having the priest go and witness (the priests in my diocese do the majority of the weddings here, that’s why my statement defaults to the priest) the marriage.

Very different from my parish where most of the weddings are mixed/disparity of cult marriages with only a liturgy of the word. We strongly discourage a Nuptial Mass in mixed marriages.

 

[Phemie]

Your quote is referring to the Eastern Rite not in communion with the Church. It is probably assuming that a priest of the Eastern Orthodox Church (who has valid Holy Orders from our point of view) is present at the wedding.

The rules for Protestants and non-Christians are probably different from this, since their ministers and leaders do not have Holy Orders; this is probably why a priest has to be present at these weddings, even if they take place off of Church property.

I quoted the entire canon but only part 2 refers to lack of canonical form.

§2. If grave difficulties hinder the observance of canonical form, the local ordinary of the Catholic party has the right of dispensing from the form in individual cases, after having consulted the ordinary of the place in which the marriage is celebrated and with some public form of celebration for validity. It is for the conference of bishops to establish norms by which the aforementioned dispensation is to be granted in a uniform manner.

After a dispensation is granted all that is required is that it be a public ceremony. The USCCB & the CCCB are free to establish the norms under which the dispensations are granted.

 

[thomasf]

**Receiving the Sacraments is not a choice. So, God takes over and imparts His Spirit and grace but the individual does not really have to do anything? Just be physically present? **

Does this mean that just being a citizen of the Catholic church and receiving the Sacraments is all the person needs to do to initially receive Eternal Salvation in Heaven?

I am not sure I agree with either of the bolded statements.

In the first case:

For children, parents are responsible for them and have every right to require them to receive the sacraments. IMO, for children it’s a lot different for adults. Particularly for the sacraments of baptism and confirmation, which leave marks on the soul. Even if they do not understand the graces, or are particularly open to the graces of the sacraments, God can still work through the sacraments to change the person. Even if it takes years, and even if the person doesn’t realize it.

For the kids that the OP is working with, they may not be interested in being part of the church, or want to understand it, etc. But by going through the sacrament of confirmation, God can impart grace on their soul that can change them and mark them. They may chose to not participate and ignore this grace. That’s the way free will works. But for many (including myself) that grace will work on them and in their hearts. Whether it takes 2 years or 17 years or 50 years, if they are open to it the graces will change them. And frankly, I’d rather expose as many catholic youth to God’s grace and hope they respond, instead of leaving it up to the kids and hope that maybe someday thye’ll choose to go through it on their own.

For adults who enter the church, they must chose to do so, and choose to go through these sacraments of initiation on their own. You can’t force that upon an adult if they don’t agree to it. Additionally, as an adult you do choose to take part in the sacraments. Many catholics don’t take part in confession and marriage, although they seem perfectly willing to get in the communion line each week whether or not they are in a state of sin.

God works through the sacraments by imparting His graces. But we can always chose to ignore these graces and refuse the benefits. Just going to communion, just going to confession, doesn’t in itself do anything. These sacraments are conduits of God’s grace, but if we just go through the motions, aren’t open to receiving these graces, but are simply ‘doing’ the sacraments to check them off our lists, they don’t help us at all. I’ve known many a catholic who think that all they have to do is ‘do’ the sacraments and go to church every sunday and that means that they’re into heaven. If you are a lousy sob that doesn’t live as a christian monday through saturday, just going to church on sunday isn’t going to mean a thing.

In the second case:

Piggy backing on what I just wrote, it takes a lot more than just following the rules and being a good catholic citizen to gain salvation. The whole goal of our lives is to grow closer to God, and strive to reach the perfection we were originally created in. To turn our backs on sin, and to move toward God and His grace. The catholic church was designed by Jesus to help get us there. And the sacraments are the conduits of God’s grace to help in that journey, designed to help us grow as we grow as human beings. The whole goal is to change ourselves from sinful beings to new creations. Baptism gives us new life in God’s Kingdom, and we must strive to become new creatures.

If you’re going to be a regular old person, living in the world, mired in sin and not striving to become a better person and to get closer to God, just following catholic rules and procedures and being a good catholic citizen isn’t going to mean a thing. The idea is to change ourselves through the sacraments. You can’t be mired in sin, stuck in the things of the world, and not concerned with getting closer to God, and get into heaven because you participated in the sacraments. You can’t be stuck in sin 6 days a week, show up for confession on saturday so you can go to church on sunday, and then go back to being stuck in that sin without change until the next saturday. You must strive to change and move forward towards God.

So what I would add is that we must be open to the graces that flow through the sacraments, and the graces that flow through the church in the mass, graces from doing works (for God). We must participate in God’s transformative grace. Yes, God can use His grace to work in us whether or not we know it or understand it, but by accepting and being open to His graces, and participating in them, we can become new creatures in Christ. Get closer to God, and turn our backs on sin.

IMO, just like many protestants are going to be suprised on Judgement Day, many catholics will as well. Like St Paul said, we have to work out our salvation through fear and trembling. We can’t just sit back and check things off the list, show up after death and demand access to heaven. It doesn’t work that way.