Restoring the Order of the Sacraments

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The only explanation I’ve heard of this was not one flattering to the leadership
It was two separate changes, one pastoral, and the other disciplinary.

Confirmation was separated to reinforce the pastoral role of the bishop, who had come to be seen as a distant administrator.

Communion was separated not of itself, but as a byproduct of withholding the Cup to flush out heretics–infant communion was the Cup alone, over digestion.

Everything about comprehension and age of reason was retrofitted to the existing liturgical situation.
 
It’s not something I ever expect to understand. I’ve tried asking questions about this, and I’m either told I’m “arguing” or “fussing.” Now I simply bite my tongue. Hard.
That’s a typical response when nobody wants to answer your question. It’s a form of dodging, and a missed opportunity to explain and educate on why things are being done a certain way, so as to increase understanding. Instead, it’s easier to accuse and blame the person asking these questions, and a deliberate effort to shut them up. To tell someone making an honest inquiry that they’re “arguing” or “fussing” is an adversarial approach, which I find disrespectful of the parishioner’s right to know these things. It’s a violation of their right to know.

Is it really any wonder there’s so much misunderstanding, and so many Catholics leaving the Church? Snarkiness and unwillingness to communicate and work with people is a very large factor. Those in charge need to wake up to the damage they’re doing when they treat people that way.
 
Ever since this subject came to my attention, I’ve had a hard time understanding how withholding sacraments from children - that is, keeping them from the graces God gives through the sacraments - when Jesus specifically said not to could be considered pastoral (CCC 1373/4, cf Mt 19:14).

Re:retrofitting explanations to current practice: yes, that’s exactly what the “arguments” sound like. Instead of reasoning from what we know via scripture, magesterium, and tradition, i.e. “This is what’s right, so this is what we’ll do,” on this topic we go backwards, “This is what we’re doing, so this is why it’s okay.”

Sigh.
 
Last edited:
that is, keeping them from the graces God gives through the sacraments
This. It literally boggles the mind. Unless one has no faith in the efficacy of the sacrament, it seems there can be no valid reason for delaying reception so long. But I want to give these people who oppose the restored order the benefit of the doubt and not make such a bad assumption about their faith. Hence, the boggling if my mind.
 
Conspicuously absent from the article was the reason the Western church split the sacraments of initiation into 2-3 separate events after 500 years of administering them all at once.
In the Latin rite the Bishop is the ordinary minister of Confirmation; as the Church grew it became more difficult for bishops to get around all of the parishes in their diocese to confirm the recently baptised - stories abound of bishops passing through villages on horseback, confirming (possibly while still on the horse) and then moving on to the next village! In 1910, Pope Pius X issued the decree Quam Singulari which changed the age of First Communion is taken to 7 (down from about 12 or even 14). Problem was, it said nothing about confirmation! I think I’m right in saying that in all Eastern Rites, confirmation takes place at the same time as baptism for infants (as happens when a child or adult is baptised in the Latin Rite).
 
While I could agree with just about every post in this thread, I think we are missing one or two critical elements.

We could plan anything - and in many parishes, find people to carry out the plans.

Except for one critical element.

Parents.

When the parents have little meaningful catechetical background; when they cannot be bothered to support the program(s), when often they cannot even be bothered to show up at Mass on Sunday on a regular basis, then all the good intentions in the world are going to take a distant second place to the most important learning environment a child has - the family.

Back somewhere in the dark past, there was a phrase heard often: the family that prays together stays together. Anyone care to take a survey of any 10 parishes and find out how many families have daily prayer together?

Does anyone even want to see what the results of such a survey would be? I don’t.

Go into just about any parish, and odds are you will find well better than 50% of those attending have grandchildren. And according to CARA, the over 50 age bracket has the highest rate of attendance weekly. It drops off rapidly as you go down in age brackets.

Things broke down after Vatican 2 (and no, it was not because of anything whatsoever contained in Vatican 2 - nor was it the changes in the Mass). We now have two generations which have learned far less about their faith than they could or should have; and several years ago the survey by CARA showed that the age bracket of 18 to 29 had the lowest rate of weekly Mass attendance - 18%.

The second greatest cause of the drift of kids away from faith is the secular world they live in - school, classmates. the internet… and parents who have no clue, and do not try to direct their children away from issues, situations and people (including classmates) who potentially threaten those children.

Bottom line: as much as I might agree that the the Sacraments of Initiation should be provided at once, and to all - including infants, it is by no means any sort of cure.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with otjm’s post above. I recall teaching a 5th grade PSR class some time ago for the parish. The kids were attentive and interested. But what astonished me was that hardly any of these Catholic kids attended weekend Mass, because the parents didn’ take them. Why would they bring them to PSR every Wednesday but not take them to Mass on Sunday?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top