Should the Confirmation age be lowered?

[CDB1718]

What about CCC 1307 and CCC 1309? Both can be interpreted as occurring at an older age.

1307 says age of discretion (around 7) or younger. How can you “interpret” that to mean older?

1309 says “To this end catechesis for Confirmation should strive to awaken a sense of belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ…” How can you “interpret” striving to awaken to mean older when it follows an explicit direction that the age being addressed is the age of discretion (around age 7) or younger?

You could if the parents were still willing to bring their children to RE. It is a fact that once the Sacraments stop, the participation in Religious Education stops. Why do you think the American Catholic Church is in the state it’s in.

That’s a separate issue. You can’t hold the children’s sacraments hostage because their parents don’t value catechesis. Devaluing catechesis further doesn’t fix the problem, it just creates new ones which involve barring children who should have the sacraments from access to the sacraments. That leads to the idea that the sacraments are the church equivalent of a high school graduation. It’s one fault following another.

 

[CDB1718]

You could if the parents were still willing to bring their children to RE. It is a fact that once the Sacraments stop, the participation in Religious Education stops. Why do you think the American Catholic Church is in the state it’s in.

That’s a separate issue. You can’t hold the children’s sacraments hostage because their parents don’t value catechesis. Devaluing catechesis further doesn’t fix the problem, it just creates new ones which involve barring children who should have the sacraments from access to the sacraments. That leads to the idea that the sacraments are the church equivalent of a high school graduation. It’s one fault following another.

 

[tafan]

What about CCC 1307 and CCC 1309? Both can be interpreted as occurring at an older age.

1307 The Latin tradition gives “the age of discretion” as the reference point for receiving Confirmation. But in danger of death children should be confirmed even if they have not yet attained the age of discretion.123

1307 clearly affirms the teaching expressed in canon 891. Your interpretation appears to be quite a stretch

1309 Preparation for Confirmation should aim at leading the Christian toward a more intimate union with Christ and a more lively familiarity with the Holy Spirit - his actions, his gifts, and his biddings - in order to be more capable of assuming the apostolic responsibilities of Christian life. To this end catechesis for Confirmation should strive to awaken a sense of belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ, the universal Church as well as the parish community. the latter bears special responsibility for the preparation of confirmands

Again in 1309, you are reading something into it that is clearly not intended (or else 1307 and canon 891 would not be as explicit). Awakening a sense of belonging does not mean a person has been fully catechized as an adult. The word “awaken” clearly implies that it is almost the start of the process, not the end.

Do you doubt the efficacy of the sacrament so much that you actually cannot consider the graces bestowed on the child through the sacrament as a benefit, not a hindrance, to proper formation?

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

That is all very laudable, but what gives you the right to offer access to the Sacraments as some kind of ‘reward’ for a demonstration of that person’s good knowledge of Catholic teaching?

In taking this approach you are actually teaching the children something that is contrary to the teachings of our Church. You have in effect created a doctrine of your own.

How would you deal with a handicapped child who will never be able to meet the standards you set? Deny them access to the Sacraments?

I am following the direction of the Diocese. Period. I do not add or delete anything. Handicapped persons are not denied Sacraments…That is under discretion of the Pastor.

As far as teachings contrary to the Church, you will have to address the Bishop of Buffalo on that. It’s his call.

 

[CDB1718]

I am following the direction of the Diocese. Period. I do not add or delete anything. Handicapped persons are not denied Sacraments…That is under discretion of the Pastor.

As far as teachings contrary to the Church, you will have to address the Bishop of Buffalo on that. It’s his call.

Do you believe the Bishop of Buffalo teaches that “These decisions cannot be truly understood by children under the age of 16. They have not had adequate time to learn and understand the faith” and that “Confirmation should be considered the ‘sending off point, the fruition of childhood catechesis’”?

The latter statement is a heresy that denies the sacramental nature of Confirmation. I do not believe the Bishop of Buffalo teaches this.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

1307 clearly affirms the teaching expressed in canon 891. Your interpretation appears to be quite a stretch

Again in 1309, you are reading something into it that is clearly not intended (or else 1307 and canon 891 would not be as explicit). Awakening a sense of belonging does not mean a person has been fully catechized as an adult. The word “awaken” clearly implies that it is almost the start of the process, not the end.

Do you doubt the efficacy of the sacrament so much that you actually cannot consider the graces bestowed on the child through the sacrament as a benefit, not a hindrance, to proper formation?

You claim that the Diocese of Buffalo stretches the interpretation of the CCC and Cannon Law. It is for me to follow their guidelines in preparing children for the Sacraments. I happen to agree with them.

 

[CDB1718]

You claim that the Diocese of Buffalo stretches the interpretation of the CCC and Cannon Law. It is for me to follow their guidelines in preparing children for the Sacraments. I happen to agree with them.

Under current canon law, the United States Roman Catholic bishops may set the regular age for Roman Catholics to receive Confirmation between the age of discretion and age 16. In danger of death, they’re to confirm any baptized person including infants.

You state that the Diocese of Buffalo chooses a later age because “Confirmation should be considered the ‘sending off point, the fruition of childhood catechesis.’”

I do not think the Diocese of Buffalo teaches this or that they chose a later age for that reason. If they did, it would be heresy.

Will you please show where the diocese teaches that this is why they chose the age of Confirmation they choose? If you can’t, you shouldn’t say that your private interpretation is the teaching of the bishop.

 

[Brendan_64]

I am following the direction of the Diocese. Period. I do not add or delete anything. Handicapped persons are not denied Sacraments…That is under discretion of the Pastor.

But what if they haven’t got the intellectual capacity to understand the Sacrament? What if they never have?

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

Do you believe the Bishop of Buffalo teaches that “These decisions cannot be truly understood by children under the age of 16. They have not had adequate time to learn and understand the faith” and that “Confirmation should be considered the ‘sending off point, the fruition of childhood catechesis’”?

The latter statement is a heresy that denies the sacramental nature of Confirmation. I do not believe the Bishop of Buffalo teaches this.

All I am saying is that the Diocese of Buffalo allows the Sacrament of Confirmation to be received after the completion of 10th grade religious education and only with the approval of the pastor which is based on a one on one interview to assess the Confirmands knowledge and willful desire to accept the teachings of the Church.

I am implying nothing else. That is the way it is done here.

 

[tafan]

You claim that the Diocese of Buffalo stretches the interpretation of the CCC and Cannon Law. It is for me to follow their guidelines in preparing children for the Sacraments. I happen to agree with them.

First of all, I admit to making the claim you state. I would like to withdraw that. I have seen that the USCCB clearly gives a wide range (as they are allowed to do under canon law):

Following recognition by the Holy See, the [USCCB] has decreed that the age for conferring the sacrament of confirmation in the Latin rite dioceses of the United States will be between “the age of discretion ‘considered to be about age seven’] and about sixteen years of age.’” (www.usccb.org)

However, my other points I clearly make: ie the age of reason in the West is the norm, and the catechism clearly expresses that preference.

Yes, you are doing your responsibility.

However, you agreement with Diocese of Buffalo does not give you the right to object publicly to the clear teaching of the Church (which is what you do state obvious wrong interpretations of these teachings).

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

But what if they haven’t got the intellectual capacity to understand the Sacrament? What if they never have?

You must have missed the part where I stated that such circumstances are under the pastors discretion.

 

[UncleBill]

Call it what you want but we are fostering and setting forth good solid Catholics that know the faith and are willing to live the faith instead of creating more Catholics in Name Only who pick and choose what teachings of the Church to follow and might show up to Mass on Easter and Christmas.

So tell me please…why does this catechesis need to be linked with the reception of the sacrament of Confirmation? Couldn’t you give these young adults the same catechesis e.g. if they were previously confirmed? Emmy must the two be linked?

That’s how we in the Byzantine Churches do it.

 

[tafan]

But what if they haven’t got the intellectual capacity to understand the Sacrament? What if they never have?

That illustrates the whole problem with the “lets make confirmation a rite of passage into adulthood” theology.

Any given level of intellectual capacity or understanding of the sacrament is nowhere mentioned (not even alluded) to in the section of the Catechism about who should receive confirmation (paragraphs 1306-1311)

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3T.HTM

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

…However, you agreement with Diocese of Buffalo does not give you the right to object publicly to the clear teaching of the Church (which is what you do state obvious wrong interpretations of these teachings).

In your opinion. You have, nor has anyone else, proven without a doubt that the guidelines for receiving the Sacrament of Confirmation, as prescribed by the Diocese of Buffalo, are in anyway misinterpreted or in error.

 

[Hopey]

Your diocese is outside of what is allowed if they are confirming above 16. About 16, does not mean above. It mean on or approaching. Although exceptions can be made they are not the norm.
Many diocese have fallen into this error, not just yours. Many have been lead by faulty text books and a desire to keep the kids as long as possible hoping it will make a difference all along ignoring the huge amount that are dropping out.

Change and correction is slow in the church.

If you are open to learning more, Confirmed in the knighthood, is a good book that gives the history of the sacrament and the errors it has fallen in to.

It is the parents responsibility to make sure their children receive appropriate classes whether in the parish or at home. It is discpuraging that many young people are denied this sacrament and the help from it because of the many misunderstandings of the sacrament.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

Here is the link to the Diocese of Buffalo. It explains everything much more eloquently than I can.

officeoflifelongfaithformation.org/Sacraments/Confirmation.aspx

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

Your diocese is outside of what is allowed if they are confirming above 16. About 16, does not mean above. It mean on or approaching. Although exceptions can be made they are not the norm.
Many diocese have fallen into this error, not just yours. Many have been lead by faulty text books and a desire to keep the kids as long as possible hoping it will make a difference all along ignoring the huge amount that are dropping out.

Change and correction is slow in the church.

If you are open to learning more, Confirmed in the knighthood, is a good book that gives the history of the sacrament and the errors it has fallen in to.

It is the parents responsibility to make sure their children receive appropriate classes whether in the parish or at home. It is discpuraging that many young people are denied this sacrament and the help from it because of the many misunderstandings of the sacrament.

Thank you…It sounds like a good read.

 

[Hopey]

Called to Knighthood is the book
calledtoknighthood.com/index2.html

 

[tafan]

In your opinion. You have, nor has anyone else, proven without a doubt that the guidelines for receiving the Sacrament of Confirmation, as prescribed by the Diocese of Buffalo, are in anyway misinterpreted or in error.

I did not say they interpreted them wrong, only that you did. You stated that both 1307 and 1309 indicated a later date of confirmation. Clearly that is wrong, unless the word “awaken” means something different to you than it does to most of us.

Although less egregious, your statement that confirmation “should be a sending off point, the fruition of childhood catechesis” is also very problematic.
The catechism states it is anything but the fruition, it says it "**leading the Christian toward **a more intimate union with Christ and a more lively familiarity with the Holy Spirit ". This sounds much more to as the beginning of formation, not the culmination of formation.

So while I certainly acknowledge your Diocese’s right to have the later age, I consider it a big mistake.
Your the Diocese has an obligation to teach the teenagers the truth about the sacrament. I would find it quite challenging to explain to a 16 year old that this is so great a sacrament, the norm and tradition of the church has it at the age of discretion, yet you are 16 and have not received it. Tell me, does the diocese explain sections of the catechism such as 1307 and 1309 to the students?

At the end of the day, arguments for late confirmation always come down to your post in #80

You could if the parents were still willing to bring their children to RE. It is a fact that once the Sacraments stop, the participation in Religious Education stops.

In our diocese the Bishop was quite honest about this to the priests, but it is extremely flawed thinking. The end result is that parents send their kids to 1st and 2nd grade CCD to allow them to go to 1st communion. Then the kids don’t go back until the year (or maybe 2 years) prior to confirmation. How does that work out? Horribly, the kids are smart enough to know the only reason their parents are sending them is so that they can pass the hurdles required for the confirmation. I have taught first year confirmation prep class to 7th graders who are starting their preparation for 8th grade confirmation. It is a joke. They have had little or no catechesis, or even reception of the sacraments for 5 years. Literally starting them out memorizing their basic prayers. The know absolutely nothing. And getting them motivated to learn anything without in those conditions is next to impossible. Oh, for a little extra grace… Oh I forgot, denying them that was the whole point.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

I did not say they interpreted them wrong, only that you did. You stated that both 1307 and 1309 indicated a later date of confirmation. Clearly that is wrong, unless the word “awaken” means something different to you than it does to most of us.

Although less egregious, your statement that confirmation “should be a sending off point, the fruition of childhood catechesis” is also very problematic.
The catechism states it is anything but the fruition, it says it "**leading the Christian toward **a more intimate union with Christ and a more lively familiarity with the Holy Spirit ". This sounds much more to as the beginning of formation, not the culmination of formation.

So while I certainly acknowledge your Diocese’s right to have the later age, I consider it a big mistake.
Your the Diocese has an obligation to teach the teenagers the truth about the sacrament. I would find it quite challenging to explain to a 16 year old that this is so great a sacrament, the norm and tradition of the church has it at the age of discretion, yet you are 16 and have not received it. Tell me, does the diocese explain sections of the catechism such as 1307 and 1309 to the students?

At the end of the day, arguments for late confirmation always come down to your post in #80

In our diocese the Bishop was quite honest about this to the priests, but it is extremely flawed thinking. The end result is that parents send their kids to 1st and 2nd grade CCD to allow them to go to 1st communion. Then the kids don’t go back until the year (or maybe 2 years) prior to confirmation. How does that work out? Horribly, the kids are smart enough to know the only reason their parents are sending them is so that they can pass the hurdles required for the confirmation. I have taught first year confirmation prep class to 7th graders who are starting their preparation for 8th grade confirmation. It is a joke. They have had little or no catechesis, or even reception of the sacraments for 5 years. Literally starting them out memorizing their basic prayers. The know absolutely nothing. And getting them motivated to learn anything without in those conditions is next to impossible. Oh, for a little extra grace… Oh I forgot, denying them that was the whole point.

If you believe I am mistaken please read this PDF from our Diocese. This will clarify my position.

officeoflifelongfaithformation.org/Portals/8/PDF/Sacraments/The%20Sacrament%20of%20Confirmation.pdf