Should the Confirmation age be lowered?

[Lapey]

But 15 years ago, none of us who now support this, even though we were active, practicing Catholics at the time, knew we were wrong. Now we do. It will change, and quicker than you think. Yes the Church works slowly in many things, but this is not really a change for the universal Church, just for the US. It is simply a matter of the RE establishment (and that is certainly who drives this stupidity, the DREs around the country) learning the error of their ways.

This is what gives me hope as well. Until only a couple of short years ago, I too would have been arguing against myself on this one. I was helping teach incorrect theology of the sacrament of confirmation, “its your chance to claim the faith for yourself as an adult in the Church…” What hogwash. So the sacrament is about what the recipient does as opposed to what God does? That sound a little Protestant, don’t you agree? I just didn’t understand the truth, or rejected it in exchange for the “norm”.

It’s much like a Protestant altar call, because a person decides of his own free will to stand up in public and declare Jesus is Lord of his life he is saved. That thought kind of leaves Jesus and the whole event of His Crucifixion out of the equation doesn’t it?

I hope I am wrong on the timing as well.

Peace,
Dc. Gary

 

[tafan]

This is what gives me hope as well. Until only a couple of short years ago, I too would have been arguing against myself on this one. I was helping teach incorrect theology of the sacrament of confirmation, “its your chance to claim the faith for yourself as an adult in the Church…” What hogwash. So the sacrament is about what the recipient does as opposed to what God does? That sound a little Protestant, don’t you agree? I just didn’t understand the truth, or rejected it in exchange for the “norm”.

It’s much like a Protestant altar call, because a person decides of his own free will to stand up in public and declare Jesus is Lord of his life he is saved. That thought kind of leaves Jesus and the whole event of His Crucifixion out of the equation doesn’t it?

I hope I am wrong on the timing as well.

Peace,
Dc. Gary

Of course it sounds Protestant. Luther rejected that confirmation was a sacrament. The Lutherans make confirmation a non-sacramental rite of adult profession of faith. Catholics in this country have done the exact same thing. There is no priority of thought at all about the graces conferred by the sacrament.

BTW, I said 15 years ago. That was likely inaccurate, I doubt if I figured it out more than 5 years ago, maybe 10 (but that would be a stretch).

 

[EasterJoy]

It says they have to be prepared in accordance with their age and ability. The younger the person, the lower the threshold. The assumption is that the person will be around 7, or just figuring out right from wrong. It says that clearly. Around age 7 we want you to do these things.

The American bishops have an exemption that allows them to set a normative age between 7 and 16. They are an aberration. The experiment is leading to widespread heresy and to religious education teachers denying the sacramental nature of a sacrament and clergy saying that explaining the sacramental theology of Confirmation is sacramentalizing it.

Best case scenario for Confirming at the proper age:
Children have sacramental grace and through that grace continue to form their consciences including through formal catechetical programs.

Worst case scenario for Confirming at the proper age:
Children have sacramental grace but no catechesis.

Best case scenario for Confirming at a late age:
Children have catechesis and through that and seek out a holy life and sacramental grace.

Worst case scenario for Confirming at a late age:
Children have little to no catechesis and no sacramental grace.

If I have to choose between those worst case scenarios, I’ll choose children having sacramental grace with no catechesis. The best case scenario is also preferred.

Well, since canon law states “Can. 891 The sacrament of confirmation is to be conferred on the faithful at about the age of discretion unless the conference of bishops has determined another age, or there is danger of death, or in the judgment of the minister a grave cause suggests otherwise,” it seems a bit strong to say it is an “aberration” that the USCCB has set a different age range.

Yes, it seems a dicey trade-off to put off confirmation since it has become clear how many fewer Catholics will receive it when that decision is made…how many will suffer the truly worst case in the hopes that perhaps some might realize a better case. (I would guess this is why the Orthodox bishops have chosen do the entire three-fold initiation at once.) Still, these decisions are beyond my authority and pay grade, so there is no power to bind in my opinion.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

…Even GRATEFULONEjim now recognizes that a late confirmation date is a “drastic” action by the Bishops and that the sacrament is not well understood because of the current practice.

Yes indeed you are correct. Unfortunately though, to the disdain of many, I agree with the course that our bishop has chosen to convey the Sacrament in the 11th year of High School. BUT…Not unwilling to change if it was to be changed universally by the USCCB ::yup:

I do understand that it is placed before the Sacrament of Eucharist in the order of initiation, and yes this does pose a question of whether or not it should be conveyed at the earliest occasion once the child has reached the age of reason, or conveyed at a later point once it can be determined that the child indeed has the ability to reason and understands what (s)he is called to do as a Catholic. In my opinion, which many disagree with and that is perfectly fine, this later position is what the bishop in our diocese and many believe is the best course for the Confirmands to pursue.

Indeed, many have provided strong evidence that this course of action is incorrect, and the evidence is strong in their support, but there are areas that the bishops see as being discretionary and that is why you see older age Confirmation taking place. It sure IS a tough call. I would certainly value a decision to be made by the USCCB. After the lively, but truly wonderful, discourse that has taken place within this thread, there does need to be an answer so we can proceed forth in the 21st Century unified in our goal across the nation to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

This indeed was one of the better threads I have been fortunate enough to have enjoyed being part of on CAF.

 

[Lapey]

Yes indeed you are correct. Unfortunately though, to the disdain of many, I agree with the course that our bishop has chosen to convey the Sacrament in the 11th year of High School. BUT…Not unwilling to change if it was to be changed universally by the USCCB ::yup:

I do understand that it is placed before the Sacrament of Eucharist in the order of initiation, and yes this does pose a question of whether or not it should be conveyed at the earliest occasion once the child has reached the age of reason, or conveyed at a later point once it can be determined that the child indeed has the ability to reason and understands what (s)he is called to do as a Catholic. In my opinion, which many disagree with and that is perfectly fine, this later position is what the bishop in our diocese and many believe is the best course for the Confirmands to pursue.

Indeed, many have provided strong evidence that this course of action is incorrect, and the evidence is strong in their support, but there are areas that the bishops see as being discretionary and that is why you see older age Confirmation taking place. It sure IS a tough call. I would certainly value a decision to be made by the USCCB. After the lively, but truly wonderful, discourse that has taken place within this thread, there does need to be an answer so we can proceed forth in the 21st Century unified in our goal across the nation to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

This indeed was one of the better threads I have been fortunate enough to have enjoyed being part of on CAF.

Well spoken Jim. We do disagree, but that’s why we are called universal and all encompassing.

I had asked you a couple of questions which you may have missed. It was about the size of your parish. Do you know how large your parish is? This could be part of why we differ so much. My assigned parish is 1700 families and it is a little difficult for me to say I know all of the kids at confirmation age. On the other hand, some of our parishes are 100 to 400 families. In that case I sure could know all of them. That’s the only reason I asked.

Peace

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

Well spoken Jim. We do disagree, but that’s why we are called universal and all encompassing.

I had asked you a couple of questions which you may have missed. It was about the size of your parish. Do you know how large your parish is? This could be part of why we differ so much. My assigned parish is 1700 families and it is a little difficult for me to say I know all of the kids at confirmation age. On the other hand, some of our parishes are 100 to 400 families. In that case I sure could know all of them. That’s the only reason I asked.

Peace

My parish is roughly 300 families. The Vicariate is roughly 1400. That is our grouping of Churches within a 50 mile radius. These are under the direction of the vicar (pastor), one parochial vicar and 2 deacons. It includes 5 Churches, 2 Oratories and one School k-8.

 

[Lapey]

My parish is roughly 300 families. The Vicariate is roughly 1400. That is our grouping of Churches within a 50 mile radius. These are under the direction of the vicar (pastor), one parochial vicar and 2 deacons. It includes 5 Churches, 2 Oratories and one School k-8.

That could explain why my doubts to the numbers a few pages back. Your parish is quite a bit smaller than mine. As a whole the size is close but with added help with ministers and team members.

My parish consists of me and our Pastor, the DRE and my wife the youth minister; so you can see how I doubted you knowing all, I am guilty of thinking everyone is in my shoes. For that I do apologize.

Anyway, it has been a good discussion and I hope to see some leadership out of the USCCB soon; either way there should be at least some consistency.

Peace.

 

[GRATEFULONEjim]

That could explain why my doubts to the numbers a few pages back. Your parish is quite a bit smaller than mine. As a whole the size is close but with added help with ministers and team members.

My parish consists of me and our Pastor, the DRE and my wife the youth minister; so you can see how I doubted you knowing all, I am guilty of thinking everyone is in my shoes. For that I do apologize.

Anyway, it has been a good discussion and I hope to see some leadership out of the USCCB soon; either way there should be at least some consistency.

Peace.

Our two priests and deacons celebrate 7 Masses each weekend, and daily Masses throughout the week at each location. The vicar (pastor) oversees the operation of 4 out of the 5 Churches and 2 Oratories, one of the deacons is administrator for the other Church. The vicar also oversees the administration of the school. 4 of the 5 parishes have separate RE classes. All come together as previously noted for Confirmation classes with catechist teams from each parish hosting class as previously stated. There are separate youth groups at each parish and all groups come together once per quarter for fellowship. A lot of work, but everything comes together nicely.

Keep the faith

 

[babochka]

This indeed was one of the better threads I have been fortunate enough to have enjoyed being part of on CAF.

I have to agree. Thank you all for the friendly and respectful discourse.

 

[smichhertz]

I haven’t read through the thread at all, but I voted for confirmation as infants because I can’t think of a reason to allow infant baptism, but not the other sacraments of initiation.

I was actually baptized under the Ukrainian rite. So I received all sacraments of initiation at baptism. Although, I later transferred to the Latin rite. On the day of my “Confirmation” the bishop bestowed on me a special blessing, but I wasn’t actually Confirmed as I had already been confirmed.

I don’t really have a strong option on it though, and when I have time I’ll look through the thread to hear what others think.

 

[jediknight]

For America I would like to see the age of Confirmation actually raised at least to the till person is a teenager and around his or her junior year in high school. And perhaps to some how initiate some kind of refresher course for parents to be better able at teaching their children the basics of the faith instead of the parents relying entirely on catechists in their respective parishes to teach. Also it would be nice though probably very hard to see more religious catechists per religious ed program, perhaps not a clergy or religious per class but at least 1 on site per gather or even two , to aid in the teaching of parents and or children even the catechists sometimes on what is needing to be taught or learned.

Right now our religious ed program is mediocre the catechists do their best with what they have , but having classes in the middle of the week, especially with older children makes teaching very hard especially in the evening to night hours when kids are ready to call it a night and or have homework during the week and do not understand why their faith is even important to begin with…

 

[thewanderer]

For America I would like to see the age of Confirmation actually raised at least to the till person is a teenager and around his or her junior year in high school. And perhaps to some how initiate some kind of refresher course for parents to be better able at teaching their children the basics of the faith instead of the parents relying entirely on catechists in their respective parishes to teach. Also it would be nice though probably very hard to see more religious catechists per religious ed program, perhaps not a clergy or religious per class but at least 1 on site per gather or even two , to aid in the teaching of parents and or children even the catechists sometimes on what is needing to be taught or learned.

Right now our religious ed program is mediocre the catechists do their best with what they have , but having classes in the middle of the week, especially with older children makes teaching very hard especially in the evening to night hours when kids are ready to call it a night and or have homework during the week and do not understand why their faith is even important to begin with…

Confirmation is not a reward for knowing your faith. It is a sacrament of initiation into the life of Christ which imparts Grace to those who receive it to help them live good and holy lives. Why make kids have to wait to receive this grace? The need for catechesis does not end at Confirmation, so why deprive kids of the special Grace this sacrament would give them? Why make things more difficult for the kids by making them have to go through it all without that added Grace?

 

[MonkMoses]

I haven’t read through the thread at all, but I voted for confirmation as infants because I can’t think of a reason to allow infant baptism, but not the other sacraments of initiation.

I was actually baptized under the Ukrainian rite. So I received all sacraments of initiation at baptism. Although, I later transferred to the Latin rite. On the day of my “Confirmation” the bishop bestowed on me a special blessing, but I wasn’t actually Confirmed as I had already been confirmed.

I don’t really have a strong option on it though, and when I have time I’ll look through the thread to hear what others think.

Did you actually “change rites” by doing the paperwork through your Ukrainian bishop? It is extremely rare for the Holy See to allow an Eastern Catholic to transfer into the Latin Rite.

 

[illinidiva]

Actually, I think that it should be increased to high school. Children should not be forced to go through it if they don’t want to and should be old enough to reasonably understand what they are doing. Rather than forcing people to fully accept Catholicism when thy are very young and cannot understand it; they should be allowed to come to an adult understanding of faith. It is my understanding once Confirmed, you cannot leave the Catholic Church without being in mortal sin.

 

[Brendan]

Actually, I think that it should be increased to high school. Children should not be forced to go through it if they don’t want to and should be old enough to reasonably understand what they are doing. Rather than forcing people to fully accept Catholicism when thy are very young and cannot understand it; they should be allowed to come to an adult understanding of faith. It is my understanding once Confirmed, you cannot leave the Catholic Church without being in mortal sin.

That happens at Baptism. One is Catholic at the time of Baptism and really can never leave

In effect, one is bound by Church law at Baptism. It is possible to leave by formal defection anytime past the age of Reason, but it requires formal notification to one’s Bishop.

That removes the obligations under Canon Law, but the person is always and forever more a Catholic.

 

[catholictiger]

should be up to the bishop

 

[Phemie]

That happens at Baptism. One is Catholic at the time of Baptism and really can never leave

In effect, one is bound by Church law at Baptism. It is possible to leave by formal defection anytime past the age of Reason, but it requires formal notification to one’s Bishop.

That removes the obligations under Canon Law, but the person is always and forever more a Catholic.

Actually there is no longer the possibility of defecting to avoid the obligations. Even if you formally defect, such as they do in Germany to avoid paying the Church tax, you are still bound to marry according to canonical form and not doing so results in an invalid marriage. That loophole in Canon Law was closed a few years ago.

 

[Phemie]

Actually, I think that it should be increased to high school. Children should not be forced to go through it if they don’t want to and should be old enough to reasonably understand what they are doing. Rather than forcing people to fully accept Catholicism when thy are very young and cannot understand it; they should be allowed to come to an adult understanding of faith. It is my understanding once Confirmed, you cannot leave the Catholic Church without being in mortal sin.

There is no such thing as 'fully accepting Catholicism" for a baptized Catholic. It’s Baptism that makes you Catholic, not Confirmation.

Confirmation is done to you, it’s not something you do. That’s why anyone, be they an hour old or 100 years old, who is baptized Catholic is to be confirmed if they are in danger of dying.

Once a Catholic, always a Catholic. You may opt not to practice but that doesn’t make you less Catholic, it just makes you a non-practicing Catholic.

 

[illinidiva]

That is sort of unfair that the religious choice is taken away from people.

 

[Brendan]

That is sort of unfair that the religious choice is taken away from people.

It is part of the ontological reality of Baptism. It makes an irremovable change to the soul itself.

From the Catechism

1280 Baptism imprints on the soul an indelible spiritual sign, the character, which consecrates the baptized person for Christian worship. Because of the character Baptism cannot be repeated