P
PatriceA
Guest
One question: Why do YOU think this timeline is a good idea?
And the article you linked, has nothing to do with what you are proposing.
- Status
And the article you linked, has nothing to do with what you are proposing.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
Good question. I am also curious as to why the OP thinks it would be a good idea.
O
opus101
Guest
My cousins received confirmation at the time of their infant baptism - they belong to the Byzantine rite, and that is how it is done there.
S
Sunbreak
Guest
Nope, don’t think it’s a good idea. It won’t retain young folks just because the age is changed. I think if young folks had to wait until age 21 to be confirmed, a lot of them wouldn’t bother.
M
Mrs_Sally
Guest
I do not like the idea of withholding sacraments so long. If the sacraments are not going to be in the restored order and close to the age of reason, than I think confirmation should be as early as possible - no later than middle school certainly and preferably at or before 6th grade. Whether this is the worse age for children or not, I believe that allowing for the fullness of the Holy Spirit before children turn into teens and all the angst and hormones that go along is an inspired idea. 
T
thomasf
Guest
It should all be finished by the age of 9 at the latest. I do not support spacing them out.
E
Elizium23
Guest
Finished?!?!?!
It should just be begun at that age! The sacraments of initiation are the very stepping-stones to a lifetime of faith and grace. It is unfortunately all too often that Confirmation is a going-away ceremony, a sending-forth of people who will never darken the door of a church building again. One rationale for spacing out the sacraments and making them take longer is to keep children in religious education. Carrot-and-stick. The children’s parents “need” something - that ceremony that is all-important for them or the in-laws. The Church “needs” something - children who are well-formed in faith and haven’t quit going to Mass altogether. So withholding sacraments until a later age seems to be an adequate solution to this problem. Not so. The infusion of grace and abundant gifts of the Holy Spirit can never be withheld from those who would benefit. Children should be taught certain fundamental things early and often: that frequent reception of the Eucharist and Penance are essential to Christian life. That attending Mass is a joyful occasion, not a dreary obligation.
If the fundamental tenets of faith and citizenship are not instilled in children by a very young age, it may perhaps never be done. Some are destined for perdition and no amount of religious indoctrination will open their eyes to the beauty of God’s gift. But let’s view the sacraments as a new beginning, a rebirth in the grace of God the Father, a death to sin and suffering, not as a drudgery of ticking off requirements on a checklist.
It is a sad reality that the parents of children often view religious education as something the Church must do. This is a dereliction of duty by the family. The family is the Domestic Church. The primary responsibility of religious and spiritual education lies with the parents. RE classes at the parish must be a supplement, a reinforcement of what the children are already learning at home through faithful parents. This is why baptisms are delayed when it is perceived that the parents will not lead a life of Christian faith and virtue. This is why my parish requires families to be active members for at least four months before beginning preparation for a sacrament. The parents must be the ones learning the faith and transmitting it through their children to future generations. Otherwise, all the work by bishops and priests is in vain.
D
devoutchristian
Guest
Yes. All the sacraments of initiation should be available to children as soon as they are susceptible to sin.
E
Elizium23
Guest
I totally agree. See my previous post.
M
mikeeh
Guest
Great responses everyone. It should be noted that in the Eastern Churches Confirmation is called Chrismation. It’s the same sacrament, but I do feel the name gives a different meaning. Chrismation seems to be just sealed by the Holy Spirit. Confirmation is not only sealed by the Holy Spirit but also receiving full maturity in the Church.
Well I wanted to be unbiased, so I thought it would be a good way to show something that’s a little opposite to what I put forth. However, the Father in that blog does say he’s going to wait until the individual child is ready. If he’ll follow through with that method is unknown. I don’t know if waiting for each child to be ready is practical, but maybe giving them a little more time to study each sacrament will allow them to appreciate each them more.
The rationale behind this idea (mind you, it’s all just food for thought) is not to keep people in religious ed, but to give the sacraments at times when they are more likely to understand them. The Blessed Sacrament at 14 so they know how to handle and care for the Body of Christ. It seems like younger kids know how to handle it, but see it more like something magical than divine. And when I give Communion to younger kids they always seem to stare at me blankly and whisper Amen. Waiting a little longer might help instill a little confidence in their acceptance of the Body and Blood of Christ. As for Confirmation it’s later so that adults can choose to become full members of the Church on their own instead of having mommy and daddy force it upon them.
Interesting. I’m debating on what I might do if I ever have children, have them receive Confirmation when they’re young or letting them receive it on their own if and when they want.
Well I wanted to be unbiased, so I thought it would be a good way to show something that’s a little opposite to what I put forth. However, the Father in that blog does say he’s going to wait until the individual child is ready. If he’ll follow through with that method is unknown. I don’t know if waiting for each child to be ready is practical, but maybe giving them a little more time to study each sacrament will allow them to appreciate each them more.I never said it was a good idea. I just like healthy discussions. As I have said in my responses above it allows more time for understanding and appreciating the sacraments. I do feel like Confirmation could be a choice for a little later. When I received it as a teenager I was definitely not ready, and I definitely did not want it. But I would have loved to have received in my mid-20s when I started coming back to the Church. I even asked my mom if I could redo Confirmation, but she said you only receive it once. I feel like it was a waste of a great experience. I’ve also been a chaperone for the Confirmation kids’ retreat two years now and so many of them aren’t ready and just don’t want it, but mommy and daddy makes them. Many people argue for the sacraments given as infants thinking the Eastern Orthodox Churches have a better spirituality, but if you’ve ever been to any big modern city in Eastern Europe they have the same problem with secularism in their young people, or their young people see religion as a culture/heritage and not a faith.
M
MariaG
Guest
I do not like the idea of withholding sacraments so long. If the sacraments are not going to be in the restored order and close to the age of reason, than I think confirmation should be as early as possible - no later than middle school certainly and preferably at or before 6th grade. Whether this is the worse age for children or not, I believe that allowing for the fullness of the Holy Spirit before children turn into teens and all the angst and hormones that go along is an inspired idea.
YES!!
M
MariaG
Guest
Most people don’t get to choose when their kids get confirmed. The parish they attend has rules set by the priest which conform to the directives of the diocese.
But again, you seem to be falling into the protestest believers adult responsibility of the faith kind thing.
Keep not the LITTLE children from Him. 14 is not little.
P
Phemie
Guest
Instituted Lector and Instituted Acolyte are still steps to ordination, though no longer minor orders in the Ordinary Form. Those instituted ministries are only open to adult males.
Because the English language gives us two words for someone who reads (lector, reader) people on these boards tend to use ‘Lector’ when referring to the instituted ministry and ‘reader’ when referring to the minister (male or female) that one sees in the average parish. In parish use, however, you’ll usually find the words used interchangeably and in many other languages, including French and Latin where there is only one word, the distinction is only by the use of the adjective ‘instituted’.
C
Cider
Guest
But it is an option, it is the oldest tradition of the Church to have baptism, chrismation ( confirmation) and first eucharist at birth with reconciliation starting at the age of reason.
U
UncleBill
Guest
It is about time the Western church returns to her roots and do what they originaly did and the Eastern Church still does…Baptism, Chrismation (Confirmation) and Eucharist all at once to INFANTS! Why baptize a baby and then refuse them the rest of the sacraments of initiation? Just makes no sense.
M
MariaG
Guest
agreed!!!
U
UncleBill
Guest
Think of it like this…baptize a baby and the first thing you do to him is excommunicate him! Horrible!
S
stlcatholic86
Guest
I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit now. I initially agreeded that the sacrements should be separated, but now I’m not so sure. I think there is something unique about coming to the final rite of initition on ones own accord. When I was 14 church wasn’t important to me at all. It grew less important as I grew older, but now it’s really important to me I feel a real pull to the church and its teachings something I haven’t felt in a long time. A part of me is indeed sad that I wasn’t confirmed as teenage, but a large part of me is really happy that it wasn’t, because now the experience will have a true meaningful experience something that I really can rember. It’s not the end but the begging of a new life as a full member of the Church. I guess my point is the sacrements shouldn’t necessarily be based on age (no doubt people should be baptized as early as possible). Instead, perhaps we should base them on the intent of free will thus those that feel they are truly ready and not forced or coerced will enter and those that are not will just wait until they are. Thoughts?
M
MariaG
Guest
We don’t lose free will just because we have be given the gift of the grace from confirmation. What it DOES give us is the grace to persevere to the end. Yet we deny this grace to our children pushing the sacraments farther and farther apart.
While there has been a push to get them closer again, it is not enough. It is still seen by many as an adult decision. Someone here called it heresy, and if things keep going the way they are, with people seeing it as a “believers confession” kind of thing, it may well become heresy.
The good thing is the remedy would probably end up being doing like the eastern rite or at the very least, at the “age of reason” around 7.
S
stlcatholic86
Guest
I didn’t say we loose free will. Instead, I suggested it would be more meaningful because people would arrive to on their own accord rather than corecion. Lets not get carried away with the heresy nobody is questioning doctrine rather it seems to be how to apply scripture and doctrine and that would fall starkly out of the category of heresy.
As an aside perhaps someone could explain either on this forum or PM what exactly the purpose of each sacrement is or send me a link I’m sure it been laid out on this forum before.
- Status