Spacing the Sacraments

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikeeh
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mikeeh

Guest
Would it be a good idea if the Sacraments of Initiation and the Sacrament of Reconciliation were spaced out a little more?

Baptism: Infants
Reconciliation: age 7
First Communion: age 14
Confirmation: age 21

These are approximate ages and of course if someone is ready they could request to receive Confirmation as young as 18. I know there are lots of people who love the idea of everything being done as infants, but for argument sake lets say that’s not an option.

Here’s an interesting read:
wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/angry-priest-ive-had-it-with-sacrament-prep-of-young-people/
 
Would it be a good idea if the Sacraments of Initiation and the Sacrament of Reconciliation were spaced out a little more?

Baptism: Infants
Reconciliation: age 7
First Communion: age 14
Confirmation: age 21

These are approximate ages and of course if someone is ready they could request to receive Confirmation as young as 18. I know there are lots of people who love the idea of everything being done as infants, but for argument sake lets say that’s not an option.

Here’s an interesting read:
wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/angry-priest-ive-had-it-with-sacrament-prep-of-young-people/
I think that confirmation should take place before first Communion. But I can see both sides of the argument regarding delaying first Communion.
 
Denying grace in communion to children like that would be a horrible idea.
 
No!

The Sacraments of Initiation should be as close together as is practical. In the Western Church that would be Baptism as an infant, First Confession at age of reason and Confirmation and First Holy Communion soon after.

This is the restored order that is being used in several US dioceses and commended by Pope Benedict XVI.
 
I’ve read this a lot on this forum about Confirmation and Communion happening at relatively the same time and sometimes Confirmation happening first. I am recently returning to the faith, but I thought Confirmation was the final rite of initiation? It would seem there ought to be some time in between communion and confirmation? No?
 
I’ve read this a lot on this forum about Confirmation and Communion happening at relatively the same time and sometimes Confirmation happening first. I am recently returning to the faith, but I thought Confirmation was the final rite of initiation? It would seem there ought to be some time in between communion and confirmation? No?
There is a line of thought, which is supported by the ancient practice of the Eastern Church, that Communion is the final rite of initiation; how can one be more fully a part of the Church than to be joined with her as one flesh?
 
hum . . .interesting concept with spacing the Sacraments . . .
I think in my parish, many people would be for the plan proposed by the OP.
However, it would be with the mistaken notion that Confirmation means “you’re done” . . . like you’ve checked off all the boxes on the sheet and now know all there is to know, so go be an adult. But, of course, it doesn’t work that way. More often than not, Confirmation is but the first step into beginning an adult faith life.

OP< would the idea behind this be to keep our young people in religious ed programs longer or some other rationale? Would love to hear more of your thoughts . . . .
 
There is a line of thought, which is supported by the ancient practice of the Eastern Church, that Communion is the final rite of initiation; how can one be more fully a part of the Church than to be joined with her as one flesh?
This defiantly makes sense. I was baptized Catholic (as a baby) and I had my first Communion as a Catholic (at age 7). However, for various reasons I was confirmed as a Lutheran (at age 13). The reason I bring this up is because my baptism counted in the Lutheran faith, but my communion did not as confirmation and receiving communion are combined in that Lutheran branch as a final initiation to the congregation.
 
Would it be a good idea if the Sacraments of Initiation and the Sacrament of Reconciliation were spaced out a little more?

Baptism: Infants
Reconciliation: age 7
First Communion: age 14
Confirmation: age 21

These are approximate ages and of course if someone is ready they could request to receive Confirmation as young as 18. I know there are lots of people who love the idea of everything being done as infants, but for argument sake lets say that’s not an option.

Here’s an interesting read:
wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/angry-priest-ive-had-it-with-sacrament-prep-of-young-people/
Steady infusion of grace or grace grand slam? Hmmm, well lets see now I was baptized and confirmed and received first communion all when I was 26 (I joined the church at Easter 2010 after going through nine months of RCIA with a great priest). Also, I had reconcilliation about 10 days after Easter. Yeah, it was a grand slam of grace if you will. As for how it should be ordinarily done, I don’t think I’d wait around for someone to be in their twenties to receive the sacrament of confirmation. If God should lead me into the vocation of married life, I would ideally have my kids be confirmed by their sixteenth birthday.
 
Would it be a good idea if the Sacraments of Initiation and the Sacrament of Reconciliation were spaced out a little more?

Baptism: Infants
Reconciliation: age 7
First Communion: age 14
Confirmation: age 21

These are approximate ages and of course if someone is ready they could request to receive Confirmation as young as 18. I know there are lots of people who love the idea of everything being done as infants, but for argument sake lets say that’s not an option.

Here’s an interesting read:
wdtprs.com/blog/2012/06/angry-priest-ive-had-it-with-sacrament-prep-of-young-people/
It is weird of you to suggest these weird things and then link us to a blog post which pretty much suggests the opposite by mentioning the practice in the Eastern Churches.
 
I’ve read this a lot on this forum about Confirmation and Communion happening at relatively the same time and sometimes Confirmation happening first. I am recently returning to the faith, but I thought Confirmation was the final rite of initiation? It would seem there ought to be some time in between communion and confirmation? No?
From the Catechism:

1322 The holy Eucharist completes Christian initiation. Those who have been raised to the dignity of the royal priesthood by Baptism and configured more deeply to Christ by Confirmation participate with the whole community in the Lord’s own sacrifice by means of the Eucharist.

When you look at the Church documents, they always speak of the Sacraments of Initiation as Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist – in that order.

I think delaying the sacraments is a bad idea. Why keep grace from people? What possible good could come from that? As soon as someone has the capacity to sin mortally (i.e. they hit the age of reason), they ought to be equipped with every spiritual advantage the Church can offer to them.
 
From the Catechism:

1322 The holy Eucharist completes Christian initiation. Those who have been raised to the dignity of the royal priesthood by Baptism and configured more deeply to Christ by Confirmation participate with the whole community in the Lord’s own sacrifice by means of the Eucharist.

When you look at the Church documents, they always speak of the Sacraments of Initiation as Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist – in that order.

I think delaying the sacraments is a bad idea. Why keep grace from people? What possible good could come from that? As soon as someone has the capacity to sin mortally (i.e. they hit the age of reason), they ought to be equipped with every spiritual advantage the Church can offer to them.
So why do many dioceses have the order as Baptism, Eucharist, and Confirmation? I’m really curious about this actually.
 
So why do many dioceses have the order as Baptism, Eucharist, and Confirmation? I’m really curious about this actually.
Well, there is a heresy (and no, i’m not flaming, i actually think it might technically fit the definition) that believes that Confirmation is the final “acceptance” of the Christian faith, and therefore it makes you an ‘adult’ member of the church.

This isn’t supported by official church teaching, at least I think so. However, If I was proven wrong, I’d be happy to hear the objection 🙂
 
It does make you eligible for positions like lector and EMHC in the Church, though. I thought it’s always been that way.
 
It does make you eligible for positions like lector and EMHC in the Church, though. I thought it’s always been that way.
The practice varies from diocese to diocese, and even from parish to parish. You will find many places that allow any baptized Catholic to participate. And you will find places that allow non-Catholics the same. Whether this is allowed is another question.
 
The practice varies from diocese to diocese, and even from parish to parish. You will find many places that allow any baptized Catholic to participate. And you will find places that allow non-Catholics the same. Whether this is allowed is another question.
Interesting so there is no standard on who can participate as a lector or EM in the Church?
 
Interesting so there is no standard on who can participate as a lector or EM in the Church?
Yes, there is a standard. Only baptized Catholics may be admitted to liturgical ministry in the Church. That is the minimum standard set down by Church documents such as Christifideles Laici (I am sure that earlier examples can be found.) Bishops and pastors are free to set stricter standards for their own flocks.
 
That’s good. At my parish, you have to be confirmed to be a lector, but for others, no.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top