Yes, the validity of the Sacrament is not dependant on the belief of the person receiving it.A friend of mine got confirmed because it was expected of him by his family, and he didn’t want to disappoint them. But he did not believe in Catholicism at the time of his confirmation. Does the sacrament still take place?
NopeA friend of mine got confirmed because it was expected of him by his family, and he didn’t want to disappoint them. But he did not believe in Catholicism at the time of his confirmation. Does the sacrament still take place?
I think you have that backwards: The validity of the Sacrament is not dependant on the holiness of the person administering it.Yes, the validity of the Sacrament is not dependant on the belief of the person receiving it.
By my reading of Canon Law (Canon 869 §2), a proper disposition or intention is required for a sacrament to be validly received by an adult. So, for all his troubles, all your friend probably got was an oily forehead.A friend of mine got confirmed because it was expected of him by his family, and he didn’t want to disappoint them. But he did not believe in Catholicism at the time of his confirmation. Does the sacrament still take place?
Yes, the Sacrament takes place, he is Confirmed. However he only receives the Grace based on his disposition to receive it.A friend of mine got confirmed because it was expected of him by his family, and he didn’t want to disappoint them. But he did not believe in Catholicism at the time of his confirmation. Does the sacrament still take place?
I’m fairly sure you are mistaken on this.Yes, the Sacrament takes place, he is Confirmed…
Thats a little complcated. When a baby is baptised, they are (obviously) below the age of reason. They are batised based on the faith of their parents. Therefore, the sacramant IS valid, and they have been washed of sin and entered the covenant family of God. Yet, since mortal sin can seperate man from God, and since a person can willingly throw away God’s free gift of salvation, this person can still be damned if they choose such a path. Baptism is what it is: The washing of sin and the entrance into the covenant family of God. It is NOT a guaranteed ticket into heaven.So if the sacrament never took place, then I assume that means the person also never receives the sacramental graces that would otherwise accompany the sacrament.
Does this mean if a person is unwillingly baptized and later rejects God, then the person might still be able to go to Heaven? I base this conclusion on another thread, which has been answered by an apologist. See the link below:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=14870
This assessment may be correct if his parents forced him to be confirmed. If he did because he was too afraid to tell his parents and family that he did not believe what the Church taught, then I think it is no longer a matter of obedience.We must not forget that he although did against his will, he was obedient to his parents therefore honored by our God.
how many times have we done things against our will? we did it in obedience to our Lord.
Reference bolded section above - this is only true in the Latin Rite and only true in the current canon law with a child that is not in danger of death. In the Eastern Rite, or on danger of death a child under the age of reason can validly receive the sacrament of Confirmation.I’m fairly sure you are mistaken on this.
Thats a little complcated. When a baby is baptised, they are (obviously) below the age of reason. They are batised based on the faith of their parents. Therefore, the sacramant IS valid, and they have been washed of sin and entered the covenant family of God. Yet, since mortal sin can seperate man from God, and since a person can willingly throw away God’s free gift of salvation, this person can still be damned if they choose such a path. Baptism is what it is: The washing of sin and the entrance into the covenant family of God. It is NOT a guaranteed ticket into heaven.
Confirmation, on the other hand, deals with a person who HAS reached the age of reason. At the ceremony, the Bishop leads the renewal of baptismal promises. Here, the candidate MUST REPEAT the Baptismal vows of rejecting Satan, accepting Christ, etc… IF the candidate is LYING about all that, then the confirmation is invalid.
I’m 99% sure I’m right about all this
Hmm. Good points. The sacrament of Confirmation is unlike the sacrament of matrimony or confession in that is leaves an indelible mark on the soul. Yes, I see this now.Of course the sacrament is perfectly valid and real, even if its graces are ineffective. All a valid (real) sacrament of Confirmation requires is the right form, words and intent on the part of the minister. At that point it leaves an indelible mark on the soul, rather like a brand would on the body, which exists regardless of belief or unbelief.
Nothing the recepient does can change its validity, only its practical effects in their lives, and upon reversion and restoration to a state of grace that Confirmation will become practically operative as well. It’s not like they’d need to be reconfirmed for example. The fact is, people can no more be re-confirmed than they can be rebaptised, it’s a one-off sacrament regardless of the recepient’s disposition.
Originally Posted by terryobrien80
Thats a little complcated. When a baby is baptised, they are (obviously) below the age of reason. They are batised based on the faith of their parents. Therefore, the sacramant IS valid, and they have been washed of sin and entered the covenant family of God. Yet, since mortal sin can seperate man from God, and since a person can willingly throw away God’s free gift of salvation, this person can still be damned if they choose such a path. Baptism is what it is: The washing of sin and the entrance into the covenant family of God. It is NOT a guaranteed ticket into heaven.
Confirmation, on the other hand, deals with a person who HAS reached the age of reason. At the ceremony, the Bishop leads the renewal of baptismal promises. Here, the candidate MUST REPEAT the Baptismal vows of rejecting Satan, accepting Christ, etc… IF the candidate is LYING about all that, then the confirmation is invalid.
I’m 99% sure I’m right about all this
Ooops. I forgot about you “Easterners”. My bad. So the question is: Which Rite was this person’s aquaintance confirmed in, Eastern or Western. Did she ever say?Reference bolded section above - this is only true in the Latin Rite and only true in the current canon law with a child that is not in danger of death. In the Eastern Rite, or on danger of death a child under the age of reason can validly receive the sacrament of Confirmation…
There are different rites but only one sacrament (of Confirmation).Ooops. I forgot about you “Easterners”. My bad. So the question is: Which Rite was this person’s aquaintance confirmed in, Eastern or Western. Did she ever say?
Because neither the question or the answer is part of the Sacrament of Confirmation. The Sacrament has 4 parts. The proper minister and the proper Intent by the minister. The laying on of hands/anointing with Sacred Chrism and the Words “Be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit”. The Sacrament consists of nothing more, and takes only 15 seconds to celebrate. Don’t confuse this with the Rite of Confirmation which are all the actions, prayers, words, surrounding the Sacrament of Confirmation.If I am not mistaken, in order for a person to be confirmed, they must answer “yes” to this, among other, questions, “Do you believe everything the Catholic Church proposes in matters of faith and morals?” or something to that effect.
Thus if a person did not believe, would they not be lying?
Lying when taking a marriage vow invalidates the sacrament of marriage. Lying during the sacrament of confession invalidates the confession and absolution. Why wouldn’t lying during confirmation invalidate it?