Why does communion come before confirmation?

[sckcd]

I am new to Catholicism and just started RCIA. I have many questions about the Catholic Church, but we have just begun so I haven’t had many answered yet. But here’s one I am puzzled over. Taking communion is obviously a very big deal. I was told I would probably have my 1st communion along with my confirmation (if I go ahead and convert), and that makes sense. What I am puzzled over is why do children start taking communion before they are confirmed? It seems like confirmation should come first. Shouldn’t one be a full fledged Catholic *before *they take communion? I am not arguing the Church’s stance on it, I just want to know why. A non-Catholic relative and I were discussing it the other day and I didn’t know what to say about why it’s in that order.

 

[sckcd]

Perhaps this thread should be in the Sacraments forum? Idk. I just want to know why and how to explain why.

 

[pcg2]

Im not an expert, but I’ll give you an answer to the best of my ability As I understand it, one becomes Catholic the moment they are baptized, which is why you are baptized before you receive your first communion and confirmation. Secondly, in the bible the last supper (the first eucharist) takes place before the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles in Acts (the scriptural evidence for the sacrament of Confirmation.) Seeing as how the apostles received their first communion before their confirmation, I believe this is why the Church deemed it appropriate to have us follow the same order as well. Hope this helped

God Bless

 

[Joe_5859]

You’re absolutely right. Communion should not come before Confirmation (or rather, Confirmation should come before Communion).

The Sacrament of the Eucharist completes Christian Initiation (CCC 1322), not the Sacrament of Confirmation (although Confirmation does complete the Sacrament of Baptism (CCC 1304)).

Historically speaking, Confirmation always preceded First Communion. It is only in the last hundred years that this began to change to the point that many Catholics now (unfortunately) think of Confirmation as some sort of “coming of age” sacrament.

Church teaching is clear that the Eucharist completes our Initiation (and thus it seems reasonable that it should come after Confirmation. The current practice of postponing Confirmation is not official Church teaching, nor is it universally practiced. The Eastern Catholic churches still give all three Sacraments of Initiation to infants (in the right order). RCIA follows the proper order (you will receive Confirmation prior to First Communion, even though it’s at the same Mass). Also, many parishes and even a dozen or so dioceses in the U.S. are starting to return back to the former practice. The movement is called “Restored Order”.

EDIT: Just another thing to note. Even in the Catechism, look at the order the sacraments are discussed. Baptism is discussed first, then Confirmation, then Eucharist. This is also the order they appear in Canon Law. Any time you see the three sacraments of initiation mentioned together in any Church documents, they are listed (1) Baptism, (2) Confirmation, (3) Eucharist. I have to wonder how it ever became common practice to change this order in the first place.

 

[Joe_5859]

Sorry, I have to chime in again. (You would think I felt strongly about this or something. )

Look at Canon Law:

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.

The age of discretion is at about 7 years old. This is the ideal time to confer Confirmation and is the age the Church recommends.

 

[4elise]

Sorry, I have to chime in again. (You would think I felt strongly about this or something. )

Look at Canon Law:

The age of discretion is at about 7 years old. This is the ideal time to confer Confirmation and is the age the Church recommends.

Thanks for all this information Joe - very interesting, my sisters had received confirmation at the same Mass where they received their first communion - around 7 - but by the time I came along it was, as you said moved to a kind of young persons opportunity to accept the faith that was passed on…

I hope it is restored to an earlier age - I think pre-teens and teens in this society need all the help they can - the gifts of the Holy Spirit can help them navigate the waters of growing up in our culture!

Blessings!

 

[Ghosty]

Just want to add that in the non-Latin Catholic Churches, the order is Baptism, Confirmation, Communion, and they all occur at the same time even if the child is an infant.

The current practice of the Latin Church to delay Communion and Confirmation until “the age of discretion” is not the ancient norm, either. There is some debate over how, when, and why it arose, but the other Churches keep the most ancient practice.

Peace and God bless!

 

[BernadetteM]

Actually I think having First Communion at the age of 7 or 8 is a good idea. A child at that age can understand what the Church teaches about this sacrament.

Also wating until the person is around 13 or 14 for Confirmation is also better in my opinion as at that point he/she is much more able to understand what our faith is all about. There is so much involved in learning what the Church teaches, that no 7 or 8 year old is capable of understanding it.

If the Church had CCD for all ages up through high school in all parishes, then Confirmation could be given at the same age as Holy Communion.

It is very important that our children starting high school and of course before learn the faith and understand it fully. Maybe that would keep them from going off and joining their friend’s fun church.

Yours in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

Bernadette

 

[Ave_Maria_1]

One of the reasons why confirmation was separated from baptism is that the ideal is to have it conferred by a bishop and logistically this is not very possible.

But then the idea came in that it was meant for later teens and so on but that really was faulty thinking because confirmation completes the sacrament of baptism and that strength can certainly be conferred at an early age. At this time, the sacrament is being given younger and younger and it may well preceed Holy Communion again one day in the Latin Rite.

I received it at the age of 10 and it was a powerful and memorable event for me.

 

[sckcd]

You’re absolutely right. Communion should not come before Confirmation (or rather, Confirmation should come before Communion).

The Sacrament of the Eucharist completes Christian Initiation (CCC 1322), not the Sacrament of Confirmation (although Confirmation does complete the Sacrament of Baptism (CCC 1304)).

Historically speaking, Confirmation always preceded First Communion. It is only in the last hundred years that this began to change to the point that many Catholics now (unfortunately) think of Confirmation as some sort of “coming of age” sacrament.

Church teaching is clear that the Eucharist completes our Initiation (and thus it seems reasonable that it should come after Confirmation. The current practice of postponing Confirmation is not official Church teaching, nor is it universally practiced. The Eastern Catholic churches still give all three Sacraments of Initiation to infants (in the right order). RCIA follows the proper order (you will receive Confirmation prior to First Communion, even though it’s at the same Mass). Also, many parishes and even a dozen or so dioceses in the U.S. are starting to return back to the former practice. The movement is called “Restored Order”.

EDIT: Just another thing to note. Even in the Catechism, look at the order the sacraments are discussed. Baptism is discussed first, then Confirmation, then Eucharist. This is also the order they appear in Canon Law. Any time you see the three sacraments of initiation mentioned together in any Church documents, they are listed (1) Baptism, (2) Confirmation, (3) Eucharist. I have to wonder how it ever became common practice to change this order in the first place.

Thanks, I will have to ask our priest about this. I really feel that to participate in taking the Body and Blood that one should have made a concious choice towards the Church. For instance, right now I am learning what I need to convert in a matter of months, so am I welcome to take communion now? Not as far as I know. So it seems odd that a child does years before they are confirmed.

 

[diggerdomer]

Thanks, I will have to ask our priest about this. I really feel that to participate in taking the Body and Blood that one should have made a concious choice towards the Church. For instance, right now I am learning what I need to convert in a matter of months, so am I welcome to take communion now? Not as far as I know. So it seems odd that a child does years before they are confirmed.

I can understand the confusion/questions. You can’t take communion now because you are not yet baptized/Catholic (right?). The Eastern Catholic Churches have always fully initiated infants, i.e. they are baptized, confirmed (chrismated) and receive communion. This puts the emphasis on these sacraments as sacraments “of initiation.” Initiation is a beginning, not a final exam. As others have ably pointed out on this thread, the actual history of the practice of these sacraments in the western (Latin, Roman) Church is complicated and full of twists and turns. Practice became disconnected from the original theology/understanding, then theology responded by justifying the received practice. There are pros and cons to the various practices/disciplines.

 

[sckcd]

I can understand the confusion/questions. You can’t take communion now because you are not yet baptized/Catholic (right?). The Eastern Catholic Churches have always fully initiated infants, i.e. they are baptized, confirmed (chrismated) and receive communion. This puts the emphasis on these sacraments as sacraments “of initiation.” Initiation is a beginning, not a final exam. As others have ably pointed out on this thread, the actual history of the practice of these sacraments in the western (Latin, Roman) Church is complicated and full of twists and turns. Practice became disconnected from the original theology/understanding, then theology responded by justifying the received practice. There are pros and cons to the various practices/disciplines.

I am baptized, but not in a Catholic church. I guess I’ll just see what our priest has to say. I am not asking to go ahead and receive communion, I have no problem waiting, I just don’t understand why it is set up the way it is for children as opposed to adults. Very confusing.

 

[diggerdomer]

I am baptized, but not in a Catholic church. I guess I’ll just see what our priest has to say. I am not asking to go ahead and receive communion, I have no problem waiting, I just don’t understand why it is set up the way it is for children as opposed to adults. Very confusing.

Yes, it is very confusing. Don’t worry. If you’re in RCIA, that’s great, keep focus on the “big picture” and your own journey. Details about the historical development and practice of sacraments can come later. Best wishes.