Sacraments of Initiation
Part 3 The Rite for Adults and Children

Chapter i38 Eucharist:  Completion of Initiation

Preliminary Questions

Have we seen "Infant Baptism, Second Grade First Communion, and Sophomore Confirmation" so frequently that we think of Confirmation as the Completion of Initiation?   What can be done to remedy this? 

[Return to top of this page]

Bibliography

[Return to top of this page]

Eucharist:  The Completion and Culmination of Initiation

[Return to top of this page]

Eucharist before Baptism

It is a good question to ask “how hospitable" should we be?

Jesus sat at table not as the charming, congenial, ringleted centerpiece of a Rembrandt painting, but as a vulnerable vagrant willing to share potluck with a household of strangers...Normally, a meal is about social identification, status, and power... But the very randomness of Jesus' table habits challenged this system of social relations modeled on meals and manners... It was not simply that Jesus ate with objectionable persons - outcasts and sinners but that he ate with anyone, indiscriminately. The table companionship practiced by Jesus thus recreated the world, redrew all of society's maps and flow charts. Instead of symbolizing social rank and order, it blurred the distinctions between hosts and quests, need and plenty. Instead of reinforcing rules of etiquette, it subverted them, making the last first and the first last. (Nathan Mitchell [quoted by] Maxwell E. Johnson, The Rites of Christian Initiation: Their Evolution and Interpretation, Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1999, p 3.)

Indeed, Jesus ate with everyone indiscriminately.  I believe that it is important for students of liturgy in a graduate school to know that there are serious thinkers and theologians and pastors who both advocate and practice open communion, even to the non-baptized.  For example one of the study groups at the annual meeting of the North American Academy of Liturgy is devoted to this issue.  If the Eucharist is open to all so that all may “profit from this experience of hospitality, this experience of the presence of Jesus” [as you say in your essay], and grow in faith and love to the point where they wish to become Christian then the people might request baptism.  This is a very different way of thinking of the sacraments of initiation; and as you can well imagine the Roman Church is a long way from even considering such a practice.  But it is important to know that there are serious theologians who are discussing the merits of this sequence.

[Return to top of this page]

Comments on 2007 Assignments 7 & 8

After reading your team presentations The Eucharist:  The Culmination of Initiation I would like to make the following three observations:

Observation 1 Regarding "culmination"
Observation 2 Regarding citations
Observation 3 Regarding the Catechism

Observation 1 Regarding "culmination"

As stated in several postings, the word "culmination" has several meanings.  However, in the present context, "culmination" does not necessarily imply “last in sequence".  At the present time, even in parishes and dioceses which have the sequence “Baptism, First Holy Communion, Confirmation,”  Eucharist is the culmination of initiation and the catechetical instructions and formation should be done in that perspective.

I suggest that you review the paper you wrote for Assignment 7 (the paper itself is like the "top of the iceberg") while trying to examine what "model" of sacramental theology is operative in your unconscious memory (the "model" is like the "bottom of the iceberg").   As I was reading your postings I wondering if some of you at this point in the course still operate out of the sacramental model of the seven shoe boxes.  If you have not already done so, please review this metaphor.  A summary is posted at Metaphor of the Seven Shoe Boxes  

I use this metaphor in Chapter 2 of my soon to be published book on the Eucharist.  A draft of this chapter is reprinted below and I would ask that you check your understanding of "sacrament"; at this point in the course I would expect that you think of sacrament in about the same way as what follows:

Eucharist:  Jesus With Us  (2008 © Saint Anthony Messenger Press, Cincinnati OH)
Chapter 2:  The Incarnation

God’s Plan for Creation

Now, as we know, God didn’t have to create anything. God created freely out of love. God who is the very essence of love (I John 4:16) planned from day one to share the love, harmony, communication, and unity of God’s own inner Trinitarian life with the persons and things that God would create. (After all, isn’t that what love does? It wants to propagate itself.)

Usually when we make something, we have some "plan" in mind. For example, if you want to build a house and you start to measure the land, dig the foundation, and pour the footings, and someone asks you, "What are you doing?" you wouldn’t say, "Well, I don’t know yet; I’m just pouring concrete and we’ll see what happens." No, from the very beginning your mind’s eye is on the finished project. "I’m building a house." Similarly, God had a plan for all of creation.

This plan was Jesus Christ. Little by little the plan was revealed in the history of God’s people. As the Letter to the Hebrews explains: "Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son ... the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being." (NRSV Heb 1:1-3) When the time was ripe, God’s plan was revealed all its wonderful mystery in the birth, life, passion, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The plan God had in mind from the very beginning was Jesus Christ! [God→Plan →Mystery→ Jesus]

When the inspired authors of the New Testament describe this amazing plan of God for the world, the word they use for "plan" (they were writing in Greek) is mysterion. They tell how this mystery – this wondrous plan of God for the world – is summed up in Christ. "I want [your] hearts to be encouraged and united in love, so that [you] may have ... the knowledge of God’s mystery, that is, Christ himself. (Col. 2:2)

When the Greek New Testament is translated into Latin, the Greek word mysterion was often translated by the Latin word sacramentum. A sacrament, as Saint Augustine (354-430) explained is a "visible sign of invisible Grace." Today, when Catholics think of "sacraments" we usually think of "the seven sacraments" – but in St. Augustine’s broader understanding of the word, all created things can become visible signs of the invisible God.

An artist is always "embodied" in his or her work of art. We can look at a painting and say "that’s a Picasso" or "that’s a Monet;" we hear a piece of music and say "that’s Mozart." Just so, the Divine Artist is "embodied" in the beautiful universe we see around us. And of all God’s "works of art," God’s masterpiece is Jesus! God’s inner Trinitarian life and love "spill over" into creation and nowhere is this more evident than in Jesus who is "the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being." (Hebrews 1:1-3)

Saint Francis of Assisi, perhaps more than any of us, had the ability to see the "imprint of God’s very being" in all of creation. Seeing in the Creator in everything created inspired him to sing:

Praised be You, my Lord, with all Your creatures,
especially Sir Brother Sun,
Who is the day and through whom You give us light.
And he is beautiful and radiant with great splendor;
and bears a likeness of You, Most High One.
Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Moon and the stars,
in heaven You formed them clear and precious and beautiful.
Praised be You, my Lord, through Brother Wind,
and through the air, cloudy and serene, and every kind of weather,
through whom You give sustenance to Your creatures.
Praised be You, my Lord, through Sister Water,
who is very useful and humble and precious and chaste.

Closer to our own time the English poet Isaac Watts (1674-1748) expressed the same sentiment in a hymn that is probably familiar to you:

I sing the mighty power of God, that made the mountains rise,
That spread the flowing seas abroad, and built the lofty skies.
I sing the wisdom that ordained the sun to rule the day;
The moon shines full at God’s command, and all the stars obey.

I sing the goodness of the Lord, who filled the earth with food,
Who formed the creatures through the Word, and then pronounced them good.
Lord, how Thy wonders are displayed, where’er I turn my eye,
If I survey the ground I tread, or gaze upon the sky.

There’s not a plant or flower below, but makes Thy glories known,
And clouds arise, and tempests blow, by order from Thy throne;
While all that borrows life from Thee is ever in Thy care;
And everywhere that we can be, Thou, God art present there.

But while everything that God made is a reflection of God’s glory the best, the most complete, "visible sign" (sacrament) is Jesus himself. For Jesus "is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." (Col. 1:15) In Jesus "we see our God made visible and so are caught up in love of the God we cannot see." (Preface I, Mass of Christmas) It is in this sense that we can speak of Jesus himself as "sacrament." [God→ Plan→ Mystery →Sacrament→ Jesus]

At Mass we pray: "You sent Jesus Christ your Son among us / as redeemer and Lord. / He was moved with compassion / for the poor and the powerless, / for the sick and the sinner; / he made himself neighbor to the oppressed. / By his words and actions he proclaimed to the world / that you care for us / as a father cares for his children." (Mass for Various Needs, IV) The love that is the inner Trinitarian life of God is revealed in everything that Jesus said and did, but nowhere is this love so clearly expressed as in his passion, death and resurrection: the Paschal Mystery.

Jesus has left us the Eucharist as the embodiment of the Paschal Mystery. This is why we can speak of the Eucharist as the first and greatest sacrament, indeed, the "Sacrament of sacraments" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1211).

At the incarnation God becomes visible. Sacraments are the visible signs of this invisible Love. And the Eucharist is our greatest sign of this mystery. [God →Plan→ Mystery→ Sacrament→ Jesus→ Incarnation→ Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday→ Eucharist]

After his resurrection Jesus breathed on the disciples and said "Receive the Holy Spirit." "As the Father has sent me, so I send you." (John 20:22, 21) This Holy Spirit – the spirit of wisdom and understanding, of right judgment and courage, of knowledge and reverence, the spirit of wonder and awe which the prophet Isaiah said would be the hallmark of the Messiah (the Christ) – permeated and sealed the life of Jesus of Nazareth. It is this same Spirit which Christ gives to us.

Each time we gather for the Eucharist we ask God to send the Holy Spirit to transform our bread and wine into that sacrament which is the sign of reconciliation, communion, and love, that is, Christ himself. Then we as the Father to send the same Holy Spirit upon us who eat and drink so that we are taken up into the sacrifice of Christ. "Lord, look upon this sacrifice which you have given your church; and by your Holy Spirit, gather all who share this one bread and one cup into the one body of Christ, a living sacrifice of praise." (Eucharistic Prayer IV) [God→ Plan→ Mystery→ Sacrament →Jesus→ Incarnation →Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday→Eucharist→ Church]

When we celebrate the Eucharist we become Christ’s Body, we become Church. The Eucharist "makes the Church." (CCC 1396) The Church itself is a sacrament, "a sign and instrument both of a very closely knit union with God and of the unity of the whole human race." (Constitution on the Church, 1) And that sacrament which is the Church is never more visible than when we are celebrating the Eucharist. The Eucharist "is the outstanding means whereby the faithful may express in their lives, and manifest to others, the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church." (Constitution on the Liturgy, 2)

But before we leave the incarnation and continue our journey to our next pilgrimage site let us first stop a moment and stick our heads under the surface of the water to take a look at the "invisible baggage" that we are carrying with us.

Let’s look under the iceberg to see the meaning that surrounds the word "sacrament." As I look back and examine the things I have written and taught about the Sacraments I find that unconsciously (below the iceberg) the categories I use for describing the sacraments has changed over the years. Let me explain this change by two metaphors. Over the years the basic metaphor I employ to understand sacraments has changed from the metaphor of the "seven shoe boxes" to the metaphor of "ripples emanating from a stone dropping into a pond."

In my bedroom closet I have several pairs of shoes, each pair neatly put away in its shoe box. I have a pair of black dress shoes that I wear for Mass. I have a new pair of sneakers I wear to the gym and an old pair I wear when working in the yard. I have sandals (Franciscans have to have sandals) and a comfortable pair of slippers for lounging around the house. And when I am not wearing them, I put them away in their box.

Now these shoes all have some things in common: they are all the same size and each pair has a left and a right foot. But other than that, they have little to do with one another. They are five distinct pairs of shoes, each pair in its own shoe box.

I learned about (and for many years, taught about) the sacraments in much this same way: they were, for the most part, seven separate things. The Baltimore Catechism asked: "How many sacraments are there? The answer: "There are seven sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Orders, and Matrimony." (Baltimore Catechism 305) Eucharist was number three in a list of seven – seven sacraments, each in its own box. I got one out when I wanted to teach it or administer it, and then put it back. They were all sacraments, but in reality they had little or no relation to one another.

Today I think of the sacraments differently. Have you ever dropped a stone into a pond on a quiet evening and watched the ripples go out in ever larger concentric circles, seemingly forever? That is how I think of the Eucharist and the other sacraments today. And it is through this metaphor that we have viewed the incarnation. [God →Plan→ Mystery→ Sacrament →Jesus→ Incarnation→ Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Easter Sunday →Eucharist →Church]

I have friends who returned from a visit to Russia with a set of those Russian nesting dolls (matryoshka). I always enjoy watching the amazement on the faces of their grandchildren as they open the largest doll to find another slightly smaller doll inside, and another inside that, and so on until all nine are displayed on the table. Perhaps these matryoshka dolls can serve as another image which can help us view the incarnation and the Eucharist.

Picture the dolls as being transparent so that you can see through the outer one to the next and the next and the next. Now imagine looking at the Eucharist and seeing not only the consecrated host but also your own mystery and the mystery of the Church, the Body of Christ. Continuing to look through the transparent dolls see in the mystery of Christ the beauty of creation and God’s mysterious plan for the world. And then look through the beauty into the very heart of the mystery, the Trinitarian love of God’s very self. God Plan Mystery Sacrament Jesus Paschal Mystery Church Eucharist Body of Christ all creation Christ Trinity All of this is really present in the Eucharist.

Look under your iceberg and see which metaphor is more operative in your understanding of the Sacraments (the shoe boxes or the ripples in the pond). Do you think of them as seven distinct things or has your "sacramental vision" become more integrated and unified?

When the Second Vatican Council talked about the Sacraments in The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, the very shape of the document is reflective of the ripples in the pond metaphor. The Constitution is presented in seven chapters. Chapter 1 speaks of "The Mystery of Christ." Chapter 2 is entitled "The Most Sacred Mystery of the Eucharist." After speaking of Christ and the Eucharist, the document then treats in Chapter 3 "The Other Sacraments and the Sacramentals" and the ripples continue out from the Eucharist. "The Liturgy of the Hours" (Chapter 4) carries the Eucharist throughout the day and "The Liturgical Year" (Chapter 5) continues the Eucharist through the seasons of the year. Chapter 6 "Sacred Music" and Chapter 7 "Sacred Art and Furnishings" continue the ripples to the edge of the pond until everything – all of creation – can be seen as a visible sign of the Artist’s handiwork. Just a stone dropped into a pond causes ripples to extend outward in all directions, so the paschal mystery of Christ celebrated in the Eucharist has a ripple effect through all of creation.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1997) treats the Sacraments in three groups: "The Sacraments of Initiation", "The Sacraments of Healing", and "The Sacraments at the Service of Communion." Here again everything centers around the Eucharist. The first time we celebrated the Eucharist it is in the Sacraments of Initiation: Baptism / Confirmation / Eucharist. While the water bath itself is never repeated, each time we come to Eucharist we come "through Baptism." Eucharist is, indeed, the repeatable part of Baptism (Initiation).

(When you enter your parish Church for Sunday Eucharist and dip your hand into the baptismal water and make the sign of the cross – the sign into which you were baptized – do you, at that moment, think of your baptism and the promises you made at your baptism? Do you remember that it is because of those promises that you are now coming to renew that commitment in the Sacred Eucharist?)

And while the Eucharist itself is the primary and original sacrament of reconciliation and healing, the Church celebrates two special sacramental rites dedicated specifically to these graces: The Sacrament of Reconciliation, and The Sacrament of Anointing the Sick.

The Catechism then treats "The Sacraments at the Service of Communion", Marriage and Holy Orders. This arrangement places these Sacraments in direct connection to the Church and the Eucharist. As the Eucharist becomes more "transparent" for you as a sign of the Trinitarian love of God, where on earth do you see this love more visibly exemplified than in the fruitful love of husband and wife? And as we view the Eucharist as "making Church" – the Body of Christ – and we consider the various organs and ministries of that Body, we see the relation of bishop, presbyter, and deacon to the Church and to the Eucharist.

In the arrangement of the material treating the sacraments in both the Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy  and The Catechism of the Catholic Church we see this unified vision of the sacraments. God Plan Mystery Sacrament Eucharist Church Body of Christ all creation Christ Trinity As St. Thomas Aquinas said, "in this sacrament is recapitulated the whole mystery of our salvation." (Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, q. 83, a. 4c. quoted in Ecclesia De Eucharistia 61)

This unified vision, this transparency of creation, Jesus, and the Eucharist to see into the very heart of Trinitarian Love is what we want to "see" on this first stop on our Eucharistic pilgrimage: The Incarnation.  If you wish, rest a bit with this vision; then let’s move on together to our second pilgrimage site, Good Friday.  [End of quote from Eucharist: Jesus With Us]

Observation 1 Continued:

Here is a simple test that may help you "look under the iceberg" to see which model of sacrament is operative in your theological vision.  Without a lot of "deep thinking" or "second guessing" simply ask yourself these questions and make a mental note of your first, spontaneous answer.  Which sacrament takes away Original Sin?  Which sacrament gives the Holy Spirit? 

If you responded "Baptism" to the first question and "Confirmation" to the second you are probably operating out of the seven shoe boxes.  If you responded "Jesus Christ" to both questions you probably have adopted a more integrated understanding of Catholic Sacraments.

Another indicator:  When you think of "Original Sin" who comes to mind first, Christ or Adam.  If you responded "Jesus Christ" you probably have adopted a more integrated understanding of Catholic Sacraments.  If Adam, you might want to rethink the doctrine of the primacy of Christ and examine if you have made the second Adam less powerful and important then the first and thus, as Larry Landini would say, "have put the sting back in death." 

I was rereading Martin Connell Eternity Today:  On the Liturgical Year  [The Continuum International Publishing Group, New York, 2006.  ISBN 0-8264-1871-6.  Paper $31.32] one of the textbooks I use for the course on the Liturgical Year, and I happened across the following passage (Vol 1, p. 75) which is pertinent to our Sacraments of Initiation course. 

In the theology and liturgy of Western Christianity, the active role of the Holy spirit is underappreciated.  Some of the problem, no doubt, is that, for those Christians whose Sacrament of Confirmation too place years after their baptism into the church, there is an inclination to regard the presence of the Holy Spirit as an "add-on," as not necessary to the life of God as experienced in Christian life.  Yet the readings proclaimed in Advent alert believers to the role of the Holy Spirit in the incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth and in the life of the church today. ...   "... that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit."  The role of the Holy Spirit, according to this account is primary in time and salvation; the Spirit is the instrument of the incarnation, the Word made flesh dwelling in humanity.

The theological tradition is constant in teaching that -- as the Holy Spirit worked in the incarnation of the Son, in the Son taking on flesh -- so does the Holy Spirit work in the body of Christ of the church and its sacraments, knitting together sinful individuals and raising from them the sinless people of god.  The community of faith is wrought by the power of the Holy Spirit, as was the body of Jesus knit together in Mary's womb two millennia ago.

Observation 2 Regarding citations   My second observation on your Assignment 7 & 8 concerns the way you cite references in your major postings.  I know that this is very "late in the game" for this course as your "citing days" for this course are more or less completed.  However I want to make these comments because I hope they will help you in future courses; and I want to solicit your feedback so that I can post these comments at the beginning of future courses.

Citations are to be made in a "standard" form.  On November 14, 2006, the faculty voted to select the Chicago /Turabian Style as the preferred style for formal papers submitted here at Saint Meinrad.  StyleEase software has been purchased and installed on the public computers for the use of the students. Students can purchase their own copy of the software from the publisher at www.styleease.com   (Be sure to order the Chicago/Turabian Style)  [Students can receive a $10.00 discount by using the code in the purchase form.]  However, the "standard form" is not my primary concern here.  The point I want to make here is this:  The purpose of a footnote is to assist the reader in understanding your thought.  The reader has a right to know what are your thoughts and what you have taken from someone else. 

If you are quoting someone directly, the quoted section should be indicated by quotation marks and should be exactly as it appears in the source, and the footnote should make it possible for the reader to go to the source and find the quotation in its context. 

If you are not quoting someone directly, but showing the source of your thought, the footnote should indicate that fact; for example the footnote might read:  "The argument I am presenting here is based on an article on Advent by Martin Connell in Eternity Today [The Continuum International Publishing Group, New York, 2006.] Vol 1, p. 75."   I find that a footnote at the end of a paragraph in which there is no direct quotation and no indication in the footnote as to why the note has been placed there, is not helpful to the reader. 

2a Quoting Scripture    When quoting scripture simply put quotation marks around the citation followed by the book, chapter, and verse in parenthesis.  For example: 

The prophet Isaiah lists the qualities by which we will recognize the Messiah (Heb), the Anointed One (Eng), the Christ (Gk) when he comes.  "The spirit of the LORD shall rest on him,  / the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, / the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD." (Isaiah 11:2 NRSV) 

It is preferable that you quote from the NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) as that is the English translation which is generally agreed to be closest to the Greek. There are times when you may want to quote from the NAB (New American Bible) which is used in the English version of the Roman Lectionary (the copyright for the NAB is owned by the American bishops, USCCB). 

There is no need, indeed no useful purpose, in citing the publisher of the particular edition of the bible you are using.  To know that you are taking the quotation from "the big green book with the gold edges" does not help the reader understand your thought.  Of course, if you are quoting introductory materials, or supplementary articles, then the author of the article and the edition of the Bible are pertinent.

If there is some special reason for quoting a different translation, explain why you are doing so.   If your argument depends on the meaning of a specific word, it is best to argue from the original Greek or Hebrew rather than from a translation. 

2b Quoting the Code of Canon Law    When quoting Canon Law, it is presumed that you are quoting from the translation of the code presented by the Canon Law Society of America, consequently the only reference that needs to be given is the canon number (not the page number, etc).   If you are quoting from the commentary on the Code published by the Canon Law Society, be aware that there were two distinct commentaries:  The Code of Canon Law:  A Text and Commentary, which was published by the CLSA in 1985 -- the "red" book -- and appeared at the same time as the 1983 Code and served as an introduction to the transition between the Code of 1918 and the Code of 1983; and the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law (published by the CLSA in 2000 -- the "green" book).  When quoting an article from one of the commentaries, it is important to give the full reference (author's name, title of the article, publishing data, page number). 

When substantiating a theological argument by quoting from the Code of Canon Law it is important to recognize that there are a variety of literary genres in the Code.  Professor Orsy lists seven:

"To recognize and to distinguish literary forms in the Code is important because the nature of the text determines the method of interpretation. The meaning of theological texts changes and develops as theological reflection progresses.  The meaning of norms of action can remain unchanged and stable for a long time."  (Ladislas Orsy, S.J., "Literary Forms in the Code" in CLSA, The Code of Canon Law: A Text and Commentary,1985,  pp 41-45, here page 42)    In the Code we find:

1.  Statements of belief [not to be interpreted as law is interpreted].
2. Theological statements that do not represent any article of faith, but are historically conditioned opinions of a theological school. As such they have no right to demand universal assent.
3.  Canons that touch on issues of morality
4. Exhortations. They express what the legislator desires, but do not create right-and-duty situations.
5. Canons with a metaphysical content.
6. Canons that contain scientific statements, e.g., from the field of psychology or psychiatry. If a canon speaks of the effect of mental diseases, it should be interpreted according to the latest advances in medicine and not according to the state of information of the legislator at the time of the promulgation of the law.
7. True legislative pieces which deal with right-and-duty situations.  [Note:  look especially to the (Latin) verbs.  Nefas est, debet, etc.]

In your papers on "Eucharist:  Culmination of Initiation" for example, several of you quoted theological statements from the Code, for example: 

The sacrament of confirmation strengthens the baptized and obliges them more firmly to be witnesses of Christ by word and deed and to spread and defend the faith.  It imprints a character, enriches by the gift of the Holy Spirit the baptized continuing on the path of Christian initiation, and binds them more perfectly to the Church.   (Canon 879)

This is not a legislative piece (Orsy's number 7 above) but a theological statement (number 2 above) and, as Orsy says, "represents an historically conditioned opinion of a theological school."  To understand which theological school, look to the footnotes.  This canon quotes the Rituale Romanum of 1952, and the Apostolic Constitution which introduced the current 1971 Rite.    Clearly, it would be better scholarship to quote the original source rather than quoting someone interpreting a quotation from an original source.  The Code is not the best place to go if you want support for a theological statement; that is not the primary function of the Code.  The purpose of the code is "right order", law, rights, etc.

Also, note that these theological statements are "historically conditioned."    One might ask if our understanding of Confirmation has progressed (“The Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth.” Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, #8) since 1952, or even since 1971.   Speaking personally, my "understanding" of the Sacrament of Confirmation has been shaped not only by what I learned in the seminary in the courses on dogmatic and systematic theology, but by my study of the history of the sacrament in the light of the historical discoveries of the past 50 years and by my pastoral experience of the revised rites, and especially by my experience of the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults.   I would have not given canon 879 a second thought in 1971, but now I have several questions about it (as I believe you also have, [or should have] now that you have taken a "Sacraments of Initiation" course).

Observation 3 Regarding the Catechism  The Catechism of the Catholic Church is not the same “literary genre” as your text books.   A catechism is a simply a summary of what the Church understands to be "doctrine" at the time in history when the catechism was written.   When the Catechism of the Catholic Church first appeared in English in 1993, I read it and I did not learn anything new about the doctrine of the Catholic Church.  I would hope that those of you who have read the book cover to cover would say exactly the same thing.  This is not "arrogance" but simply acknowledging what the Catechism is:  a summary of doctrine.  Anyone who has a doctorate in theology would be expect to know the basic truths contained in a Catechism! 

The important part of the Catechism of the Catholic Church for a student of theology at the Master's level is the footnotes, the primary sources.   Who is the author (authors) of the Catechism quoting and why?  Which sources are being selected by the author and which sources are not being selected?  These are the important questions at this level of study.  [Remember:  The Catechism was not written by the Holy Spirit but by a committee of men.]

A catechism is a simply a summary of what the Church understands to be "doctrine" at the time in history when the catechism was written.   This understanding can change as time passes.  For example, when the Vatican II Catechism was published in 1993, the National Advisory Committee on Adult Religious Education of the Department of Education of the United States Catholic Conference published Catechism of the Catholic Church: An Access Guide for Adult Discussion Groups (Washington: USCC, 1995, Publication No.050-8. ISBN 1-55586-050-8. $1.77) which stated: 

While core truths do not change, the Church is constantly called to a deeper understanding of those truths (see paragraphs 65, 79). The Church faithfully hands on the teachings of the apostles and, at the same time, remains open to the promptings of the Spirit. Sometimes something is taken to be a core truth which the Spirit, through time, eventually teaches us is not. For example, the following paragraphs appear in the Roman Catechism, the catechism issued after the Council of Trent in 1566:

The Minister of the Eucharist:  To omit nothing doctrinal of this sacrament, we now come to speak of its minister, a point, however, on which scarcely anyone can be ignorant.  ONLY PRIESTS HAVE POWER TO CONSECRATE AND ADMINISTER THE EUCHARIST.  It must be taught, then, that to priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist. That this has been the unvarying practice of the Church, that the faithful should receive the Sacrament from the priests, and that the officiating priests should communicate themselves, has been explained by the holy Council of Trent, which has also shown that this practice, as having proceeded from Apostolic tradition, is to be religiously retained, particularly as Christ the Lord has left us an illustrious example thereof, having consecrated His own most sacred body, and given it to the Apostles with His own hands.

One need only compare this with paragraph 903 of the new Catechism to see that this teaching about the distribution of the eucharist was not a core teaching. We must remain open to the Holy Spirit as we grow in our knowledge of the truth.

The serious reader of the Catechism must ask:  When Bishop Schoenberg wrote the section of the Catechism on Confirmation, what was his ministerial experience of Confirmation?   What [unconscious] experiences shaped the bottom of his "confirmation iceberg").   Did he think of "Confirmation" as he had administered it to children for years and years?  Was he influenced by the [new] RCIA?  Reflect on how your own understanding of Confirmation has changed in just the last few months!  (I hope you know more about the history of Confirmation now than you did at the beginning of this course, for example.) 

Several of you mentioned the changes in Confirmation in the second edition of the Catechism in your Assignment 7 postings.  In 1998 the Holy See published Catechism of the Catholic Church:  Modifications from the Editio Typica.  When a group of bishops who are charged with preserving the traditional teaching of the Church write something about Confirmation, and then five years later change what they have written we have a significant event (e.g. when phrases such as "Confirmation... thus completing Christian initiation" are removed, it indicates that someone has had something happen "under the iceberg.")

And if one were to count how many changes were made between the first edition and the second edition of the Catechism and see where they occurred, and if one found that more changes were made in the chapter on Confirmation than in any other chapter in the Catechism, (!) one might conclude that (1) the experience of the RCIA (and the unity of the sacraments of Initiation) and (2) the more integrated understanding of "sacrament" combined with (3) the new emphasis on the primacy of Christ, has had an effect -- even on the Catechism! 

A personal example:  There was a time when I had only male students in my theology classes.  I typed class notes for the students (this was before the age of the internet).  Gradually, women entered the classes.  The experience of women present in the classroom made me aware of how I used language, particularly gender inclusive language.   When I discover old copies of the class notes from the 1970's, I am now rather embarrassed that I would have spoken as I did;  but the change in my experience made me aware of the way I speak.  

Similarly, my experience of the RICA makes me rather embarrassed about the way I used to speak about Confirmation.  The change in experience made me aware of the limited view I had of the sacrament.   It is this type of experience that can lead the USCCB to state:  "While core truths do not change, the Church is constantly called to a deeper understanding of those truths. The Church faithfully hands on the teachings of the apostles and, at the same time, remains open to the promptings of the Spirit. Sometimes something is taken to be a core truth which the Spirit, through time, eventually teaches us is not."

[Return to top of this page]

To Think About

During the 2007 summer course "Introduction to the Sacraments" I asked the participants write an essay (of between 800 and 1200 words) in which they would explain the proper order for the reception of the sacraments of initiation including the history of this complex issue and explain how Eucharist is the culmination of Initiation.  After reading the essays, I have the following observations:

1.  Scripture   If you use Sacred Scripture to support your thesis it is expected that you use Scripture accurately and correctly.   Why was Jesus Baptized?  Did Jesus "receive the sacrament of Baptism"?  If so, what did it mean for Jesus.  Is it accurate to speak of Pentecost as "the Apostles receiving the Sacrament of Confirmation"?  Note that the Acts of the Apostles does not present a uniform practice of "imposition of hands" -- sometimes it is before the water write, sometimes after, sometimes both.  Note "imposition of hands" is not the same thing as "being anointed with oil."  Do not presume that the Acts of the apostles always joins the two and is speaking of the Sacrament of Confirmation!  Regarding the "imposition of hands" be aware of the important place of this epicletic gesture in the current rituals for each of our sacramental celebrations. 

2.  The Practice of the Early Church   The history of the Early Church is complex and our documentation is fragmentary.   There are pre-baptismal anointings and post-baptismal anointings and they vary in number.  Some are Presbyteral, some are Diaconal, some are by the Overseer.   It is not good historical method to select only those facts that support your thesis and to omit the other references.  The period does not record a distinct rite for infants and to presume that infants were or were not baptized is a presumption.    Be clear on the controversies regarding "re-baptism" and the conclusions regarding the un-repeatability of Baptism / Confirmation and the resulting "naming" of this un-repeatability. 

3.  The Post-Apostolic Period   Historical developments are contextual;  sometimes developments in sacramental theology can only be understood in the context of developments in ecclesiology and ministry.   For example the rapid expansion of Christianity in the fourth century lead to the re-thinking of ministerial roles.  The pastor / overseer / Presider / priest / bishop role was beginning to be rethought.  Could others lead communities?  If so, how?  Which ministries could they perform and which ministries would be reserved to the bishop, the original minister of all the sacraments.  This question is answered in different ways in different places.  [e.g. see homework references to dividing the sacraments, requiring understanding for Confirmation, etc.] 

4.  The Reformation   Look "under your iceberg" and try to see your "attitudes" toward the reformation.  What this a good thing or a bad thing?  Where the key players "good guys" or "bad guys"?  "Smart guys" or "dumb guys"?   Did they set out to "improve the Church" or "destroy the Church"?  One way to answer this question is to look at the ways in which your classmates speak of the reformers and what happened during the reformation and see what "feelings" arise in reference to their statements. 

5.  The Second Vatican Council   The Council did not do anything "revolutionary" with regard to the Sacrament of Initiation.  The Rite for Adults was revised to take into account developments in catechetical theory and restored traditional liturgical rites to this faith journey.  The Rite took into account developments in ecumenical theology (especially under the impetus of Pope John XXIII).  Following the general liturgical principles that a Rite should say what it means, a new Rite was composed which acknowledges that when infants are presented for baptism, the minister is speaking to the parents about the infant, etc.  Note that the official theological documents all speak of Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist in that order with Eucharist giving the fullness of the Spirit.  I am unaware of any recent, official documents regarding Initiation which speak of Baptism, Eucharist, and Confirmation (in that order). 

6.  Eucharist   From reading the homework assignment postings I get the impression that some seem to think of the Mass as "the words of consecration with prayers before and after" and have not integrated the function of the epiclesis and the role of the Holy Spirit at Eucharist.   Often Confirmation was present as the (the one and only) sacrament of the Holy Spirit as though the Spirit was not operative at (Baptism and) the Eucharist (and, indeed in all the sacraments and in everything the Church prays and does.)   The key to understanding Eucharist as the culmination of Christian Initiation can be found in the text of the epiclesis, following the ancient axiom Lex orandi legem credendi constituit. 

7.  The Holy Spirit   All divine creative and sanctifying activity of the Trinity "ad extra" is attributed to the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit is operative in each of the sacraments.  For example, one cannot be freed from sin except by the action of the Spirit.  One cannot be incorporated into the Body of Christ except by the Holy Spirit.  From reading the homework assignment postings I get the impression that some are not very clear about who the Holy Spirit is and/or what the Spirit does.   For a long period in the Church, the Romans suffered from a deficient Pneumatology.  Look, for example, at the role of the Holy Spirit in  the Roman Canon [now: Eucharistic Prayer I].  Often this deficiency was supplied by the Blessed Mother Mary, resulting in a deficient Mariology and a deficient Pneumatology.   The renewal of the Eucharistic theology and the prominence of the epiclesis at our current Eucharistic celebrations (together with the Charismatic movement and the current revival of Pentecostalism) might, in time, remedy those deficiencies. 

8.  Lex Orandi   The ancient axiom Lex orandi legem credendi constituit points to the importance of the liturgical experience as the foundation for theological reflection.  Before quoting (and evaluating) an author's theological explanation of a sacrament (e.g. Confirmation), first ask "What was the author's liturgical experience of the sacrament?"   Did Hippolytus have any experience of Confirmation as a "stand alone" sacrament?"  Did Thomas Aquinas have any experience of the unity of the Rites of Initiation?  When quoting from contemporary authors, look at the date of publication and ask if the author who is writing about  Confirmation has had experience of the restored integrated rite at the Easter Vigil.  For example, my 1964 writing about Confirmation is much different from my 2007 writing on Confirmation.  And not everyone living in 2007 has had the same experience of Confirmation or interprets that experience in the same theological perspective.   This development of doctrine and catechetics can be seen even in the official statements of the magisterium.   Look at the date; not all statements are equal.   [This also applies to the Catechism of the Catholic Church -- look to the footnotes.]

9.  Theology and Catechesis   There is a difference between our theological understanding of something, and the aspects of that understanding that we might select for preaching and catechesis to a particular audience. [Just as there is a difference between how one might study human sexuality in a graduate course in medicine or psychology and the way one might present this understanding of human sexuality to children in a "sex-education" course in grade school.]   There are things one should learn in a graduate course and things one will find for the "ordinary folk" in a Catechism.  If one is preparing Roman Catholic adolescents (who had been baptized as infants) for Confirmation, the catechesis should be based on an orthodox theology of Confirmation, and upon the social and religious needs of the adolescents.  However, it is not good theology or good catechesis to look at the social and religious needs of the adolescents and then to construct a theology of Confirmation that meets those needs.  For example, your theological understanding of Confirmation should NOT be "age dependent."  Confirmation is not the time when one can decide whether he/she wants to be baptized or not.  There is one sacrament of Confirmation whether it is celebrated with 1) converts, both adults and children; 2) adults and children coming into full communion with the Catholic Church; 3) infants; 4) persons in danger of death; etc.  (It would be an interesting study to examine "Christian Military Metaphors in their cultural context.  Soldiers for Christ.  Legionnaires for Christ.  The Blue Army.  "An army of youth flying the standard of truth..."  "Hymn of the Brown Marines [e.g. Franciscans]" in the light of Jesus, the prince of peace.) 

[Return to top of this page]

© Copyright: Tom Richstatter, Franciscan Province of St. John the Baptist, Cincinnati Ohio, Order of Friars Minor. All Rights Reserved.  This page was created by Fr. Thomas Richstatter, O.F.M.  Every effort has been, and is being made, to acknowledge sources when the ideas are not my own.  Any failure to comply with the United States Copyright Act (Title 17, United States Code) will be corrected immediately should I become aware of it.  This site was updated on 06/22/08 .  Your comments on this site are welcome at webmaster2@tomrichstatter.org.