Confirmation at the Age of Reason
The Development of Faith, Aim of Religions Education
Catechists and professors of religion are frequently divided about the aim of religious education. One group struggles almost exclusively with the transmission of a precise knowledge; its members profess themselves satisfied if pupils know the letter of the catechism. At the opposite extreme are those who make too weak a case not only for memorization but for intellectual effort as well. Their sole objectives seem to be the encouragement of religious practice and the implantation of virtuous habits.
Both groups are concerned with certain aspects of the total goal, but the exclusive outlook of each—be it strict intellectualism or pragmatism—hinders one as well as the other from grasping the full reality, namely, the development of faith on which our salvation depends. "The heart has only to believe, if we are to be justified," St. Paul wrote to the Romans; "the lips have only to make confession, if we are to be saved." (Rom. 10, 10) And he added: "See how faith comes from hearing; and hearing through Christ's word." (Rom. 10, 17) The aim of the catechist, of the professor of religion, of the preacher, is to work with grace in the awakening or the increase of that faith which justifies us.
Now, this disposition of soul is a complex one. We become aware of its richness only in studying successively the principal elements that go to make it up. Following St. Thomas, Canon Mouroux has designated them by the three lapidary formulas: Credo Deum, Credo Deo, Credo in Deum.[1]
Credo Deum: "I believe there is a God." Our faith has an object, a content. At first glance it seems to deal with a multiplicity of things and with abstractions. Do we not speak of "the twelve articles of the Creed"? Actually, under this apparent variety of abstractions, we find the triune unity of God into which man is invited to come and abide eternally. The content of our religious teaching can be reduced to one fundamental reality: "God present to humanity in order to save it."
The role of the professor of religion is not limited therefore to arousing a certain sentiment or eliciting a religious practice. He has a message to communicate in its objectivity and integrity. However, his task is not to reproduce a compelling demonstration but rather to prepare for the reception of a witness.
Credo Deo: "I believe God." Revelation has come to us, the fact is, by means of testimony or witness. "No man has ever seen God; but now his only-begotten Son, who abides in the bosom of the Father, has himself brought us a clear message." (Jn. 1, 18) "We speak of what is known to us," Jesus declares to Nicodemus, "and testify of what our eyes have seen, and still you will not accept our testimony." (Jn. 3,11) Later he will add, addressing the Pharisees who refuse His testimony, "My Father who sent me testifies on my behalf too." (Jn. 8, 18)
The "Good News" of salvation was introduced into the world by two witnesses; the external witness—deeds and words—of Jesus Christ, and the internal witness—an intimate attraction—of the Father. "No one can come to me," says the Lord, "unless he has received the gift from my Father." (Jn. 6, 66)
Ever since the Ascension the Christian message continues to be transmitted by means of a twofold witness: the external witness of Christians, both personal and in community, and the internal witness of the Holy Spirit. "When the truth-giving Spirit, who proceeds from the Father, has come to befriend you, he whom I will send you from the Father's side, he will bear witness of what I was; and you too are to be my witnesses, you who from the first have been in my company." (Jn. 15, 26 f.)
The acceptance of any testimony depends largely on our dispositions with regard to the witness. If he is sympathetic toward us we trust him. If the contrary is the case we raise objections and manage to escape him somehow. It will suffice here to recall the conduct of the Pharisees.
More basically still, the acceptance of a sublime act of witness depends on our moral dispositions and our human experience. How difficult this acceptance is for the man who is not genuine, who lives in the midst of a deceitful and seductive world.
Under these conditions it will not suffice for the teacher of religion to address himself exclusively to the reason of his pupils. He must contribute something of himself toward bringing them close to the Savior. In his own person he is a modest and subordinate witness; but he gives true testimony nonetheless. He must merit the confidence of pupils. He must be able to build on their experience of loyalty developed through personal conduct and contacts.
Credo in Deum: "I believe in God." God is not only the object of revelation and its authorized witness. He is also the beatific End. Him we shall enjoy fully in the life to come; toward Him we are oriented in this life, in a sense possessing Him already. Faith is an intellectual adherence and a trust and also a commitment of the whole person. That is to say, our task remains unachieved if having elicited the immense love of God we do not seek the means to promote an ever more generous response to it.
This simple analysis of faith enables us to recognize its two aspects, the intellectual and the vital, which certain educators dissociate and isolate from each other.
Faith is an intellectual adherence to the message of salvation proclaimed publicly in the Church. It is an intimate acceptance as well, since it is a response to that attraction whereby God gives testimony in our hearts. The principal object of this adherence as we have pointed out is "God the Savior," or more precisely, the Paschal Mystery, the Mystery of Christ. Does not St. Paul center his whole missionary preaching on Christ risen? "If Christ has not risen, then our preaching is groundless, and your faith, too, is groundless." (I Cor. 15, 14.)
Faith is also a commitment, a lifelong gift of self. In the case of the conversion of an adult this may even be called its most striking aspect. Up until this decisive act, the individual had thought himself the shaper of his destiny. He looked upon the world as the framework in which the issues were joined. He was forcing himself to solve problems according to the potentialities of a human universe. Then it was that God intervened as the Living God and Friend to man, the one whom man must accept as his Master and the Guide of his destiny if he wishes to find a life which encompasses and surpasses by an infinity that of his own efforts. This life will vanquish death itself and every limit to the condition of this mortal body. Man says "yes" not through weakness or fear but because God is stronger and more alive than he.[2]
If, in order to appreciate better the steps of the believer, we have seen fit to distinguish the various aspects, let us recall that they are closely joined to one another. The order in which they have been presented must not lead us into error. Actually, the full knowledge of adherence is sustained by that force which carries us on toward God. In the first response to the divine invitation, these various aspects comprise but a single one. Faith is the encounter of the human person with divine Persons.
From the time of conversion onward, or with the first stirrings of consciousness in the baptized, this encounter must normally turn into intimacy. That supposes in him a progressive purification: his love more disinterested, his knowledge less sensual. Faith becomes interiorized and the believer comes to have a certain experience of the world of faith, a fruit of the presence of the Spirit of Christ. "It is by acknowledging the Son that we lay claim to the Father too. . . . The influence of his anointing lives on in you, so that you have no need of teaching: . . . according as this anointing has taught you, live on in him." (I Jn. 2, 23-37)
The increase of faith is manifested also by its spread. More and more it inspires all the activity of the Christian, who thereby takes on the aspect of a witness to Christ and apostle.
Such is that faith which it is the whole object of the catechist or the professor of religion to develop. Helping others to give themselves over to God or to remain faithful to the first commitment is his real task, along with encouraging an increasingly interior adherence and promoting the spread of faith. He will go about these tasks zealously, knowing that "faith comes through preaching," but above all with a deep-seated humility, for he is only the instrument of the interior Master whom the liturgy calls the "Light of hearts." He will also have a particular esteem for "the sacrament which gives the Holy Spirit."
This leads us to a consideration of the significance of confirmation.
The Significance of Confirmation
For about thirty years now the sacrament of confirmation has been the object of a particular interest. Theologians are engaged in determining its specific character and distinguishing it from baptism. Following their lead, we shall open the Scriptures, contemplate the liturgy, and consult the documents of the magisterium. It is a long road but it leads to enlightenment.
Scripture
1. The Gospels. Just as the baptism of the Christian receives its full meaning only in the light of Christ's baptism, so also it seems to us that our confirmation will be better understood with reference to the anointing or "confirmation" of the Savior.
"Then Jesus," we read in St. Matthew, "came from Galilee and stood before John at the Jordan, to be baptized by Him . . . and as he came straight up out of the water, suddenly heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God coming down like a dove and resting upon him. And with that, a voice came from heaven which said, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.' " (Mt. 3, 13-17) According to the Fathers and scholastics, the baptism of the Christian reproduces in some way the baptism of Jesus in the water; confirmation is a participation in His anointing, that fullness of the Spirit manifested by the descent of the Spirit.[3]
Quite frankly, these comparisons are surprising at first glance. Those who institute them hold that by baptism the Spirit takes up His abode within us, and that the sacrament of confirmation merely develops the spiritual energies infused in the water of baptism. According to them, "It corresponds to the progressive setting to work of these energies, by which the baptized person, a child in Christ, attains his full stature as a perfect man."[4] Neither the spiritual (or "pneumatic") aspect of baptism nor the dynamic character of confirmation is obvious from the baptism narrative, thus interpreted. Consequently, those commentaries which discover in the account of the baptism of Christ the heralding of the baptism and the confirmation of the Christian seem somewhat arbitrary, even though they may have their justification.
It is quite another matter, we think, if instead of limiting our gaze to certain verses about baptism (Mt. 3, 13-17), we consider the whole "wilderness pericope" (Mt. 3, 1-4, 11) :
In those days John the Baptist appeared, preaching in the wilderness of Judea: Repent, he said, the kingdom of heaven is at hand. . . . Come, then, yield the acceptable fruit of repentance; do not presume to say in your hearts. We have Abraham for our father; I tell you, God has power to raise up children to Abraham out of these very stones. . . . As for me, I am baptizing you with water, for your repentance, but one is to come after me. . . . He will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. He holds his winnowing-fan ready to sweep his threshing-floor clean; he will gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will consume with fire that can never be quenched. [Mt. 3, 1-12. Here the baptism narrative begins, followed immediately by the "temptation" episode.]
The preaching of John the Baptist gives us the meaning of baptism: entrance into the kingdom of heaven, a penitential rite, and intervention of God capable of raising up a progeny to Abraham—a judgment like that rendered by God in Egypt. Is it not the heralding of Christian baptism, which is new birth in God's image?
On the other hand, stating it briefly, the "temptation" narrative gives us the meaning of confirmation or at least makes it explicit. Cyril of Jerusalem recognized this when he said:
Lastly you have been anointed on the breast so that, clothed with the breastplate of justice you may resist the demon's attacks. Indeed, just as Christ after his baptism and the coming on him of the Holy Spirit went out and triumphed over the Adversary, so you after holy baptism and sacramental anointing, having put on all the armor of the Holy Spirit, will resist the hostile power.[5]
A reading of the Gospel thus leaves two positions open to us. We may either see in the baptism narrative a relation to the baptism and the confirmation of the Christian, a relation prepared for (in the case of baptism) by John the Baptist's preaching, and made explicit (in the case of confirmation) by the "temptation" episode.[6] Or, we may recognize in the baptism of Christ the prototype of our baptism only, and compare confirmation to the temptation of Christ which was brought to an end by the dispatching of angels as bearers of the divine presence.
Plausible arguments can be put forth to support both positions. It matters little to our purpose, however, to decide whether the significance of confirmation is conveyed in the "temptation" narrative for the first time or if it is only found there more explicitly. The fact is that we can never neglect this narrative in a study of confirmation. The two passages of the Gospel—baptism and temptation—are closely associated, as the ceremonies of baptism and confirmation were to be in the early Church. The "wilderness pericope" serves as a model for the Christian initiation: catechumenate, baptism, confirmation.
Baptism. "The baptism of Christ in the Jordan," writes Father Henry, "is a solemn ritual act by which Christ is consecrated preparatory to his death and resurrection."[7] The actions and words of the baptism recall the figures and preparations of the Old Testament and announce the Paschal Mystery, the realization of which is already begun. Let us examine it.
After having eaten the paschal lamb at the time of the "passing over" of the avenging angel, Israel had "passed through" the Red Sea, sojourned in the desert, crossed the Jordan (which the renewed miracles had, so to speak, identified with the Red Sea), and finally entered into the Promised Land. Similarly Christ "passes through" the Jordan before repairing to the desert and entering into the Promised Land. John baptizes him. The Spirit descends on Jesus and "the consecratory voice coming from heaven declares: 'Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."' (Mk. 1, 11) It is an echo of the "Servant songs," of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to Isaia," as the last song has been called. (Is, 53, 1)[8] These "songs" are evoked by the utterance of the Father, to be sure, but also by the coming of the Spirit and the words of John the Baptist: "Look, this is the Lamb of God; look, this is he who takes away the sin of the world." (Jn. 1, 29; Is. 53, 7)
Thus it appears that Jesus comes to the Jordan to accomplish the prophecy of Isaia. Now, in what sense was that prophecy evocative of the Messiah? First, it speaks of him as the messenger and renewer of justice (42, 1); then as a man humiliated unto death and exalted in a true resurrection. "Exaltation is linked to death in a cause-and-effect relation. Redress is achieved in virtue of abasement." (Cf. 53, 10-12) The Passion of the Servant now contributes to a redemptive purpose. The Sufferer expiates crimes he is not guilty of, the crimes of his many brothers, and just as his humiliations touch him in his own person insofar as he is a substitute for sinners, so also the personal glory which these humiliations win for him redounds to the profit of his brothers. "If he offers his life in expiation he shall see a posterity; long shall he live, and what pleases Yahweh shall be accomplished by his hands." (53, 10) We already know from other songs of the Servant what that purpose is; namely, establishing justice among the nations (42, 1-4), leading Jacob, making light to shine among the Gentiles and bringing salvation to the ends of the earth. (49, 5ff.) Because the Servant has borne their sins, God will give him "many men for his share, and multitudes for his spoils." (53, 12) "He shall have dominion over those for whom he offered his sacrifice of expiation. This dominion to be exercised by the humble Servant is the last picture we get from this tremendous text."[9]
The Servant is the messenger who proclaims judgment on the nations. He offers Himself as an expiatory sacrifice and rises again. Thus does he become Master. Are not the three missions of Christ, prophetic, priestly and kingly, thereby prefigured?
It can be seen from this how the baptism of Christ sketches out beforehand the Paschal Mystery to come. Now, He passes through the Jordan on His way to the Promised Land; then, the hour will have come for Him "to pass from this world to the Father" (Jn. 13, 1), and He will eat the paschal lamb with His disciples. Now, He is designated the Servant of Yahweh; then. He will accomplish this prophecy: He will render the supreme witness which shall lead to His condemnation, He will offer the redemptive sacrifice. He will rise and be proclaimed Lord of creation. Thus is His baptism the dawn of the passion and the resurrection.
Is it surprising then that the Lord Himself should have spoken of His Passion as a baptism? "Have you strength to drink of the cup I am to drink of, to be baptized with the baptism I am to be baptized with?" (Mk. 10, 38) "There is a baptism I must needs be baptized with, and how impatient am I for its accomplishment." (Lk. 12, 50) Is it surprising that in the conversation with Nicodemus (Jn. 3, 2-15), where He expounds the necessity of baptism for His disciples, He announces His own crucifixion and ascension? In His "raising up" (cf. Jn. 8, 28 and 12, 32; also Numbers 21, 8), He will "draw all things to Himself," a drawing realized when the Christian by his baptism finds himself associated with the "baptism" of Christ.[10] Later St. Paul will see in baptism a being made like to Christ dead and risen again, a certain consecration to the death and resurrection of Christ.[11]
Thus, as Henry writes,
The life of Jesus unfolds as one great sacrament, between a beginning (His baptism) which is primarily rite and symbol, and an end (the passion) which is primarily deed and effect; between a sacrament-sign which inaugurates and consecrates, and a sacrament-reality which consummates and achieves.[12]
The anointing or "confirmation" of the Lord. According to the majority of authors, as we have already seen, Christ was "anointed" spiritually when the Spirit descended upon Him; He was "confirmed" and His strength manifested in the dialogue with Satan. Henry prefers to relate the confirmation of the Christian to the ministrations which the Savior received at angels' hands after the threefold temptation. He writes:
In the interval (between the baptism and the passion), all the solemn moments in the life of Christ, those in which the action of the Father is manifested sensibly and ritually, so to say, are sacramental moments in the strict sense, that is, they signify and effect death and resurrection.[13]
In either hypothesis we are invited to search for some light on confirmation in the temptation narrative. This is the perspective in which we should like to reread the narrative. Jesus is "led into the desert by the Spirit" to be tempted by the devil. The Tempter suggests to Him that He use to His advantage some of His marvelous power and change stones into bread. Jesus answers him with the Scriptural phrase which recalls to every Israelite the primacy of the spiritual in life. "Man cannot live by bread only; there is life for him in all the words which proceed from the mouth of God." Then Jesus is brought to the pinnacle of the Temple, before all the people of Israel. "If thou art the Son of God," the challenge comes, "cast thyself down to earth." In other words, do that deed which those who look for the Messiah expect. Give the sign from heaven so ardently anticipated. What have you to fear? Is it not written, "He has given charge to his angels concerning thee, and they will hold thee up with their hands, lest thou shouldst chance to trip on a stone." "But it is further written," Jesus said to him, "Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the proof."
Staking everything on his last throw so as to gain all, the Tempter brings before the eye of the Nazarene as if on some lofty summit the vision of the empires of the world and all earthly glory. Then, aggressive and terribly sure of himself, he offers to share with his impenetrable Adversary this empire and this glory, if he will but do homage to him—for "they have been made over to me, and I may give them to whomsoever I please." But Jesus puts the brazen one to flight: "Away with thee, Satan; it is written. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and serve none but him." Defeated, the Strong One armed disappears, at least for a time.
Father de Grandmaison, from whom we have borrowed this paragraph,[14] says by way of conclusion: "What we have to remember concerning these very significant events . . . is that from then on the question of the Messiahship and the Kingdom of God was prominently before the Master, and formed the framework for the temptations which were to assail him."[15]
It does not seem out of place to go further and put the three temptations parallel on the one hand with the three great phases or aspects of the life of Christ, on the other with His three missions, prophetic, priestly and kingly. Jesus prefers the word of God to bread; He will preach the Good Tidings of salvation and will reproach the multitude with looking for bread other than His "words which are spirit and life" (Jn. 6, 63 and 68): for He is a prophet.
Jesus does not cast Himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple. He will not conquer spirits and hearts by "signs from heaven": He will act as a "Servant" throughout His life, but especially on Calvary. He will not come down from the cross to triumph over the incredulity of the chief priests by a dramatic exploit. He is our victim and our priest.[16]
Another passage brings to mind the second and third temptations. Peter has just acknowledged Jesus as "the Christ, the Son of the Living God." (Mt. 16, 16) Jesus commends him, and follows through with the prophecy of his Passion. "Whereupon Peter, drawing him to his side, began remonstrating with him. . . ." Jesus turned around and said to him: "Back, Satan; thou art a stone in my path; for these thoughts of thine are man's, not God's." Then follows Christ's promised reward of a life of renunciation and the cross, in which the Son of Man would return in His Father's glory surrounded by angels to make recompense. (Mt. 16, 22-27).
Jesus does not sacrifice his soul to the cause of dominating the whole world. He will be king, yes, but his reign will begin when he is lifted up on the cross.[17]
Put briefly, in the desert episode as in the Servant Song recalled by His baptism there is an illusion to the three missions of the Savior and to the three phases or principal aspects of the redemptive work.[18]
From this moment, Jesus accepts his three missions in the light of the Paschal Mystery. During his public life he will fulfill especially that of prophet or herald of salvation. (Lk. 4, 18; Is. 61, 1) That, however, will not hinder his remitting sins or working miracles at the same time, the signs of a dominion which extends to the material universe. Even so, if in his passion Christ is primarily a priest he is nonetheless a prophetic witness and king as well.
Let us conclude the Gospel account. Jesus has come out into the desert impelled by the Spirit to be tempted there. Once the demon is worsted the angels who are bearers of the divine presence intervene. According to Henry, they make of this moment a ritual thing: "Christ is fortified in his destiny as suffering Servant; we have here a confirmation."[19] If one recognizes the anointing of Jesus in the baptism narrative, it will be easy to see here the renewed assurance of the good pleasure of heaven.
The common elements in the Savior's baptism and his "confirmation" are the active intervention of the Holy Spirit, orientation toward the Paschal Mystery (indicated in the baptism by the circumstances and the words, in the confirmation by the struggle with Satan for fidelity to the Father which only the Savior's victory will terminate,) and references to the prophetic, priestly and kingly missions (clear in the baptism if one consults the Servant songs, probable but less clearly identifiable in the other case).
In the transition from the baptism of Christ to His "confirmation," He is seen to he in general more active in the latter, very clearly aware of His destiny (the meaning of His life), determined upon an encounter in which He will struggle victoriously with Satan, who departed from Him "for a while."[20] To this deepening there was probably joined a greater extension. At the Jordan, Jesus presents himself as an individual among others who come to confess their sins and ask for baptism. In the desert, He combats an adversary over a conception of the Kingdom of God.
We shall not tarry long over the Acts of the Apostles. Two passages in Acts speak explicitly and without any possible confusion of the rite of laying on of hands, that is to say confirmation insofar as it is distinct from the baptismal rite. (Acts 8, 14-17 and 19, 1-7) The first deals with the mission of Peter and John to Samaria, where the two apostles go to complete the work of the deacon Philip: it is followed by the meeting at Ephesus of Paul and the disciples of John the Baptist. It should be remarked that in the first of these texts especially, the Spirit's coming is linked to the rite of the laying on of hands.[21] Certainly the Spirit is already present in the baptized. But by a literary ellipsis the author of Acts signifies to us that for him, as for the first generation of Christians, confirmation is the "sacrament which gives the Spirit." the sacrament of the Spirit. At Ephesus, after Paul had laid his hands on twelve men, "the Holy Spirit came down on them, and they spoke with tongues, and prophesied." (Acts 19, 6)
Since confirmation is, par excellence, the sacrament which gives the Spirit, we are invited to see what the effects of the descent of the Holy Spirit were on Pentecost day, even though this has to do with a special case, that of the Apostles.[22] Upon reading the second chapter of Acts, one sees there the following effects.
First, there is the fullness of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit sent by the risen Christ: "They were all filled with the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2, 4) The Apostles receive an understanding of Scripture, a grasp of the history of salvation, in particular of the Paschal Mystery and the Eucharist. Peter, who had grown indignant at the thought of the Passion some weeks before, has comprehended the design of God. According to St. Thomas, Pentecost was also "the time when the Holy Spirit initiated the hearts of the disciples into the full knowledge of the mystery of the Eucharist."[23]
The disciples are caught up in this "story of salvation." Their first activity is preaching—"prophecy," witness. But the "breaking of bread," the Eucharist, is called for directly afterward. Under the impulse of the Spirit and the direction of the Apostles, the Church grows in strictest unity. The Acts describe this spread, beginning with Jerusalem to the very ends of the earth.
To sum up: Under the influence of the Spirit sent by the risen Christ, the Apostles receive some understanding of the Paschal Mystery and of the Eucharist. They engage, in turn, in the history of salvation itself as heralds and priests for the extension of the Kingdom of God.
The Liturgy
In the life of the Savior, His baptism and "confirmation" are preparatory steps toward the redemptive passion. The descent of the Holy Ghost on Pentecost unites the minds as well as the hearts of the Apostles in the mystery of our salvation. It is accomplished by the Father who sends His Son, by the Son who dies and rises again, by the Spirit who is sent by Christ in glory.
Even though baptism and confirmation (at least as made manifest or more explicit in the desert), are both oriented toward the passion, there is nonetheless a progress from the one to the other. At the Jordan, the entry into public life is like a birth, a recognition: "Thou art my Son," says the Father to Jesus who appears in the role of "Servant of Yahweh." In the desert, without any change in perspective, it is a matter of personal choice and a pledging of self to establish the Kingdom of God. This ordering in the direction of the Paschal Mystery, these relations, are things we shall see represented in an impressive way in the early liturgy.
1. The early liturgy. In the Paschal Vigil and Mass the Christian community accomplished a complete Eucharistic rite, a great act of thanksgiving memorializing the Savior's Resurrection. Before the offering of the sacrifice, both baptism and confirmation were conferred. It is in this context that confirmation, ordained toward the Eucharist, reveals if not its entire significance at least one of its chief roles:
The whole community took part actively and hierarchically in preparing for and celebrating this feast.
Laymen, that is to say, men "provided with the sacred character common to the entire 'royal priesthood,' have presented and then instructed the candidate for baptism: in this vigil they were the first to lay hands on him." After that, a deacon descended with him into the piscina and with a second imposition of hands immersed him in the baptismal waters. When he had come forth a priest began to anoint him with holy oil, saying to him the while: "I anoint you with holy oil in the name of Jesus." Finally, they brought him to the bishop who laid hands on him once more, saying almost to the letter that prayer which is still used to conclude the confirmation ceremony: then he completed the anointing in the name of the entire Trinity. After the kiss given by the bishop, the candidate took his place in the ranks of the faithful.
"The new Christians pray with their brothers [as they were not able to do before, Hippolytus carefully points out], and exchange the kiss of peace with them. They all proceed immediately to the offering where they likewise take part for the first time. Then the bishop pronounces the consecratory prayer when the deacons have brought him what has been offered. All is brought to a close by the communion of the neophytes in company with the rest."[24]
In the ceremony reserved to the bishop, let us observe more attentively on the one hand the rites and their effects, and on the other the person of the minister and his role. Even in the Old Testament the laying on of hands by a man of God has as its effect the gift of wisdom.[25] When Samuel anointed Saul and then David, the Spirit of God rested on them and transformed their hearts in view of the mission which these elect of God would have to fulfill.[26] In the New Covenant, "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power." (Acts 10, 38; see also Lk. 4, 18 f. which reproduces the Septuagint text of Is. 61, 1 f.) Those confirmed are made to participate in this grace when they receive from the bishop a palpable anointing, "It is God who gives both us and you our certainty in Christ; it is he who has anointed us, just as it is he who has put his seal on us, and given us the foretaste of his Spirit in our hearts." (II Cor., 1, 21 f.) Thus we have received in our measure the same Spirit as Christ. We are put in harmonious union with the Head of the Mystical Body, prepared to participate actively in offering His sacrifice.
The minister of this imposition of hands and this anointing is the bishop. Ruler, shepherd, teacher, pontiff, he receives us into the community as Christians who by the grace of the Holy Spirit reach adulthood and become capable of participating maturely in the Eucharistic oblation which the Church makes.
In the context of the primitive Paschal Vigil, confirmation thus presents itself to us as a day of twofold significance: it completes baptism and associates us more intimately with the priestly office of Christ; administered by the bishop, it introduces us as adults into the community of Holy Church.
Before long, however, the Church had been extended from country to country and conversions had multiplied. It grew impossible to lead all the neophytes before the bishop immediately following their baptism. Consequently the liturgy evolved in two directions. In the Eastern Church care was taken to preserve the strict unity of the three sacraments of Christian initiation, and confirmation was conferred by every priest. In the Latin Church reasons for reserving confirmation and the reception of adult Christians into the community of the Church to the bishop prevailed. The sacraments were separated from one another, with the unfortunate effect that the connections between confirmation and baptism and the Eucharist largely escaped notice. Despite all this, however, the Church in general came to abide by the order: baptism, confirmation, Eucharist.
2. Historical sketch: the order of the sacraments. I shall limit myself here to reproducing the conclusions of a study done recently by Father Levet, professor in the Major Seminary at Arras. These serve to strengthen the positions of his predecessors.[27]
This order in the conferring of the sacraments is a matter of tradition, one may say. Level writes:
The Church has always considered it normal for the baptized, adults as well as children, to receive confirmation before the Eucharist.
To our knowledge there is no Roman text which foresees the possibility of adopting the reverse order habitually and in principle.
Rather is it the case that the letter of Leo XIII (1897), the latest edition of the Roman Ritual (1952), and the instruction of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments (1932), show that the Church still thinks in the same terms. These documents require observance of this rule except in cases of impossibility. With adults this impossibility is realized whenever a bishop is not present at the time and place of their baptism. In the case of children, from the fourth to the twelfth century there was often an equal impossibility deriving from a bishop's absence; from the twelfth century to the Decree "Quam Singulari" (1910), the impossibility practically never existed, confirmation being given several years before first communion. Since "Quam Singulari" there may sometimes be an impossibility arising from the coincidence of the ages for reception of the two sacraments and the urgency of the precept to receive communion at the age of reason. That brings to mind the concluding part of the response of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments to the Spanish-speaking countries. But bad arranging must not render such an impossibility habitual.[28]
Over the centuries the Church remained faithful to the order of the sacraments. This practice is not incompatible with fluctuations in the matter of age. It should not be superfluous to record the history of practice here. If, in this regard, historical study does not yield a decisive argument for reception at the age of reason, it will at least no longer justify us in considering the ages of eleven, twelve or thirteen as "traditional"; quite the contrary.
3. Historical sketch: age of confirmation. The age at which confirmation has been administered has varied greatly in the course of centuries and in the law nothing hinders that it vary even today. The following summation is from Levet:
a) Up to the IV Lateran Council (1215), no distinction was made in the manner of conferring Christian initiation on adults and children. To both, baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist were given equally.
b) From the twelfth century the tendency grew not to give communion to children "before the age of reason."
Furthermore, shortly after the IV Lateran Council, even though the usage of confirming babies continued (Council of Arles, 1260), there likewise began to arise the custom of putting off confirmation until the ages of one, three, seven and even twelve—but in any case, before communion.[29]
c) The Roman Catechism (1566), catechism of the Council of Trent, canonized in that year the custom of putting confirmation off to the age of reason. It therefore played the same role in the history of confirmation that the IV Lateran Council had played in that of the age of first communion.[30]
d) From the beginning of the nineteenth century to the decree "Quam Singulari" (1910), in the Latin Church in general no change in discipline, except that starting with the mid-nineteenth century one sees a reaction set off by Rome against conciliar or synodal prescriptions which contemplate too late an age for first communion.
But first in France and later in Austria-Hungary the custom of putting off confirmation even until after first communion became widespread.[31]
Nevertheless, a return to the general usage of the Latin Church took shape after an intervention of the Sacred Congregation of the Council which demanded modification of the acts of the provincial council of Algiers in 1875.
e) The decree "Quam singulari" (1910) on communion at the age of seven constitutes the authentic commentary on the decree of the IV Lateran Council of 1215. . . . Generally only its eucharistic consequences are observed. It does seem that even outside of France it is not realized how modification of the point of view on the age of communion was meant to render the obligation of early confirmation much stricter.
In France the anomaly of the nineteenth century was aggravated in most dioceses.
In 1917 the Code of Canon Law was promulgated. In canon 788 the prescriptions given by the Roman Catechism for the age of confirmation were reverted to. But since the catechism was not a legislative text, this was the first time that a law was made on the age of confirmation: "Licet sacramenti confirmationis administratio convenienter in Ecclesia Latina differatur ad septimum circiter aetatis annum, nihilominus etiam antea conferri potest, si infans in mortis periculo sit constitutus, vel ministro id expedite ob iustas et graves causas videatur."
An Instruction of the Sacred Congregation on the Sacraments (1932) authorized the Spanish-speaking countries to retain the custom of administering confirmation shortly after baptism, while at the same time declaring it preferable to follow canon 788 so as to be able to precede the reception of confirmation with a "catechesis instructio."[32] It contained another directive as well for other countries: "Certainly it is opportune and more in conformity with the nature and effects of the sacrament of confirmation that children should not come to the Holy Table for the first time until they have received confirmation, which is like the complement of baptism and in which the Holy Spirit is given (S. Th. III, q. 72, a. 2, c„ where 'robur spirituals' is described as befitting 'perfectae aetati'); however, children must not be forbidden access to the Holy Table if they have come to the age of reason without having been able (non potuerunt) previously to receive the sacrament of confirmation." Briefly, the Church intends to remain faithful to the order in which the sacraments should be received, but the practical impossibility of receiving confirmation will not necessarily retard first communion.
f) Since its Instruction of 1932 the Sacred Congregation on the Sacraments has promulgated two decrees relative to confirmation.
The Instruction of May 20, 1934 says apropos of age:
"Besides the custom already cited (that of Spanish-speaking countries), there can also be, according to the view approved by several theologians, other legitimate causes for giving confirmation before the age of seven, especially when the prolonged non-appearance of the bishop is foreseen."
The Decree of Sept. 14, 1946 concedes to certain priests the power to give confirmation to persons—whether children or adults—in danger of death. One clause seems to us to put an end to debate on the "catechesis instructio" mentioned in the document of 1932; "The common law of the Latin Church, codified in canon 788, stipulates that the administration of this sacrament be deferred until the seventh year, so that, after a fitting (or appropriate) instruction, the children may derive from it more abundant fruit."
"31. The Church desires that confirmation be given at the age of reason (the age, that is, of the so-called "private communion"). Should anyone say that "confirmation is the sacrament of adulthood," the answer is that the phrase must be understood in the domain of spiritual and supernatural life, not physical and social life on the natural level.
"32 Just as it is legitimate to delay certain of the engagement ceremonies, so would it be contrary to the intention of the Church to delay confirmation. The faculties granted to pastors to confer confirmation on the sick illustrate this point well."
4. Conclusions from historical research. We repeat at the close of this resume of liturgy and ecclesiastical history that one fact is certain: the Church has always considered it normal for the baptized to receive confirmation before the Eucharist.
At times the reverse order has obtained, as in the case of the rare appearance of the bishop or (following a period of persecution, for example) when there were excessive numbers of candidates for confirmation. In these instances the children were required to await their turn until after the adults.
We prescind from these accidental modifications resulting from circumstances, however. More profound reasons came along to delay confirmation and even to put it after first communion, especially when the latter became obligatory at the age of seven.
First of all, there was the idea that it is not a sacrament necessary for salvation.[33] From this it follows that there is no urgency to confer it and that, for serious reasons, it may be delayed. The nineteenth century, which was prone to identify religious formation with the study of a systematic, abstract catechism, would be disposed to defer confirmation in the hope of guaranteeing catechism study more surely, or would at least be disposed to overestimate the intellectual demands made of the "confirmed."[34] The twentieth century, more solicitous for morality than faith, and justifiably shaken by the dangers to which adolescents are exposed—likewise answering the rallying cry of Catholic Action—chooses to see in confirmation a help in the difficulties of puberty, a means of resistance to the influences of a dechristianized culture, and the defensive armor of a knight of Christ. It wishes to see entrance to adult life marked by the consecration of a sacrament.[35]
But do not these pedagogic, moralistic and apostolic concerns run the risk of deflecting the sacrament of confirmation from its profound significance intended by the Savior? After the study of confirmation in Scripture and the liturgy, the question is certainly in order. If such is the case we shall not really be serving the causes so important to us.
Acts of the Magisterium
According to the documents of the magisterium, confirmation is a sacrament which gives us the Holy Spirit.[36]
In relation to baptism, it marks an increase of grace ("augmentum," "augemur in gratia")',[37] a making firm in faith ("roboremur in fide," "roborati," "robur");[38] it has its effect the communication of a power to profess the faith ("ut Christianas audacter Christi confiteatur nomen");[39] it is a balm which enables us to give off in every direction the good odor of Christ.[40]
In the enumeration of the sacraments it almost always follows the first, baptism, and comes immediately before the Eucharist.[41] The decree for the Armenians (1439) likewise indicates clearly the interconnection of the three sacraments of Christian initiation: "By baptism we are reborn spiritually; by confirmation we grow in grace and are fortified in faith; then, born anew and strengthened, we are nourished with the divine food of the Eucharist."[42] When the reference is to character, confirmation is cited after baptism and before order.[43]
In other contexts, the magisterium notes several times that confirmation must be conferred by the bishop, the successor to the Apostles who gave the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands;[44] if a priest is delegated he must use chrism blessed by the bishop,[45] whose action he prolongs.
A. Theological Reflection on the Meaning of Confirmation
If we reflect on the data of Scripture, the liturgy, and the magisterium, we see in confirmation a new intervention of the Spirit which has as its effect an interior change and a participation in the missions of the Savior.
The three divine Persons are at work in all the sacraments. Consequently, the new relations which we contract with each of them are the essence of these sanctifying interventions on their part; these relations constitute our Christian personalities.[46] By baptism the Holy Spirit unites us with Christ in His death and resurrection. We become adoptive sons in the only Son on the occasion of this rebirth, filii in Filio. The spiritual energies transmitted in the baptistry, however, lie dormant in the one who is baptized. In Christ he is as yet only a child. But it is not God's will that we remain minors forever. He invites us not only to achieve our salvation with Him but to collaborate in the salvation of the world.
How does one become a collaborator with the creative and redemptive Word, a little bit like the human Christ? It is quite impossible without a new intervention of the Spirit, He alone, sent by the Father and the Son, can carry on the creative work begun at baptism and make the baptized person participate in that anointing of Christ which transforms him into another Christ. By confirmation the Spirit extends to each of us who is baptized all the influence He exerted in the Incarnation and Redemption, bringing us close together and making us like the Person of the Word who creates and redeems. It makes us capable of working with the Spirit for the increase of Christ in ourselves and others. Endowed thus with the power of the Father whose instrument he has become, the Christian is ready to participate in the Savior's Eucharistic sacrifice as one responsible for himself, for his neighbor and for the whole world.
This influence of the Christian is possible only in view of the inner transformation which he undergoes. He becomes more closely configured to Christ in intelligence, will and entire being. His confirmation is an illumination. He understands the "wonders of God" (cf. Acts 2. 14-36), which are chiefly the events of the Paschal Mystery. The Christian is guided by the Holy Spirit unto all truth (Jn. 16, 13), but in a way so persuasive that His teaching is a "witness" in the full force of that term (Jn. 15, 26). Confirmation also gives the Christian strength, the strength of a magnanimous love and a devotedness docile before the Spirit. To have "the same mind which Christ Jesus showed" (Phil. 2, 5) is a thing not accomplished in a Christian save by confirmation. So much is this the case that the Church prescribes the confirmation of children in danger of death that they may achieve in Christ their full stature as adults.
The transformation of the baptized is not accomplished immediately, however, through confirmation. The Holy Spirit continues His work in docile hearts through a progressive purification of the concepts and the affections of carnal man.
In the New as in the Old Testament, when the Spirit plummets down upon someone and transforms him into a new man this is done with the purpose of investing him with a mission. The sacraments of baptism, confirmation and order incorporate man into the Christian community and confer on him a particular mission in the Church. They comprise a consecration in man analogous to that of Jesus who by His union with the Word is constituted Mediator between God and men. One can see why the bishop, the pontiff, teacher and shepherd of the diocese should be the ordinary minister of confirmation, for this sacrament confers on men an adult participation in the priestly, prophetic and royal missions of Christ.
By confirmation we men become capable of taking part actively—as mature individuals responsible in a spirit of solidarity for the good of the community—in the Mass, wherein the Paschal Mystery is presented anew. This is the highest function for which confirmation prepares us. given the fact that "the character deputes a man to the worship of God in accordance with the Christian religion."[47] In general, this is insisted on far too little with the consequence that the theocentric character of confirmation goes undeveloped.
When we participate actively in the. celebration of the Eucharist which by means of union with God and neighbor builds up the Mystical Body, when we observe in every detail of life the new commandment of charity whose source is Christ, when we prepare for the. appearance of new heavens and a new earth in an ever closer union with the creating and redeeming Word, then shall we be collaborating in the extension of the Reign of God, the gathering into one of a whole race of men redeemed, and in a sense, of a Universe made holy in trinitarian Unity, in accord with Christ's vow, "That they all may be one." (Jn. 17, 21)
Confirmation does not have as its purpose, to confine the life and effort of a Christian within the limits of the works of piety, nor even works described as "charitable." It looks to all the human activity of this son of God. For the life of grace must be introduced into every field of human effort, into all the trades and all the professions. Only at this price will the world undergo a reconstruction in Christ.[48]
Confirmation is a participation in the three missions of Christ. It is not only the sacrament of the apostolate, however, but also and primarily of personal commitment and spiritual progress. It brings about a development of faith, refining spiritual sensibilities.
The question is frequently posed, Does confirmation destine us for any one of the three missions of Christ more than the others? Ordinarily one speaks of the prophetic mission in this connection, that of bearing witness. In Christ, we have observed, the missions are very closely joined, though at various times in His life He seemed to exercise one mission somewhat more than another. In one who is confirmed the functions of Christ are intimately conjoined. Assistance at Mass is for him a sharing in the priesthood, a profession of faith, and an active collaboration in establishing the Reign of God.
The proper role of confirmation is not to orient us toward one function of Christ in preference to another. What it does do is render us able throughout life to participate in the missions of Christ as adults responsible for their own salvation and that of the world.
Confirmation accomplishes in us for our earthly existence what extreme unction will achieve in the perspective of passing from this world to the Father. There is in fact a strict parallelism between the various sacraments of initiation, baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist, and the last sacraments, penance, extreme unction and Viaticum.[49] Confirmation unites us more to Christ's public life which was principally but not exclusively revelation and testimony. Extreme unction consecrates our passing and prepares us for revelation face to face. In a comprehensive sense, it can be said that the sacrament of confirmation is conferred on us with testimony to truth in view. It enables us to be other Christs, witnesses to the Savior.
In saying this we must not forget that the highest function it renders us capable of, the most efficacious for ourselves and the Mystical Body, is the new participation in the Eucharist, which is the sacrament of charity. The principal gift of the Holy Spirit is, in fact, the charity which unites us intimately with God and neighbor. He distributes other gifts in all sorts of ways for the upbuilding of the Body of Christ.
If one had to include all these data in a single formula perhaps it could be put thus: "In the sacrament of confirmation the glorified Savior gives us, through the imposing of the bishop's hands and anointing with chrism, his Holy Spirit, who transforms us into strong and conscious Christians: he stamps our hearts with a new seal of the cross and gives us an active share in the work of Christ."
Confirmation at the Age of Reason: A Necessity for the Efficacy of Religious Teaching
We said at the very outset that the purpose of religious instruction is the development of faith. That means an intellectual adherence to the Paschal Mystery, the message of salvation brought by "the Witness." It is an adherence which is characterized by the orientation of one's entire person, in a word by commitment. Hence the mission of the catechist or the professor of religion is broken down into three tasks: helping others either to give themselves to God or else to remain faithful to their earlier personal commitment, assisting them in an adherence which is increasingly more conscious, and promoting the spread of the Faith through the sacramental and the interior life just as much as through the witness borne by a man's whole conduct of life.
All research done on the role of confirmation has concluded that this sacrament enlightens us as to the meaning of the Paschal Mystery and the history of salvation, and gives us the strength to take on, on our own account, the obligations assumed by our godparents. It thus marks a stage in the growth of that faith which must animate the interior life and active participation in the Eucharist, not to speak of all Christian conduct and witness. This simple collocation of argument proves sufficiently that for the normal efficacy of religious formation confirmation at the age of reason—if not sooner—is a necessity. Left to himself, the catechist or the professor of religion will necessarily be unequal to the three tasks incumbent upon him. If, on the contrary, he discharges them with children who have received confirmation or are preparing for it, he sees himself in the lofty position of humble co-worker of the interior Master. In the pages that follow I should like to show how much the early reception of confirmation would facilitate personal commitment, an increased religious awareness and the burgeoning of faith in every aspect of life.
Confirmation and Personal Commitment
The light of faith shed upon the data of experience yields two conclusions as to the role of confirmation in the religious life of children. They are these:
Confirmation is very useful, indeed necessary, for the child to attain the use of reason in a true sense (that is, to prefer God to himself) and recognize sufficiently the God to whom his self-offering is directed as he stands at the threshold of life.
The influence of confirmation is by no means least in the matter of perseverance.
1. Confirmation and one's earliest personal choice. Let us begin by studying the role of confirmation in the initial option or self-determination. What does that consist in? How much is at stake here? Father Claeys Bouuaert writes:
Everyone knows that the beginnings of moral life in man coincide with the onset of what is correctly termed the age of reason. This is the time when he discerns good and evil and deliberates inwardly, is "oriented personally" in St. Thomas's phrase, toward some final end, and ceases to depend entirely on his instinct and his surroundings. He really takes hold of himself and becomes in actual fact a reasonable being. To reach the age of reason is to enter into moral life. Again, once it is understood in its full and only coherent meaning, the moral life cannot be conceived without the notion of strict obligation. This in turn implies and supposes the notion of the true God. Therefore we can make the following identification: the age of reason is the age of moral life and also the age of knowledge of God. Ail three terms signify the same thing.[50]
These equations sufficiently indicate the importance of this age. It is then that the child becomes capable of either following freely or resisting the natural impulse of his intelligence which, divinely elevated, carries the creature toward the Creator. Such is the drama of the age of reason. But notice that the self-determination is by no means so simple as it may appear.
a. First of all, it may either never take place, or else the soul may not arrive at the age of reason for a good while. The reader needs only to recall various unfortunate cases of abnormalcy to concur on this point. These cases are not the most tragic ones, as Claeys de Bouuaert points out:
Let us imagine, for example, disastrous moral conditions in thoroughly civilized countries in which children are obliged to develop in coarse and even thoroughly corrupt surroundings, where their souls must be formed for life; where they never hear God spoken of nor conscience, duty, or any ideal whatsoever, save in terms of hate and derision as the invention of priests and the rich. Out of these surroundings they finally escape, by that time unreservedly given over to their instincts and without any other aim in life than money and pleasure. If we try to estimate the effect of such an education on the souls of the young and if we recall that the Vatican Council authorizes us to believe, even in the matter of knowledge of God, in the power of social influences, it will doubtless be hard to continue affirming calmly that in the soul of every human being who enjoys the gift of intellect the notions of obligation and of God must necessarily develop early; and this, mind you, with all the certainty required to engage the conscience, that is, to set the alternatives of mortal sin and perfect love in opposition, as a result of which the soul will reject or accept anything that conduces toward its last end.
We have been speaking only of children raised in the crudities of a milieu which knows neither faith nor law. Evidently that comprises but one set of cases. Other situations can produce the same effects. May not, for example, the spirit and the understanding grow embittered in the most refined surroundings just as surely as in the crudest? Do not science and culture have it in their power as well as a defect of education to lead the spirit astray and close it to a higher world of truth?[51]
There should be no need to apply these considerations to our own time. We witness the material suffering of millions of children and the spiritual distress of all who are subject to rationalizing influences much too early. Given these material and cultural conditions it is to be feared that many human beings do not arrive at the level of personal choice for a long time. Thereby the ranks of unbelievers who are without responsibility in their amoral condition are swollen. What results is a partial bankruptcy of religion, of morality, or of humanity.
b. The same causes outlined above will incline some of those oriented toward a final end to prefer self to God. Perhaps this choice will have been prepared for by an egoistic childhood in which parents were eager to satisfy the youngster's every whim. From two to four the child chooses between his "I" and others. He thus acquires a disposition which will be influential when the moment of decision comes in which he must prefer either the great Other or himself. Appearances can deceive us. The recitation of prayers is no sure index of virtuous choice. It has to be determined whether the child's religion is purely self-interested or whether sacrifice plays any part in it. Depending on which is the case, formalism will continue to be accentuated or, contrariwise, the purification of love.
If we cease to credit outward appearances overmuch and judge as Christians, we will acknowledge how much strength and light is needed by the child at the age of reason to make the personal act of choice that prefers God to himself. He needs both gifts to recognize sufficiently the God whom he is being called on to offer himself to at the dawn of conscious life.
2. Confirmation and persevering at one's commitment. Important though this election of the child may be, it is not that of an angel. It can undergo revision, whence comes the problem of persevering in the initial declaration in favor of the good. The child needs to be guided in the business of remaining on the right path. The modern world puts him off the track by a whole series of deceits: lies, commercial huckstering, nationalist or party propaganda. His moral resolve needs strengthening because the climate is debilitating in the extreme. Even on the supposition that without the aid of confirmation the first personal election would have been excellent, the sacrament would still be very useful and even necessary for perseverance.
Certain psychologists speak of the "psychological optimum" in discussing the teaching of some matter or an educational proposal of some sort. If a thing is tried too late it can come to nothing, for by that time the subject has a taste for something else.
The effects of a tardy administration of confirmation make themselves felt. Deprived—I underline the point—deprived of confirmation from the age of reason to the age of eleven or twelve, the soul has been spiritually put to severe strain. It can have lost if not the understanding of God at least the taste for Him. In the most favorable cases, the child has mastered a religious knowledge which is the pride of priest or catechist. Could not this knowledge have been checked on anywhere along the line? It is a well-known fact that even the non-Catholic youngster sometimes comes out first in religion-study competitions. My point is that normally, if confirmation is what we believe it to be, the adolescent of twelve will present himself to the bishop less well disposed than the child of seven. He will have lost in resiliency of spirit what he might have gained in the realm of a knowledge that can be checked by questioning.
Confirmation and Conscious Adherence
Catechetical instruction is faced with an antinomy in our day. In various countries the courses in religion are too challenging and the manuals too substantial for children malformed by their surroundings and spiritually anemic. But on the other hand, the necessity for solider religious formation presents itself as secular culture grows and the pattern of life is divorced from the sacred. A solution to the problem presupposes the concurrence of several factors, among them the early reception of confirmation. Since I cannot enter into all the details, I should like to highlight three points.
1. Contemporary philosophy has brought to the fore the roles of freedom and love in any progress in knowledge. Blondel's labors have been completed by the observations of the existentialists. Thanks to them we understand better today that knowledge of God progresses variously according as we have acted for Him or against Him, Similarly, on the supernatural plane, the believer animated by divine charity will discover God in a different fashion from the believer who does not live in God's friendship. Writes Father de La Taille:
The light of faith, although in the mind, has not entered into man through the mind but through the heart. There is its gate of entry. There is the aperture through which God pours it more or less abundantly, more or less alive, according as love itself is alive within us beyond all other affection or, conversely, as self-love dominates the love of God and overwhelms it.
As has been said above, confirmation has a great influence on the most personal area of choice and on fidelity to this first commitment. It increases our love of God. On this count it enjoys a considerable role in the progress of religious knowledge.
2. Passing from the child's faculties to his program of religion study, we can testify to a happy evolution in our day. All teaching that savors of rationalism is at least theoretically proscribed and in its place the message of the Good News is addressed simultaneously to intellect and will. It is being presented as the story of salvation or, better still, the mystery of salvation. Well and good. But this divine sense of history which needs to be communicated to children was not grasped by the Apostles before Pentecost day. Is it out of place to believe that the introduction of a kerygmatic program requires the special assistance of the Lumen cordium, a preparation of hearts and spirits?
3. Finally, there is the problem of methods. In this area too, great progress is reported. But there are pitfalls to avoid. Professor Arnold of Tubingen fears that priests and catechists skilled in these methods may exaggerate their helpfulness and forget the role of the interior Master.
Activity methods rouse the pupil from torpor, but they also run the risk of occupying him with superficial tasks to the detriment of interior growth. We have to plead today for "more soul" in catechetics as Bergson pleaded for it to a world whose spiritual development had not been on a par with its technical prowess. The progress of methods and techniques might delude us if the action of the "interior Master" were not taken advantage of.
The task of religious education is far more than a matter of reproducing slavishly the conduct of Christ. It has to do with continuing—I had almost said "devising"—Him anew in His earthly existence. We can do a thing like that only by docility to the Spirit who led Jesus. This is the condition on which we shall be sons of God. '"Those who follow the leading of God's Spirit are all God's sons." (Rom. 8, 14)
Our religious instruction has become Christ-centered once more, an incontestable sign of progress. But it is still not "spiritual" enough or sufficiently "pneumatic" in the term of the Fathers. How necessary it is that the Spirit descend upon our children in His fullness very early, and that they come to think of Him habitually as "another Friend"; come to need Him and to act with Him!
When we consider today's children, many of them cut off from religion or thoroughly disoriented by war and its effects, by family mobility and divorce, we are dismayed at the weight of their obligation if they are baptized and wish to live as Catholics. They themselves have to struggle for perseverance; no one can do it for them. They can only do it by working to alter their surroundings, their study, their leisure.
Mankind in our day has great hopes for youth. It has learned that on the education of today's youth depends tomorrow's peace. The efforts made are remarkable, but in all likelihood much too shortsighted. The spread of knowledge and uniformity in teaching cannot make up for moral and religious education. Without the latter, children will never become fashioners of the kind of universe we hope for. Without it, international alignments cannot look to the Mystical Body of Christ to sustain them. The Holy Spirit is the Soul of the Body. Were He to animate youth in all the forms its vigor takes, nations and races could grow in unity without detriment to their diversity.
We work against Him, we who have the power to transmit Him sacramentally, if we keep Him from the young in the years they most need Him.
1 I Believe. The Personal Structure of Faith (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1959).
2 The treatment here follows the thought and at times the phrasing of Fr. A. Liege, O.P., "Faith." in The Virtues and Stales of Life, The Theology Library, IV (Chicago: Fides, 1957), 1-59.
3 Cf. J. Danielou, S.J., "Confirmation," The Bible and the Liturgy (University of Notre Dame Press, 1956), pp. 114-26. The baptism of Christ and that of the Christian are not identical but analogous. From the time of His conception, Christ's humanity was filled with grace and truth. According to St. Thomas, the sacrament is a sign of three things: it is a memorial of the past, the Savior's Passion; it is a sign of a present reality, grace; it prefigures the future, eternal life. As to Christ's baptism, that also can be called a sign of three things: it is the sign of the accomplishment of a prophecy, namely, the prediction of the suffering Servant; it is the sign of the initial realization of this destination to the Redemption; and lastly, it is the sign of full accomplishment to come, the Cross. (Cf., P. Henry, S.J., "Het sacramentalisme van het Doopsel," Bijdragen, XI [1950], 42. Also 1. de la Potterie, S.J., "L'onction de Christ," Nouvelle Revue Theologique, 80 [Mar., 1958], 225-52.)
4 Op cit., p. 126. Italics mine.
5 Cited by Danielou, op. cit., p. 121.
6 We said above that in general this was the tendency of the Fathers and scholastics; namely, to find in the one account of the baptism of Jesus the prototype of the two sacraments.
7 Henry, op. cit., p. 49.
8 Cf., F. X. Darrwell, C.SS.R., The Resurrection (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1960), pp. 4 ff. Isaia had written: "And now, here is my servant . . . the man of my choice, greatly beloved. My spirit rests upon him." (Is. 42, 1) And further on (53, 7): "Sheep led away to the slaughter-house . . . no word from him."
9 Durrwell, op. cit., p. 6.
10 Henry, op. cit., p. 49.
11 Rom. 6, 2-11. Cf. also what L. de Grandmaison has written concerning Christ's baptism Jesus Christ, II [New York: Sheed & Ward, 1943], 11): "The best commentary on these facts, and the key to the way in which Christianity interpreted them from the beginning, is to be found in the final commandment of the Saviour, and in the Trinitarian baptismal liturgy, which followed from it: 'Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' (Mt. 28, 19)"
12 Henry, op. cit., p. 49.
13 Ibid.
14 Op. cit., pp. 13.f.
15 Op. cit., p. 14.
16 This interpretation of the second temptation is suggested by a comparison with two other Gospel texts. The word of Satan is spoken through the sarcastic taunts of the chief priests on Calvary. "If thou art the Son of God." said Satan, "throw thyself down, for it is written, He has given charge to his angels concerning thee. . . ." (Mt. 4, 6). The chief priests: "He has but to come. down from the cross, here and now, and we will believe in him. He trusted in God; let God, if he favors him, succour him now; he told us, I am the Son of God." (Mt. 27, 42 f.)
17 Cf. the end of the preceding note. On the cross, Jesus begins to dispose of the Kingdom of God. "Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom," begs the thief. And Jesus answers, "I promise thee, this day thou shalt be with me in Paradise." (Lk. 23, 42 f.) Cf. also the texts on the attraction which Jesus will exercise after his "being lifted up" on the cross. (Jn. 8, 28 and 12, 32; also Num. 21, 8).
18 There is no need, however, to depend too heavily on the chronological sequence: St. Luke reverses the order of the second and third temptations.
19 There is a striking parallelism between the episode in the desert and that in the Garden of Gethsemani. (Mt. 26, 36-46). In each case there is struggle (the word "agony" means "struggle"). Three times waves of distress roll in on the soul of Jesus. Three times he comes to find his apostles. "Watch and pray," he says to them the second time, "that you may not enter into temptation." (v. 41) Just as in the desert, Jesus receives aid from heaven: "And he had sight of an angel from heaven, encouraging him." (Lk. 22, 43) The "confirmation" of the Lord was the consecration of his action; the succor or anointing during the agony will be the consecration of his passion and death. If, as Henry thinks, the succor brought from heaven to Gethsemani is the prototype of extreme unction, it would be plausible to regard the intervention of the angels in the desert as a "confirmation."
20 Cf. Lk. 4, 13 and 22, 53.
21 I borrow these lines from a study of the late M. l'Abbe Lucien de Bontridder, to appear in Lumen Vitae: his work has inspired several passages in this paragraph concerned with the significance of confirmation.
22 This enlarged treatment is all the more legitimate as the effects of St. Paul's intervention at Ephesus recall in a striking manner the events of Pentecost.
23 Sermon for the feast of Corpus Christi, Opusculum 57.
24 L. Bouyer, of the Oratory, "Que signifie la Confirmation?" Paroisse et Liturgie, 34 (1952). 8. The author highlights—unfortunately in somewhat too exclusive a fashion—the relations obtaining between confirmation and the Eucharist.
25 "Now Josue, son of Nun, was filled with the spirit of wisdom, since Moses had laid his hands upon him." (Deut. 34, 9)
26 "Then the spirit of Yahweh will descend upon you, you will enter into ecstasy with them and be changed into another man," Samuel had announced to Saul (I Sam. 10, 6); the prophecy was realized (Ibid., 10, 10). "Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers. The spirit of the Lord took possession of David from that time onward." (ibid., 16, 13)
27 R. Levet, "L'age de la confirmation," in A. Chanson, Pour mieux administrer Bapteme, Confirmation, Eucharistie, Extreme-Onction, 2ieme ed. (Arras: Brunet, 1953), 437-46.
28 Ibid., p. 444.
29 "Why this delay? There were numerous reasons: neglect to receive a sacrament which is not strictly necessary for salvation; infrequent appearances by bishops. Most of all, around 1215 the Gloss interpreted a text of the Council of Orleans reproduced by the decree of Gratian in favor of confirmation at twelve years: 'ut jejuni ad confirmationem veniant perfectae aetatis'—let them approach confirmation fasting, at a mature age.' This 'perfectae aetatis' made an impression; but as Suarez remarks, the text is speaking of adults to be confirmed and it does not speak as if it were only necessary to confirm adults. Doubtless too there was a tendency from 1215 on to wish that confirmation be received with personal dispositions like those for the Eucharist. Certain particular councils tried to struggle against the idea, but in vain. Others recognized the custom (Cologne, 1280, which said 'seven years and more'). On the eve of the Council of Trent we find a Council of Cologne (1536) citing both usages: confirmation administered to the very young and in other cases deferred until the age of reason; no absolute decision was made in favor of the one or the other." (Levet, op. cit., p. 441).
30 The text of the Roman Catechism is susceptible of two interpretations: 1) "That is why (= given that) it does not seem good (=lawful) to wait until the age of twelve, though it is mandatory not to confirm before seven:" 2) "that is why, if (for such a child) it is not considered obligatory to wait the age of twelve (though lawfully one might do so), it is at least ('certe') required to wait until the age of seven." Since internal criteria are not clear, recourse is necessary to external criteria, namely, seeing how this text was understood by subsequent provincial councils. According to Levet (op. cit., pp. 440 f.), two points seem established: 1) by examining all the councils of the second half of the sixteenth century, it can be seen that confirmation was generally given around the age of seven; 2) lesser psychological conditions were being required for confirmation than for communion, and in fact confirmation was preceding communion.
31 "Why this new deferment? The reasons for it are expounded in pastoral letters, diocesan statutes, and canons of provincial councils. Many children had not been able to be confirmed during the Revolution, and the bishops who signed the concordat found themselves faced with multitudes to be confirmed, beginning with adults. Further, by putting off the age of confirmation they could be surer that children would continue with the cycle of catechetical instruction up until first communion time." (Levet, op. cit., p. 442)
32 The Sacred Congregation does not specify what this "catechesis instructio" must be. According to Fr. Galtier ("L'age de la confirmation," in Nouvelle Revue Theologique. 60 [1933], 675-86), it must be more advanced than that for first communion. Fr. Jungmann adopts their opinion (Handing on the Faith [New York: Herder & Herder, 1959], p. 343). This interpretation has difficulty in harmonizing with the rest of the instruction (as Fr. Jungmann recognizes, ibid., p. 262, n. 99), and with later decrees of the same Congregation. It has not yet been received by the French hierarchy (see R. Levet, op. cit., pp. 443 and 433 bis, n. 20).
33 Levet points to this to explain the custom of delaying confirmation which was established shortly after the IV Lateran Council (op. cit., p. 441). Similarly, Jungmann notes it as a consideration invoked in favor of waiting until adolescence (op. cit., p. 261).
34 See Franz Arnold's article, "Renouveau de la predication dogmatique et de la catechese," in Lumen Vitae, III (1948), 496-99.
35 Jungmann has expanded upon these motives admirably, op. cit. pp. 342 ff.
36 Denzinger—Schonmetzer, ed. XXXII Enchiridion Symbolorum, (Freiburg: Herder, 1963), 98 [215], 419 [785], 450 [831], 697 [1317].
37 Ibid., 695 [1310], 697 [1317].
38 Ibid., 419 [785], 695 [1310], 697 [1317].
39 Ibid., 697 [1317]
40 Ibid., 697 [1317].
41 Ibid., 424 [793], 695 [1310], 852 [1609], 996 [1864]; in 465 [860], penance is inserted between confirmation and the Eucharist.
42 Ibid., 695 [1310].
43 Ibid., 852 [1609].
44 Ibid., 98 [215], 419 [785], 424 [793], 450 [831], 465 [860], 697 [1317], 873 [1630], 960 [1767], 2147 a[3553].
45 Ibid., 697 [1317].
46 See the profound treatments of P. Ranwez, S.J., "The Sacrament of Confirmation, Builder of the Personality for Service in the Mystical Body of Christ," in Lumen Vitae, IX (1954), 17-34; "Confirmation et vie chretienne," in Catechistes, 19 (1954), 169-82.
47 St. Thomas Aquinas, S. Th. III, q. 63, a. 3, ad 2.
48 Francois Taymans d'Eypernon, S.J., La Sainte Trinite et les sacraments (Bruxelles: Edition Universelle, 1949), pp. 68 f.
49 See above the parallelism between the Temptation narrative and that of the Agony. Early liturgical discipline permitted the administration of extreme unction before Viaticum. In 1948, the Week at Vanves expressed the hope of a return to the former custom. It is so done in the bilingual German ritual.
50 Paul Claeys Bouuaert, S.J., "Tous les athees sont-ils coupables?" in La Nouvelle Revue Theologique, 48 (1921), 171 f.
51 Op. cit., pp. 176 f.
