Newspaper Page Text
(All Articles This P?ge Copyrighted 1971 By NC News Service)
PAGE 5 — January 14, 1971
KNOW YOUR FAITH
* j / / ; ?
< >
THE HOLY SPIRIT, symbolized in this airborne bird, hovers above mankind. “It is the Spirit who
is the source of our love as well as the source of all charisms or special gifts in the Church,” writes
Father Riga this week. (NC PHOTO )
Sacraments And
Religious Education
Confirmation
By Fr. CarlJ.
Pfeifer, S.J.
“What is a sacrament?” In
the past months, I posed this
question to parents in
Virginia, priests in Boston,
teachers in South Carolina,
Illinois, Utah - to name just a
few groups. All responded
almost in chorus: “A
sacrament is an outward sign
instituted by Christ to give
grace.” Almost every Catholic
adult in the United States
seems to have learned this
definition and remembered it
for years.
However, a little probing
with more questions revealed
a great deal of confusion and
misconception underneath
the certainty of knowing the
definition by heart. The
simplicity and clarity of the
definition does not reveal the
unresolved questions involved
in the traditional Catholic
understanding of sacraments.
Nor does it suggest the
staggering differences in the
way the sacraments were
understood and administered
in different periods of the
Church’s history.
Many adult Catholics think
the definition means that
Christ gave the Apostles clear
instructions about the
number and nature of the
seven sacraments and how to
administer them
instructions the Church has
followed without change
since the time of Jesus.
Often the complexity, the
historical development, the
theological questions come as
a fearful surprise when a
change in practice takes place
in a parish or diocese. The
sacrament of confirmation is
a good example of this.
Some dioceses now
postpone confirmation to the
age to seventeen or eighteen,
and some people would argue
for an even later age. Other
dioceses wait till the seventh
or eighth grade, while many
dioceses hold confirmation in
fourth or fifth grade. In the
Oriental Rites of the Church,
confirmation is received
immediately after baptism,
even in the case of infants.
More and more theologians
suggest that this is the most
traditional approach.
The decision as to when
people are to receive this
sacrament depends on an
understanding of what the
sacrament is for. So
theologians ask the question,
“Just what is the sacrament
of confirmation?” From the
New Testament they draw
almost no conclusive help.
It is practically impossible
to discover in the Scriptures,
or in liturgical documents of
the first centuries, evidence
for the existence of a separate
sacrament of confirmation.
The most recent official
teaching authority of the
Church leaves the question
unanswered, and suggests
only that “the rite of
confirmation is to be revised,
and the intimate connection
which this sacrament has with
the whole Christian initiation
is to be more lucidly set
forth” (Constitution on the
Sacred Liturgy, no. 71).
The Council suggests what
historical research, and a
growing theological consensus
seems to indicate. The
sacrafnent of confirmation is
essentially a part of the
sacramental process of
initiation into the Christian
community, a confirmation
of the gift of the Spirit
received in baptism and a
final preparation for the
sacrament of the Eucharist.
The sequence of
baptism-confirmation-Euchar-
ist seems to be the important
factor. This sequence has
always been followed by all
the Eastern Churches, and
was the practice in the West
until the Middle Ages.
The shift in practice began
in the medieval West because
of the dying out of adult
baptism and the
catechumenate. The change
was also necessitated by
restricting the administration
of this sacrament exclusively
to the bishop, who, as
population increased, could
not be at every baptism to
administer confirmation.
These practices gradually
affected the theology, so that
emphasis was now placed on
themes such as “Christian
maturity,” “becoming a
soldier of Christ,” “courage,”
- themes that are secondary
to the main focus of
confirmation as the transition
event between baptism and
the Eucharist in the process
of Christian initiaion. This
understanding of the
Sacrament of Confirmation as
a sacrament of Christian
maturity has little basis in the
Scriptures or the earlier
twelve centuries of the
Church’s tradition and
practice.
Today there is no unified
practice regarding
confirmation, nor is there a
complete consensus among
hierarchy and theologians as
to the real meaning of this
sacrament. Some feel that
confirmation is the sacrament
of “coming of age,”, similar to
the Jewish bar-mitzvah. Such
an understanding follows the
theology developed in the
Middle Ages, and would
suggest postponing the
sacrament until a person is
able to make a fully mature
commitment.
Others, and this seems to
be the growing and most
traditional trend, view
confirmation as an integral
part of the initiation rites
into the Christian
community, signifying the
fullness of the gift of the
Holy Spirit. They would urge
that confirmation be received
just after baptism and just
before communion, even in
the case of infants.
Only further theological
development and pastoral
experimentation under the
guidance of the bishops will
gradually resolve the
contemporary questions. In
the meantime, the very
question can help us realize
how much we adult Catholics
need to deepen and enrich
our understanding of the
‘simple” definitions learned
n childhood.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. In your own words,
what do you understand by
the word “sacrament?”
2. What are the advantages
and disadvantages of delaying
the sacrament of
Confirmation until late
adolescence?
The
Sacraments
Confirmation
By Fr. Peter J. Riga
The sacrament of
confirmation from the
earliest days of the Church
has been regarded as the
complement of baptism.
Together they constitute the
initiation into Christian
existence. In the early
Church, when most of those
initiated into Christianity
were adults, these sacraments
were administered together.
Confirmation was the
Pentecost of each of the
baptized, bearing witness to
faith in the world. What was
clear even from the earliest
days was the relationship
between the Spirit and
confirmation.
The Acts of the Apostles
give us a clear teaching on the
Pentecostal gift of the Spirit
to the faithful. Just as Christ
received the mission from the
Father to go into the world
to save it, the Church and
each of her members is now
given the same mission by the
“consecration and anointing
of the Spirit.” This divine
anointing is a spiritual quality
given to the Christian to
sustain his whole spiritual life
and the action of God in
arousing faith in the hearts of
those who are obedient to his
Word.
It is the Spirit who is the
source of our love as well as
the source of all charisms or
special gifts in the Church.
These gifts build up the
Church, thereby consecrating
it as the temple of God. It is
the Spirit who keeps the
Church in unity and
communion; he is indeed the
very soul of the Church.
From the earliest times this
visible manifestation of the
Spirit in the Church was
signified by a distinct rite
known to us today as the
sacrament of confirmation.
Yet, even if we have seen this
reality in the light of
Scripture and tradition, this
still has not given us a clear
theology of the sacrament.
The Church in general and
each of the faithful, in
receiving the gifts of the
spirit, receives the various
gifts of the Spirit for the
edification and building up of
the Church’s presence in the
world. Each of the baptized
faithful, in receiving the
Spirit in confirmation in
faith, receives a special gift
(St. Paul lists many of them
in his epistles) for the sake of
others, and for the building
up of the whole Church in
the world.
God’s grace, active in each
of the faithful, has a double
dimension. One is the grace
of dying with Christ, a death
of sin, egoism, greed,
selfishness, and all the other
aspects which kill and
diminish love. But God’s
grace in Christ is also related
to saving and transforming
the world, just as the
resurrection of Jesus did not
destroy the once pain-filled
body of Christ but
transformed it through his
passion and death. This
mission to transform the
world is the mission given to
the confirmed.
Confirmation gives the
baptized person the strength
and spiritual force to become
the visible sign of Christ’s
presence in the world, that
men in the world may see and
wonder as men once
wondered when they saw the
first Christians love each
other so deeply. Each of the
faithful has his own vocation
and his own charism to work
out this mission of Christ’s
presence in the world. The
sacrament of confirmation
confers on us the mission to
witness to as well as to
transform the world in the
Spirit of Christ.
As we have seen elsewhere,
the Church is the historical
presence of God’s mercy and
love in the world. She has the
same mission the Father gave
to Jesus. The Church is
actualized and symbolized in
the sacrament of
confirmation in each of the
faithful who receive this
mission of Jesus to save the
world and transform it by
working within it.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. Why are baptism and
confirmation so closely
connected?
2. Why is the Spirit called
the “soul of the Church”?
iMpKi
“MEET JESUS” — Whether a person answers the question
"What is Confirmation,” in the traditional rote manner or
otherwise, he is still called at any age, in the Sacrament of
Confirmation, to "Meet Jesus,” in a special way. (NC PHOTO)
Scripture In The Life
Of The Church Today
The Source of Christian
Life and Leadership:
Divine Grace
By Fr. Walter M.
Abbott, S.J.
Very early in the Second
Letter to the Corinthians,
Paul goes on the defensive
(2:14-4:15). Apparently
some in Corinth or visitors
from outside had accused him
of giving too much
importance to his own words
and actions. They seem to
have had in mind especially
Paul’s letters. The severe
letter mentioned in this
epistle (2: 2-4), Which Paul
wrote “with many tears” and
which has been lost to us, was
perhaps what chiefly
generated the charge against
Paul.
Paul deals vigorously with
the charge. Along the way he
momentarily takes the
offensive by indicting some
for handling God’s message
“as if it were cheap
merchandise” (2:17). He
stresses that it is God who has
been at work in him.
Look at the beautiful
sentences in 3:2-3, where
Paul says the Corinthian
Christians are like a letter
written on his heart and
theirs for everyone to know
and read. He adds, “It is clear
that Christ himself wrote this
letter and sent it by us.” Paul
means, as the proceeds to say
in 3:5-6, that the grace of
Jesus Christ has made
Christians of the Corinthians,
and whatever virtue they
manifest is from Jesus,
'therefore, since he was
instrumental in the bringing
of that grace, Paul can point
to the Christians of Corinth
as proof that God used him
“to make Christ known to all
men.” (2:14).
That section, 3:4-6, has
been used from early
Christian times as a source for
the doctrine of the necessity
of grace for every salutary
act. Such use is an example of
“a fortiori” argumentation,
'the text, taken by itself, says
that Paul needed divine grace
to do what he did. The
argument, therefore, is that if
Paul, inspired writer and
saint, needed divine grace for
what he did, all other
Christians need grace for
what they do. I think you
will agree there is a
presumption in the
argumentation that all the
rest of us are “lesser”
Christians than Paul. It
doesn’t bother me. I’m quite
ready to agree. I suspect that
most of you will, too.
From early Christian times
that sentence in 3:3 has been
taken as indicating how we
can think about the activity
of the Holy Trinity: “It is
clear that Christ himself
wrote this letter and sent it
by us. It is written not with
ink on stone tablets, but on
human hearts, with the Spirit
of the living God. In other
words, the living God, that is,
the Father, has sent the Holy
Spirit to write in the hearts of
the Corinthians the beliefs
and practices which, for all
who see them, are a letter of
Christ. And, Paul adds, that
letter proclaims he is Christ’s
envoy.
The mention of stone
tablets reminds Paul of the
law given to Moses, or
perhaps it was the other way
around, that he was already
thinking of the law and a
point he was going to make
about it, and therefore he
used the phrase about stone
tablets. At any rate, Paul
proceeds to give what might
be called a summary of the
letter to the Galatians in
3:6-16. He says that the Old
Testament told the people of
God what to do but didn’t
give them the strength to do
it. In fact the Old Law was
the occasion of sin and
spiritual death and
condemnation as a result of
the fact that it didn’t give
grace to avoid what it
prohibited. The New
Testament, Paul teaches,
(Continued on Page 6)
Question
And
Answer
BY FR. RICHARD McBRIEN
Q. What is the Catholic Church’s present teaching
on papal infallibility, and why did the Pope not teach
infallibly rather than authentically on artificial birth
control, thus avoiding much of the furor his
encyclical subsequently aroused? Also, how and when
does a Pope decide whether he will speak infallibly or
authentically?
A. (1) The Catholic Church’s present teaching on
papal infallibility is the same as it was when initially
promulgated at the First Vatican Council in 1870.
The most recent authoritative reaffirmation of the
doctrine is contained in the Second Vatican Council’s
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (n. 25).
(2) The Pope did not made an infallible
pronouncement on the morality of contraception, in
my judgment, because the subject matter does not
pertain directly to the Gospel, but only indirectly.
Catholic theologians have said that, in the light of the
teaching of Vatican I, it is a matter of faith (DE
FIDE) that the Church (and the Pope, as head of the
Church) is infallible when it defines a truth
CONTAINED IN THE DEPOSIT OF REVELATION,
and it is theologically certain that the Church (and
the Pope) is infallible when it defines a truth
NECESSARILY CONNECTED WITH
REVELATION. The traditional distinction between
what is “of faith” and what is “theologically certain”
is this: to deny what is “of faith” is heresy; to deny
what is “theologically certain” is a theological
“error.”
One would first have to establish, in the case of
HUMANAE VITAE, that the matter of contraception
is “necessarily connected” with revelation. It is
clearly not part of the deposit of revelation, in any
sense of that expression. There are Catholic
theologians today, including myself, who would argue
that, even if the Pope had so desired, he could not
have issued an infallible pronouncement on this
question. In any case, the burden of proof would be
on those who would argue the opposite side of the
issue. They would have to show that the matter is
“necessarily connected” with divine revelation.
(3) The Pope did teach authentically, i.e., he spoke
in his official capacity as head of the college of
bishops, but without fulfilling all of the specific
conditions for an infallible statement, or without
even intending to do so. Not every authentic
statement, of course, is an infallible definition. With
one exception, no Pope has tried to attach the note
of infallibility to any of his teachings or
pronouncements since the definition of papal
infallibility in 1870.
(4) Had the Pope attempted to make an infallible
pronouncement, the furor, as you call it, would have
been far greater and ultimately far more divisive than
it actually was.
(5) A Pope decides to speak authentically (e.g. in
an encyclical letter) whenever, in his judgment, he
believes a serious pastoral, doctrinal, or moral issue
faces the Church and when he thinks that some
guidance from his office would benefit both the unitjf
and the missionary responsibility of the Church. The
theological judgment expressed in these authentic
teachings is always fallible, which means it is always
subject to error.
(6) A Pope decides to speak infallibly only after
consultation and study (this is at least a MORAL
obligation, even if it is not a CONDITIO SINE QUA
NON). The purpose of such definitions must always
be the preservation of the unity of the Church and
the safeguarding of the integrity of divine revelation.
In this regard, his infallibility is never personal. It is
the same infallibility with which the Church itself has
been endowed.
Q. Where do you get your questions? Do you make
them up yourself?
A. The questions are varied in origin. Some are
chosen from the letters which readers send me, either
directly (558 South Avenue, Weston, Mass., 02193)
or through their diocesan newspapers. Some are
chosen from the questions I receive while lecturing to
audiences of laity, priests, and Religious throughout
the country. Others are suggested to me in
conversation. And, yes, there are a few that I make
up myself, in anticipation of questions that I know
from experience will eventually be asked anyway.
This applies especially to current religious news
events. Since there is a three or four week time lapse
between the writing of this column and its
publication on the “Know Your Faith” page, I
cannot afford to wait too long for a reader’s
questions if the issue happens to be of immediate
interest. The first question in this week’s column, for
example, comes from a reader in the South and I have
printed it exactly as he wrote it, putting one or two
capitalized words into lower case for stylistic
consistency only.
I cannot usually enter into direct correspondence
with any reader. You can be assured, however, that I
read every letter and give it careful consideration
before deciding upon its suitability for publication
and response.
>