Probably not, but I would guess that this kind of thing happens unofficially all the time on a near daily basis in one diocese or another. In reality canon law seems to be treated by bishops and other Church leaders like the Pirate Code from Pirates of the Carribean - more like a set of guidelines than hard and fast rules.
It seems that a number of prelates and priests approach canon law from the perspective of "It's better to ask forgiveness than permission." And, in the case of an archbishop in Utah, his attitude may echo the traditional Chinese proverb: "The mountains are high and the emperor is far away."
In my part of USA, if children are not attending the parish school, then fees for their sacramental prep for First Communion and Confirmation can run from 100 to about 500 dollars. I'm sure that if a family really can't pay, there's some sort of financial assistance offered, but obviously only a small percentage of families can get it. I wonder if SLC diocese has similar prep fees and if the parents wait to baptize their child until he or she is past age 7 in order to bypass fees and similar prep requirements, which can require parents to attend classes, kids to do service projects or go on retreats, etc.
On the one hand, I understand the canon law issue, on the other hand it seems inequitable to make a Catholic child who was baptized as a baby do extra prep and wait until he or she is 12 to 14 to receive Confirmation while the child baptized at age 7 gets confirmed at age 7 with no extra prep.
Why are they charging fees for required Sacramental prep?
Also, why does Sacramental prep cost anyone hundreds of dollars per person? Are the teachers paid? Are they scouring the internet to find the most expensive curriculum available? Are they getting uncommonly well-catechized children for these fees?
Nominal charges put skin in the game, and sometimes do make the purchase of materials possible for parishes that have very lean budgets. Consider also that many parishes do overnight confirmation retreats, which is no small expense. I do think a $500 registration fee is a little scandalous.
I do not know the reasons for sure why the fees are so high, as I don't have kids or relatives who'd be attending prep here. I'm guessing course materials likely cost $50 to $75. The rest, I suspect, is a combination of 1) the teachers probably receiving some compensation at the higher priced parishes, as I noticed a significantly lower fee at the parish where religious sisters are in residence and teach prep; 2) particular parishes wanting to focus on kids in their own parochial school and discourage those who are just coming for prep; 3) extra activities such as retreats or service trips which in at least one case involves confirmation students visiting a less well-off part of the country about 5 hours drive away; 4) potentially having well-off families subsidizing the program for poorer families, as we have a good number of each in the area. Regardless, once the fees are going above $100 they seemed excessive to me.
I went on a retreat recently, as an adult, in another state, with 2 nights there and all meals covered and a private room, that was for less than $500. Having been on a service trip or two, it generally involves sleeping in one room with all the other girls or boys. The expensive part was the materials for the actual service, which parishioners donated. I've also signed up for a religious class with ICC, which was free and high quality, college level material - with no Sacraments being held up for it.
Per-person course materials costing $50-$75 is astonishing to me, given how much is available for free or for less than $15.
Well-off families subsidize the poorer ones who are sufficiently badly off that they qualify for and are willing to ask for assistance. The marginal families just get stuck with it - and that is the eternal problem with charging unnecessarily high prices and saying it's OK because you'll give assistance to those who can't pay.
I have to admit, Bishop Solis had me at "a pause for regular mass attendance". Maybe Pillar subscribers will help me. WHY is it 90% of Catholics see sacraments of initiation as the END of mass attendance and formation?
I constantly stumble over the conflicting messages to conform myself to Christ via regular reception of the Eucharist, which is an obligation, and God loves me more if I sin and stray, ignore
& disbelieve because God isn't about obligation of formation.
Reception of the Eucharist is only an obligation once a year.
I don't remember anything in Scripture or Tradition that speaks to God loving us more (or less) if we sin. Grace abounds more, but that is rather like a parent continuing to bind up broken bones for a child who is exceedingly good at falling out of trees. There could be more to the relationship than that, if all the time was not spent setting and healing the kid's bones. The disciplinarian father who forbids dancing on roofs may be seen as focused on rules and duty and obligations, but really he's just noticed that the kid can't participate in family life if he's in traction all the time.
The Sacraments of Initiation confer an obligation to live a Christian life, just as the Sacraments of Matrimony and Holy Orders confer obligations. Some failures constitute spiritual death. This in turn produces an obligation on the part of the ministers to do due diligence to see that those who receive these Sacraments are aware of and agreeable to those obligations. Formation provides the means to awareness, and Mass attendance is the most readily observable obligation. But a person who doesn't actually care about Mass or catechesis who is told he can't receive Confirmation because he doesn't go to Mass or know what the Creed means, is likely to decide that these are temporary barriers to entry, rather than indicators of his lack of a good disposition.
This raises a host of issues, but I can see why Bishop Solis is concerned about providing adequate catechesis. I’ve been searching, and there seems to be a real lack of materials designed for children or teens preparing for baptism.
After the age of reason, all three sacraments should be celebrated together, following the four stages of the OCIA. Canon law stipulates this because it fits the nature of the sacraments.
OCIA is meant to take more than one year. (From what our Diocese says, the catechumenal stage alone should be at least from one Easter to the next.) The celebration of all three sacraments at one Mass (which most clearly illuminates the nature of the sacraments) isn’t the problem. The problem is trying to cram the preparation into an Autumn-Easter schedule, with inadequate materials.
I think this is correct. The Diocese of Salt Lake City typically does RCIA in one year, and I think changing that window might do a lot to accomplish the bishop's aims.
Yes. My mother is currently in RCIA (which she shouldn't have to be, because she's already baptized in a protestant denom, but it's very common practice to combine formation for protestants and the nonbaptized) and even she feels that she's not going to be ready by Easter Vigil. How much more so for non baptized people? They only meet twice a month, it is like drinking from a firehose even though she has me to help.
Why does it seem like there is such a temptation to make kids earn confirmation? Whether it be requiring service hours or however many years of sacramental prep like in this article. Give them the sacraments without all the hoops to jump through, but then continue formation after that. Some of the gifts of the Holy Spirit imparted at confirmation are wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. Wouldn't having those graces help kids understand the Sacraments more fully than another year or two of classes?
Exactly. They should be impressing on these kids (and their parents) that faith formation is a lifelong endeavor. You'll never have it all figured out and will never exhaust the mysteries of God.
In a parish of over 2,700 families, we schedule and provide materials for:
• Sunday morning adult catechesis (between our 08:30 and 11:30 liturgy) for 75 minutes. We cover canonical books, Church history, etc. we are currently studying the documents of Vatican II. Our Deacon/JCL makes it very clear. We get 40 people if we are lucky. Any yes the Deacon/JCL makes clear that what we study is magisterial/Tradition with an upper case “T” - which probably limits attendance nowadays.
• Tuesday morning (2 hours) adult Bible Study/ Faith Sharing. This program “got legs” via Ascension Press’/Jeff Cavins’ “Great Adventure Journey through the Bible”. Attendance is 20 tops.
• Wednesday evening 75 minutes: Our Deacon/JCL teaches the canonical books based on the Historical-Critical Method. Less faith sharing and more intense scripture study. Attendance is typically 25-35.
So we offer a lot, and as you can see, the harvest is plentiful but the laborers (students) are few. And if (grand)parents don’t take advantage, I’m not sure parents or children will.
Of course self-learning through commentaries (remember the USCCB Catechism for ADULTS?), Googling, and self-enrichment would eliminate the ability to blame the parish for any and all shortcomings. 🤷♂️
I love this degree of ongoing faith formation by your parish!
But parishes tend to "program" to the youth and to the elderly. I'm a middle-aged male who owns a business. Anything in the morning is automatically off limits. And evenings? Hit-or-miss. No one develops programs for people like me.
I wish more parishes offered content asynchronously -- online learning modules, recorded talks, private online discussion groups, &c. But the elderly struggle with technology, so most parishes aren't willing to make the investment.
There are a lot of online/book resources available for cheap/free, I'm not sure why you would want the parish to be offering it, except to combine it with the community/social aspect. Personally, I prefer that sort of thing simply because classroom-style learning tends to irritate me, as it hardly ever goes anywhere close to my speed, but this same problem tends to show up in online learning modules and recorded talks that are purchased by parishes. If you have to sort through a lot of stuff to find something that suits anyway, and you aren't connecting with the people in your parish, why limit yourself to parish offerings?
The scheduling problem and the variety of different levels was why I was trying to go for something unorganized.
My parish has a monthly talk (short, by a layperson) followed by discussion/questions, followed by clarifications by a priest, interspersed with snacks. Announced in the bulletin & at Mass, with the topic. Attendance ranges from 10-50 people, depending on the topic. Some regulars, but they are typically not the same people. If you can't come to most, you can still come to one or two and be just fine.
The private online asynchronous discussion groups sounds great. I wish that was a widespread thing. Although I expect the moderation could be a big problem.
I have issues with high decibel sounds. If some of the lay faithful collected some friends, pick a book, and read/talk about it in the commons area after Mass, Msgr. Horenzsphardt would be having a fit, screaming " WHAT ARE YOU DOING? WHAT BOOK ARE YOU READING?" and accusing the women among us of pretending they are priests and the men of being supporters of trusteeism.
It's the same issue as with parents trying to emphasize quality time with their kids, rather than recognizing that quantity time is vastly superior on every front.
I mean that they are trying to make very special religious experiences a standardized part of religious ed, in the hopes that this will cause the kids to stay once they're adults. It doesn't work, both because very few people can take an experience or two from years ago, and turn it into a stable Catholic life without anything else, and because there's no way to standardize religious experiences.
The alternative, though, is to be doggedly devoted to the basics for the long haul, and that requires parents who will bother to take their kids to religious ed for a decade after there are no more parties to be thrown, and teachers who are dedicated to teaching the meat and potatoes of the faith, rather than trying to attract kids by dumping lots of sugar on top of a watered-down version.
This is a fantastic formulation of an important issue: "The alternative, though, is to be doggedly devoted to the basics for the long haul, and that requires parents who will bother to take their kids to religious ed for a decade after there are no more parties to be thrown, and teachers who are dedicated to teaching the meat and potatoes of the faith, rather than trying to attract kids by dumping lots of sugar on top of a watered-down version."
You know, maybe we give too much attention to people's "conversion stories" and "vocation stories" and things like that. Those stories, when interesting, include magic moments. (No one ever got a million youtube hits for saying, "I dunno, my parents always took me to mass, and we prayed together as a family, and then I just kinda became a nun.") Now magic moments have their place, but not everyone has them, and anyway, you can't manufacture them. At most, you can pave the way for them by... doggedly being devoted for the basics for the long haul.
Excellent connection! I blame Protestants' penchant for proselytizing with conversion stories, that Catholics picked up on, but I also expect that Catholics would have done it without them. It's just so emotionally satisfying to hear about, and it gives the people who contribute to them (or think that they are) many warm fuzzy feelings, and our culture generally is very bad at disciplining emotions. We over-indulge them or wallow in them, by turns.
I've heard of people having NDEs, and not changing their lives even a smidgeon. I've had low-level "magic moments". When the going gets tough (or boring, or lonely) that's not why you stay Catholic. A really amazing feeling 10 years ago doesn't get you through the valley of the shadow of death.
I remember a time when my wife and I were talking to an elderly priest in my family. My wife asked about his vocation story, and he almost seemed confused by the question. I think that for a priest of his vintage (WWII vet who went to the seminary right after being discharged) it seemed odd to expect some kind of big story. He replied that the faith had always been important in their home growing up and that he had felt a draw to being a pries, and that while he was in the war he decided it was what he would do. That was it. It was as if we had asked "what's the story of why you became an accountant/union carpenter/receptionist/etc..." and expected an earth-shattering story.
Turns out that living the faith on a daily basis makes a difference...who would have predicted?
I've heard similar from priests of that era. Met an old Irish priest once and he simply came from a devout family and they went to an ordination of a Dominican Priest when he was young and after the Mass he told his parents he was going to be a Dominican Priest and that was that, and then he did
This particular context was catechizing children, not personal moral behavior.
But the principle applies in so many contexts. Building the foundation right, even though it is muddy and smelly and hard and boring and will probably never really be seen, is essential for doing well with anything, including virtue. And I expect that virtue will be of great help in catechizing children. But also, dogged devotion to catechizing children *right*, will be of great help in developing personal virtue.
I don't get this either. I've seen kids doing "service projects" which were essentially "free help for the parish" like office work or janitorial work. I suppose it's to teach kids the importance of serving one's parish, but that should be a lesson separate from receiving a sacrament. We do not "earn" God's grace and pushing a broom has nothing to do with catechesis.
Our parish's prep for Confirmation makes me want to scream whenever we have to do it. It has actually improved over the past few years, but it essentially boils down to "write a paper every week to prove to us your kid actually attends Mass every single time he is obliged." I understand that in a big parish, not everyone will be known, including faithful families, but is the song and dance really necessary? (Not to mention, it's ineffective - within two weeks of the obligatory "reflections" an email goes out saying, "oh, if you really can't make it, here's a link to the readings and a video Mass.")
(Maybe I am "spoiled," but my family has not had to attend a baptism class for many, many years, even though we are regularly having children baptized, and so this automatically suspicious yet ineffective treatment in the interest of....fairness? or something? grates. I am trying to model faithful obedience to my children with the requirements, but they can tell it's stupid busywork, and I don't really feel like lying to them with some made up reason about why it's really good, other than obedience to our bishop.)
I'd much rather just do an interview and a retreat. Or better yet, just have kids receive their first communion and confirmation at the same time, and that would solve the problem in Salt Lake City, too.
I realize that my comment does not directly relate to the situation at hand as my children are cradle Catholics, but it touched a nerve for me. My husband and I did the math recently and even if we have no more children, by the time our youngest receives Confirmation, our family will have done sacramental prep (NOT counting baptism!) almost every year for over twenty years. That is a huge burden for a family. Being shoveled through a program because it's a program, not taking into account the needs of particular children and families, is crazy to me.
Oof. I commented about this specific attitude in another Pillar article some time ago, but this ain't it. My family is heavily involved in our parish at multiple levels. When we had the time and ability to help with sacramental prep, we did, but I currently have kids aged in utero to adolescent. This is not the time in our lives for that. I cannot guarantee that I have the time or ability for a school year long commitment any year. I do have strong opinions about it, but it's going to have to wait for me to be done with having babies.
I know some people who had to give up involvements in various parish services that they really wanted to do, but it just messed with their ability to keep a good, sane, family life. I have a lot of respect for them for making that decision and keeping first things first, rather than letting themselves get overridden by guilt, peer pressure, or FOMO.
A bit transactional but we put out a QR code for OCIA participants to scan then participate in Saturday evening/Sunday liturgy. Those candidates I see scanning it (at fixed windows before the start of Masses) are with others and attend Mass (I have not seen any “scan & ran’s) when I usher or serve as Mass coordinator. An assignment may work better, but liturgy is meant to be heard and sung and prayed, so we opt to “put down the books and journals, use missals for songs, and LISTEN.” Prepare the readings before Mass etc.
Ohhh, you're going to get me started on the tech thing. This year at our parish all the confirmation paperwork and assignments are online. This is probably very, very convenient for the people checking up on us, but we're a low-tech family with high restrictions on usage. I do not like, at all, having my child sit down in front of a screen every week to prove he was at Mass, when our pastor, DRE, and others who are very involved at the parish see him serving (and if they want proof there's a schedule with his name on it), and see our family participating in various parish activities (some charitable, some social, some devotional). We're known people.
If we had to scan QR codes to prove attendance I would probably give somebody a thorough scolding, which is not something I am generally inclined to do. If that did not prove fruitful I would find another way for my children to receive their sacraments, including switching parishes. I can understand the significant administrative burden on pastors and staff, and that there are a lot of families out there who don't care and it's hard to figure out how to get them to, but that sort of tech-based check in seems particularly likely to backfire. A QR code scan says to me, "We can't be bothered to actually check in with you and say hello and get you involved in the parish, but lucky for you, that's not what's important here. Hope you have a smartphone."
Your last sentence is way off base. I volunteer every year to sponsor someone (male adult) I don’t even know. Several of us do. Nothing more technical than scanning a QR code on your way into Mass. Our pastor and 3 deacons all teach OCIA live sessions and devote a lot of time. Deep breath.
If ensuring attendance by some official means is absolutely necessary, why not use a sign in sheet in the sacristy or some other predetermined location? Why does a person need to bring a high tech device into a church just to prove they were there?
I'm not saying you or any of the clergy or parish staff don't actually care, but means like this definitely can give the impression that you don't. It can also place an undue burden on a person who has to ask for an exemption (for such a reason as, "I don't use a smartphone," which is in fact a thing for many people, even young people or those who grew up with that kind of tech.)
Paper gets lost. All of our liturgical ministers sign in to MinistrySchedulerPro. Even that is not a slam dunk since a liturgy coordinator has to monitor it. Technology is not the enemy. Our narthex is crazy hectic before Sunday liturgies.
Technology can very much be an enemy. It can be convenient (I actually like MinistrySchedulerPro, for a group of already committed volunteers), but it can also cause a lot more problems than it solves. (It is not lost on me the irony that I have learned so much about the harms of too much tech by using said tech, but...there it is.)
I'm not a fan of unnecessary tech. A posted sign in sheet on a bulletin board in a consistent location will work most of the time. If one gets lost once in a while, I still think it's the better option. Hymnals in the pews get damaged, but you're not going to persuade me that it's a good idea to install a projector screen into Mass for people to follow along, though some parishes do it.
We can barely keep track of paper registration sheets from our ministry fairs. I’m a retired IT/ERP program manager so paper is admittedly anathema to my skill set and patience. Our QR code probably checks a box in Googlesheets or some back end database. In any event, I am an unpaid flunky and the pastor and paid staff make the rules and set the tools. I’m fast losing my will to push people toward sacramental life and heaven if they don’t really want it. I’m old, tired, and willing to do some of my own heavy lifting for the Lord Jesus. You can’t lead every horse to springs of living water.
Is it? I guess we should not accept non-parishioners either? Call me a Pharisee when the adult strangers I sponsor and gift with a Catholic Study Bible vanish after confirmation and I never see them again. Your criticism is Pharasaic. Provide a solution from behind your smartphone, please.
Overly legalizing mass attendance with electronic tracking is legalistic. Yes. It is a legalistic policy.
No bearing on non parishioners attending I don’t know what that even means. And it is not a personal attack on you or your commitment to serve in your parish.
This is not a loan from a bank. This is nota government agency program with proof of qualification. Conversion requires heart work. Not tech work. If people on rcia or sacramental prep are not invested enough to attend mass that becomes an issue between them and God. We can’t make catechesis so transactional as to require QR codes like a restaurant menu. You can teach and lead and pray but ultimately a conversion is on THE PERSON (or the parents for little ones). Mass tracking is not the answer.
The heart work was supposed to be done by the parents for 7-16 years before Confirmation. Nearly everything that predicts faithfulness through young adulthood is related to the parents. Catechesis is the most non-parental part, and even that ought to have significant parental involvement. It is not sensible to expect catechists to make up, in 2 hours a week for 9 months of Confirmation classes, for years of religious neglect.
Putting lots of effort into people who don't care and won't stay is thoroughly demoralizing. When somewhere around 40% leave as teens/young adults, and the teachers and sponsors can do little about that, I think the only way to get along is to do it heartily for God, and to simultaneously be thoroughly detached from the results.
But there is another aspect that plays into Confirmation: The Confirmation sponsor has an obligation to "take care that the person confirmed behaves as a true witness of Christ and faithfully fulfills the duties inherent in this sacrament." It's not just an obligation to be nice to the sponsee and give them religious things. Perhaps this is the answer: sponsors who are convinced their sponsee is not going to remain Catholic, should refuse to sponsor them.
Oh i couldn’t agree more! But this requirement was specified to be for RCIA too which would be adults new to the faith. Aka even more absurd to legalize attendance bc if they didn’t want to be there why would they? But yes for children prep I second your points 1000 percent
If it's important to be logged as having attended Mass, then it's probably also important enough to provide context before Mass, for what's to come. I'd imagine it'd be more welcoming to have someone sit in the narthex to sign in OCIA participants and give them a study aid or something -- even to just connect with them with a smile.
Logging attendance for the sake of attendance seems like a wonky metric to track. I'd rather incentivize attendance by offering a special welcome and mini-catechesis, so you get the touch plus the proof of attendance, than have a QR code *or* a sign-in sheet.
TL;DR -- if you don't care enough to give them a specific reason to sign in, that's useful in the moment, then don't ask them to sign in. It's OCIA, not parole.
The simple mention of a QR code seemed to trigger a technophobic $h1+ show and now monitoring Mass attendance is pharasaic. Any remaining objectors - please call my bishop or pastor. I’m out. I just set up for Mass and make sure the Presider starts on time.
In my experience as a volunteer CCD teacher, as soon as a class receives Confirmation some parents stop bringing their children. This is less true of students who have received the sacraments of initiation with their parents who are sufficiently enthused about the Church to see that their children attend.
I actually just wrote to our pastor a couple weeks ago because I noticed that he was splitting up the sacraments of initiation for people who were entering the Church as adults and suggested that this wasn't allowed. Beyond that, as we now have two children entering sacramental preparation (one for First Communion and one for Confirmation), what bothers me is that — as was my experience with marriage preparation — it's "programming". I think all too often the parish/diocese purchases a "program" for sacramental preparation and it has the effect of making them feel like they are doing something ("we have a program!"), when it's not actually personal or sensitive to what each person needs to grow in faith. Our parish now makes children wait an extra year to receive First Communion and our 8 year old, who is deeply formed in the faith, must go through 6 months of classes with videos of "Olivia the owl" that are — in my estimation — absolute garbage. Sorry, I guess this touched a nerve.
I remember when I was a kid and participation trophies were the rage. The adults thought they were great, the kids threw them away. I expect something similar is going to happen with all these attempts to make learning fun by adding special characters and technology while removing actual substance.
I'm sorry your daughter will have to wait another year to receive Our Lord in the Eucharist.
There is at least one archdiocese I know of that has a particular law allowing pastors to delay confirmation, so as to have the children join the confirmation cohort at the usual time (in their teens) and be confirmed together. This is for confirmation only, not for holy communion.
My suspicion is they’d be more inclined to stick around if they weren’t treated as muddlebrained infants for two years, and instead received very direct, mindful, clear instruction for about six months and could go on with living and loving the faith instead of being imprisoned in classrooms with volunteer catechists for years on end.
I've been invited a couple of times to apply for staff faith formation positions. In the end I decline every time for exactly this reason. I don't know if my faith could survive working for the Church.
Not at my parish. Our middle school RE and confirmation programs, whatever its faults may be, do not come remotely close to treating kids and families like muddle-brained infants. The content, especially from the 7th/8th teacher is thoughtful, challenging, orthodox, and deep. Our paid confirmation coordinator manages to rope in many teens for additional years in the program after confirmation is administered. It still mostly whooshes right by and is not affirmed in the family.
When you look at the rate at which people stop attending after receiving sacraments, I don't know if making people prepare longer is such a bad idea. In the early church, people were required to be a catechumen for three years before baptism!
The canon law issues need to be resolved, but requiring more catechesis is not a bad thing in my opinion. Especially in a diocese like Salt Lake City. It's my diocese, and as you can expect, Catholics are a minority in Utah.
This is not a place where casual faith exists. I don't mean that Utah is hostile to Catholics, that's not my experience, I love it here, but if you're not practicing the faith, there is nothing culturally that will connect you to the faith.
When I lived in Houston, TX, it seems like every other person I met was Catholic, some practicing, some not. But in Utah, I think I've only met one Catholic at an event that was not related to the church. It is very easy here to lose a connection to the church if you are not actively practicing.
I came into the church in the Diocese of Salt Lake city. I just want to say, from the time he's taken to speak to people like myself, that Bishop Solis has a pastor's heart and I trust his intentions here.
Kids over the age of 7 is a tricky one to deal with. There’s a world of difference between a 7 yr old and a 17 year old, intellectually, emotionally and physically and have different needs from ‘good catechesis’. Presumably, the younger they are, they are getting baptised as a family, or are the children of immigrants/refugees who missed infant baptism for logistical reasons. These also have different needs.
I really don’t think that today, you could argue against a universally longer formation process for all catechumens. If kids need more time for formation, so do adults 90% of the time.
I feel like universally longer formation for all catechumens makes sense. But remember that the soul and the intellect are not the same thing so the disparity in intellectual maturity between a 7-year-old and a 17-year-old is not really relevant when dealing with the Sacraments of Initiation.
A soul IS an intellect and will. That is why we bother with a catechumante in the first place and spend so much time, energy and resources on education in general. A 17 year old is an adult in many respects and deserves intellectual and spiritual formation in an adult manner. They’ve had a decade of spiritual and intellectual
Formation (good and bad) that needs to be sifted, healed or embraced. A 7 year old is very capable and has a strong intuitive and instinct for the cardinal virtues, but is only beginning his or her journey into forming their will and intellect for the spiritual life. They have an innocence there that deserves to be respected.
Is that innocence respected by ignoring canon law and withholding the real grace of Confirmation from people who are eligible to receive it? I was chrismated (confirmed) as an infant. I am now a Latin Rite Catholic and live in a restored order diocese, so perhaps it’s my background in the Eastern Rite coupled with the influence of the diocese in which I live coming out when I say this. But there is no substantive benefit to having children go through late elementary and middle school years without the benefits of confirmation. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are MORE needed today than ever before, for the individual Christian AND for the communities with which they interact. Parishes might choose to use discretion in how they structure formation groups for OCIA, but a 7-year-old is capable of receiving the grace of the Sacrament.
I think you missed my point. OF COURSE a 7 year old can receive the sacraments. I never said they couldn’t. In my diocese, 6-8 yr olds receive confirmation before their first communion and reconciliation before both. They are prepared in small groups over 4-6 weeks.
However, I would not subject a 17 yr old to preparation materials made for 6-8 yr olds. My Greek Orthodox friends all did ‘Sunday school’ during the first part of Divine Liturgy and returned to receive with the congregation. Formation of children even if they have received all the sacraments is their right and our responsibility as adults. I think we actually agree here…
My comment is not directed toward the Salt Lake City situation but is more general. I am firmly of the opinion that Confirmation, in most cases, needs to happen in proximate conjunction with first Reconciliation and Eucharist between 5-10 yrs old (rough numbers). Baptism > (Reconciliation) Confirmation > Eucharist. This is the preferred order of the sacraments of initiation, and the Eucharist is rightly the summit. Why should confirmation be earlier? It reflects a proper theology of the sacraments and grace! Why do we hold out confirmation like a carrot on stick to teenagers, when they could have already lived +5 years with the sacramental grace of confirmation? We must not underestimate the power of God's grace. The reasons I've heard for a later age are 1) it will keep them active in the parish or 2) it will be an opportunity for them to "confirm their faith" and "make it their own." Neither of these are at all satisfactory to me, so if someone is able to offer other reasons that have a bit more meat to them, I would sincerely appreciate it.
And of course, catechetical formation is certainly important. I'm not denying that. What did Jesus command the apostles to do? "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing (sacraments) them... teaching (catechesis) them to observe all that I have commanded you.
Yeah, growing up in the Episcopal Church i never even understood what confirmation was. We were literally told, by everyone from the priests on down, that it was about confirming the choice your parents made for you in baptism. I don't think that's actually what TEC teaches about confirmation but how should I know, it's hard to pin them down on anything.
Anyway I did not wind up doing their confirmation ceremony because it seemed to me that I was being asked to sign on the dotted line about something that I still didn't understand. I couldn't even find a "faithful Episcopalian" to be my sponsor because the only ones I knew were my mom and grandma.
To the extent that some catholic parishes/ dioceses are still using this kind of language, it needs to stop. It's almost exactly contrary to the point of the sacrament and the teens can sense that there's something off about it
I grew up Episcopal and ACNA, and I had the same experience. Went through confirmation with little explanation further than 'choosing the faith for yourself' and something about church membership.
I'm guessing in ACNA they probably didn't have you read selections from the Baghavad Gita though? 😭 the confirmation teacher said it had been a really important part of his spiritual journey...
The only scripture I remember reading was the story of the talking donkey. I don't remember what they were using that passage to teach.
We also watched The Motorcycle Diaries, and wrote our very own Creeds.
“Why should confirmation be earlier? It reflects a proper theology of the sacraments and grace! Why do we hold out confirmation like a carrot on stick to teenagers, when they could have already lived +5 years with the sacramental grace of confirmation? We must not underestimate the power of God's grace”
Yes, I couldn’t agree more! Most catechists are frustrated that the teens (and parents) think that Confirmation is graduation, but our system sends that message.
If it’s all about grace, why can’t our kids have it at least by the age of reason?
I was just talking to a DRE about how many more school aged children are getting baptized. With fewer parents baptizing their kids I’m surprised this is the first diocese to get a plan together. It will only become more common.
Are the sacraments freely given instruments of grace that work spiritual effect ex opere operato?
Or are they mere rites of passage for the “worthy few” who have been properly socialized?
If a German bishop ordered his entire diocese to suspend canon law to deny children - children! - their ecclesial *right* to receive sacraments of initiation, we would all be up in arms.
I was raised Protestant, and I thank God every day that my “sacramental preparation” involved me being “moved by the spirit” to just walk up to a church volunteer after Sunday school and tell her I wanted to accept Jesus into my heart and ask for baptism.
It led to a lifelong devotion to Christ that has now lasted nearly 30 years of my 37 years.
I’d have been *turned away* by Bishop Solis, the old rat.
I'm sympathetic to what you're describing here, and largely agree, but I have to speak against calling the bishop an old rat, regardless of how angry he makes you. There's only one right Judge of any man's heart and worthiness, and thanks be to God it's neither you nor me. Let's leave that to Him.
I must confess I have always found it puzzling that one can do a 1 in 3 special offer. It does seem to me, but what do I know, more logical to split the progress in 2 or 3 chunks. Not sure what the logic behind the bogof is.
I was baptized as a young adult. My kids have made that comparison (especially when complaining about the level of busywork prep that is "required" of them as cradle Catholics), but I tell them that it definitely wasn't fun bumbling about in the dark for twenty years (and the knowledge of just how hard it was only came with grace).
I don't understand how this can be done when it is prohibited by canonical norm? Is a Diocese/Bishop permitted to ignore the Code of Canon Law?
Probably not, but I would guess that this kind of thing happens unofficially all the time on a near daily basis in one diocese or another. In reality canon law seems to be treated by bishops and other Church leaders like the Pirate Code from Pirates of the Carribean - more like a set of guidelines than hard and fast rules.
It seems that a number of prelates and priests approach canon law from the perspective of "It's better to ask forgiveness than permission." And, in the case of an archbishop in Utah, his attitude may echo the traditional Chinese proverb: "The mountains are high and the emperor is far away."
In my part of USA, if children are not attending the parish school, then fees for their sacramental prep for First Communion and Confirmation can run from 100 to about 500 dollars. I'm sure that if a family really can't pay, there's some sort of financial assistance offered, but obviously only a small percentage of families can get it. I wonder if SLC diocese has similar prep fees and if the parents wait to baptize their child until he or she is past age 7 in order to bypass fees and similar prep requirements, which can require parents to attend classes, kids to do service projects or go on retreats, etc.
On the one hand, I understand the canon law issue, on the other hand it seems inequitable to make a Catholic child who was baptized as a baby do extra prep and wait until he or she is 12 to 14 to receive Confirmation while the child baptized at age 7 gets confirmed at age 7 with no extra prep.
Why are they charging fees for required Sacramental prep?
Also, why does Sacramental prep cost anyone hundreds of dollars per person? Are the teachers paid? Are they scouring the internet to find the most expensive curriculum available? Are they getting uncommonly well-catechized children for these fees?
Nominal charges put skin in the game, and sometimes do make the purchase of materials possible for parishes that have very lean budgets. Consider also that many parishes do overnight confirmation retreats, which is no small expense. I do think a $500 registration fee is a little scandalous.
I do not know the reasons for sure why the fees are so high, as I don't have kids or relatives who'd be attending prep here. I'm guessing course materials likely cost $50 to $75. The rest, I suspect, is a combination of 1) the teachers probably receiving some compensation at the higher priced parishes, as I noticed a significantly lower fee at the parish where religious sisters are in residence and teach prep; 2) particular parishes wanting to focus on kids in their own parochial school and discourage those who are just coming for prep; 3) extra activities such as retreats or service trips which in at least one case involves confirmation students visiting a less well-off part of the country about 5 hours drive away; 4) potentially having well-off families subsidizing the program for poorer families, as we have a good number of each in the area. Regardless, once the fees are going above $100 they seemed excessive to me.
I went on a retreat recently, as an adult, in another state, with 2 nights there and all meals covered and a private room, that was for less than $500. Having been on a service trip or two, it generally involves sleeping in one room with all the other girls or boys. The expensive part was the materials for the actual service, which parishioners donated. I've also signed up for a religious class with ICC, which was free and high quality, college level material - with no Sacraments being held up for it.
Per-person course materials costing $50-$75 is astonishing to me, given how much is available for free or for less than $15.
Well-off families subsidize the poorer ones who are sufficiently badly off that they qualify for and are willing to ask for assistance. The marginal families just get stuck with it - and that is the eternal problem with charging unnecessarily high prices and saying it's OK because you'll give assistance to those who can't pay.
Catholic school is a great deal more expensive than the $100-500 fee. So it’s not as though that’s a “break” in the cost.
I have to admit, Bishop Solis had me at "a pause for regular mass attendance". Maybe Pillar subscribers will help me. WHY is it 90% of Catholics see sacraments of initiation as the END of mass attendance and formation?
I constantly stumble over the conflicting messages to conform myself to Christ via regular reception of the Eucharist, which is an obligation, and God loves me more if I sin and stray, ignore
& disbelieve because God isn't about obligation of formation.
I wonder if that's true of people who are baptized at an older age. It'd be harder to get data on it, of couse.
At least according to CARA about 85% of people who went through RCIA continue to practice the faith... https://praytellblog.com/index.php/2016/04/28/rcia-retention-rates-not-just-good-theyre-excellent/
Reception of the Eucharist is only an obligation once a year.
I don't remember anything in Scripture or Tradition that speaks to God loving us more (or less) if we sin. Grace abounds more, but that is rather like a parent continuing to bind up broken bones for a child who is exceedingly good at falling out of trees. There could be more to the relationship than that, if all the time was not spent setting and healing the kid's bones. The disciplinarian father who forbids dancing on roofs may be seen as focused on rules and duty and obligations, but really he's just noticed that the kid can't participate in family life if he's in traction all the time.
The Sacraments of Initiation confer an obligation to live a Christian life, just as the Sacraments of Matrimony and Holy Orders confer obligations. Some failures constitute spiritual death. This in turn produces an obligation on the part of the ministers to do due diligence to see that those who receive these Sacraments are aware of and agreeable to those obligations. Formation provides the means to awareness, and Mass attendance is the most readily observable obligation. But a person who doesn't actually care about Mass or catechesis who is told he can't receive Confirmation because he doesn't go to Mass or know what the Creed means, is likely to decide that these are temporary barriers to entry, rather than indicators of his lack of a good disposition.
This raises a host of issues, but I can see why Bishop Solis is concerned about providing adequate catechesis. I’ve been searching, and there seems to be a real lack of materials designed for children or teens preparing for baptism.
After the age of reason, all three sacraments should be celebrated together, following the four stages of the OCIA. Canon law stipulates this because it fits the nature of the sacraments.
OCIA is meant to take more than one year. (From what our Diocese says, the catechumenal stage alone should be at least from one Easter to the next.) The celebration of all three sacraments at one Mass (which most clearly illuminates the nature of the sacraments) isn’t the problem. The problem is trying to cram the preparation into an Autumn-Easter schedule, with inadequate materials.
I think this is correct. The Diocese of Salt Lake City typically does RCIA in one year, and I think changing that window might do a lot to accomplish the bishop's aims.
Yes. My mother is currently in RCIA (which she shouldn't have to be, because she's already baptized in a protestant denom, but it's very common practice to combine formation for protestants and the nonbaptized) and even she feels that she's not going to be ready by Easter Vigil. How much more so for non baptized people? They only meet twice a month, it is like drinking from a firehose even though she has me to help.
Why does it seem like there is such a temptation to make kids earn confirmation? Whether it be requiring service hours or however many years of sacramental prep like in this article. Give them the sacraments without all the hoops to jump through, but then continue formation after that. Some of the gifts of the Holy Spirit imparted at confirmation are wisdom, understanding, and knowledge. Wouldn't having those graces help kids understand the Sacraments more fully than another year or two of classes?
They might even hang around to continue formation with us sixty-some year olds on Saturday and Sunday mornings.
Exactly. They should be impressing on these kids (and their parents) that faith formation is a lifelong endeavor. You'll never have it all figured out and will never exhaust the mysteries of God.
Seems like something adults (and 60-year-olds) could lead by example.
Collect some friends, pick a book, and read/talk about it in the commons area after Mass. Rope in people who stray too near.
“Collect” is even frustratingly challenging.
In a parish of over 2,700 families, we schedule and provide materials for:
• Sunday morning adult catechesis (between our 08:30 and 11:30 liturgy) for 75 minutes. We cover canonical books, Church history, etc. we are currently studying the documents of Vatican II. Our Deacon/JCL makes it very clear. We get 40 people if we are lucky. Any yes the Deacon/JCL makes clear that what we study is magisterial/Tradition with an upper case “T” - which probably limits attendance nowadays.
• Tuesday morning (2 hours) adult Bible Study/ Faith Sharing. This program “got legs” via Ascension Press’/Jeff Cavins’ “Great Adventure Journey through the Bible”. Attendance is 20 tops.
• Wednesday evening 75 minutes: Our Deacon/JCL teaches the canonical books based on the Historical-Critical Method. Less faith sharing and more intense scripture study. Attendance is typically 25-35.
So we offer a lot, and as you can see, the harvest is plentiful but the laborers (students) are few. And if (grand)parents don’t take advantage, I’m not sure parents or children will.
Of course self-learning through commentaries (remember the USCCB Catechism for ADULTS?), Googling, and self-enrichment would eliminate the ability to blame the parish for any and all shortcomings. 🤷♂️
I love this degree of ongoing faith formation by your parish!
But parishes tend to "program" to the youth and to the elderly. I'm a middle-aged male who owns a business. Anything in the morning is automatically off limits. And evenings? Hit-or-miss. No one develops programs for people like me.
I wish more parishes offered content asynchronously -- online learning modules, recorded talks, private online discussion groups, &c. But the elderly struggle with technology, so most parishes aren't willing to make the investment.
And thus the cycle repeats itself. :(
For asynchrous learning but without group discussion & sharing, Ascension Press can be used: https://ascensionpress.com/pages/bible-studies
Similarly, Cornerstone Bible Study and Little Rock Bible Study can be adapted to asynchronous self-study:
• https://thecornerstonescripturestudy.org/about-us/
• https://litpress.org/LRSS/About-Us/Index
I have contacts at Cornerstone - if you need them PM me. Thanks
There are a lot of online/book resources available for cheap/free, I'm not sure why you would want the parish to be offering it, except to combine it with the community/social aspect. Personally, I prefer that sort of thing simply because classroom-style learning tends to irritate me, as it hardly ever goes anywhere close to my speed, but this same problem tends to show up in online learning modules and recorded talks that are purchased by parishes. If you have to sort through a lot of stuff to find something that suits anyway, and you aren't connecting with the people in your parish, why limit yourself to parish offerings?
The scheduling problem and the variety of different levels was why I was trying to go for something unorganized.
My parish has a monthly talk (short, by a layperson) followed by discussion/questions, followed by clarifications by a priest, interspersed with snacks. Announced in the bulletin & at Mass, with the topic. Attendance ranges from 10-50 people, depending on the topic. Some regulars, but they are typically not the same people. If you can't come to most, you can still come to one or two and be just fine.
The private online asynchronous discussion groups sounds great. I wish that was a widespread thing. Although I expect the moderation could be a big problem.
I have issues with high decibel sounds. If some of the lay faithful collected some friends, pick a book, and read/talk about it in the commons area after Mass, Msgr. Horenzsphardt would be having a fit, screaming " WHAT ARE YOU DOING? WHAT BOOK ARE YOU READING?" and accusing the women among us of pretending they are priests and the men of being supporters of trusteeism.
It's the same issue as with parents trying to emphasize quality time with their kids, rather than recognizing that quantity time is vastly superior on every front.
I mean that they are trying to make very special religious experiences a standardized part of religious ed, in the hopes that this will cause the kids to stay once they're adults. It doesn't work, both because very few people can take an experience or two from years ago, and turn it into a stable Catholic life without anything else, and because there's no way to standardize religious experiences.
The alternative, though, is to be doggedly devoted to the basics for the long haul, and that requires parents who will bother to take their kids to religious ed for a decade after there are no more parties to be thrown, and teachers who are dedicated to teaching the meat and potatoes of the faith, rather than trying to attract kids by dumping lots of sugar on top of a watered-down version.
This is a fantastic formulation of an important issue: "The alternative, though, is to be doggedly devoted to the basics for the long haul, and that requires parents who will bother to take their kids to religious ed for a decade after there are no more parties to be thrown, and teachers who are dedicated to teaching the meat and potatoes of the faith, rather than trying to attract kids by dumping lots of sugar on top of a watered-down version."
You know, maybe we give too much attention to people's "conversion stories" and "vocation stories" and things like that. Those stories, when interesting, include magic moments. (No one ever got a million youtube hits for saying, "I dunno, my parents always took me to mass, and we prayed together as a family, and then I just kinda became a nun.") Now magic moments have their place, but not everyone has them, and anyway, you can't manufacture them. At most, you can pave the way for them by... doggedly being devoted for the basics for the long haul.
Excellent connection! I blame Protestants' penchant for proselytizing with conversion stories, that Catholics picked up on, but I also expect that Catholics would have done it without them. It's just so emotionally satisfying to hear about, and it gives the people who contribute to them (or think that they are) many warm fuzzy feelings, and our culture generally is very bad at disciplining emotions. We over-indulge them or wallow in them, by turns.
I've heard of people having NDEs, and not changing their lives even a smidgeon. I've had low-level "magic moments". When the going gets tough (or boring, or lonely) that's not why you stay Catholic. A really amazing feeling 10 years ago doesn't get you through the valley of the shadow of death.
I remember a time when my wife and I were talking to an elderly priest in my family. My wife asked about his vocation story, and he almost seemed confused by the question. I think that for a priest of his vintage (WWII vet who went to the seminary right after being discharged) it seemed odd to expect some kind of big story. He replied that the faith had always been important in their home growing up and that he had felt a draw to being a pries, and that while he was in the war he decided it was what he would do. That was it. It was as if we had asked "what's the story of why you became an accountant/union carpenter/receptionist/etc..." and expected an earth-shattering story.
Turns out that living the faith on a daily basis makes a difference...who would have predicted?
I want a collection of stories like that one. Just to counteract the others a bit.
I've heard similar from priests of that era. Met an old Irish priest once and he simply came from a devout family and they went to an ordination of a Dominican Priest when he was young and after the Mass he told his parents he was going to be a Dominican Priest and that was that, and then he did
I have heard substantially the same from a Filipino priest. I think non-Western Catholic cultures still function this way.
> doggedly devoted to the basics for the long haul
So, virtue? (In the Aristotelian sense, of course)
This particular context was catechizing children, not personal moral behavior.
But the principle applies in so many contexts. Building the foundation right, even though it is muddy and smelly and hard and boring and will probably never really be seen, is essential for doing well with anything, including virtue. And I expect that virtue will be of great help in catechizing children. But also, dogged devotion to catechizing children *right*, will be of great help in developing personal virtue.
Ah, I mostly meant this in the sense of "human virtues are habits" (ST I-II q. 55 art. 1 co.)
Oh, I see. But does that make all good habits virtues?
As long as "good" really means "good" then yeah I'd say so (though they may not be cardinal or theological virtues).
I don't get this either. I've seen kids doing "service projects" which were essentially "free help for the parish" like office work or janitorial work. I suppose it's to teach kids the importance of serving one's parish, but that should be a lesson separate from receiving a sacrament. We do not "earn" God's grace and pushing a broom has nothing to do with catechesis.
Our parish's prep for Confirmation makes me want to scream whenever we have to do it. It has actually improved over the past few years, but it essentially boils down to "write a paper every week to prove to us your kid actually attends Mass every single time he is obliged." I understand that in a big parish, not everyone will be known, including faithful families, but is the song and dance really necessary? (Not to mention, it's ineffective - within two weeks of the obligatory "reflections" an email goes out saying, "oh, if you really can't make it, here's a link to the readings and a video Mass.")
(Maybe I am "spoiled," but my family has not had to attend a baptism class for many, many years, even though we are regularly having children baptized, and so this automatically suspicious yet ineffective treatment in the interest of....fairness? or something? grates. I am trying to model faithful obedience to my children with the requirements, but they can tell it's stupid busywork, and I don't really feel like lying to them with some made up reason about why it's really good, other than obedience to our bishop.)
I'd much rather just do an interview and a retreat. Or better yet, just have kids receive their first communion and confirmation at the same time, and that would solve the problem in Salt Lake City, too.
I realize that my comment does not directly relate to the situation at hand as my children are cradle Catholics, but it touched a nerve for me. My husband and I did the math recently and even if we have no more children, by the time our youngest receives Confirmation, our family will have done sacramental prep (NOT counting baptism!) almost every year for over twenty years. That is a huge burden for a family. Being shoveled through a program because it's a program, not taking into account the needs of particular children and families, is crazy to me.
If you care about your faith, your parish needs you. Get involved in sacramental prep and make it more valuable.
Oof. I commented about this specific attitude in another Pillar article some time ago, but this ain't it. My family is heavily involved in our parish at multiple levels. When we had the time and ability to help with sacramental prep, we did, but I currently have kids aged in utero to adolescent. This is not the time in our lives for that. I cannot guarantee that I have the time or ability for a school year long commitment any year. I do have strong opinions about it, but it's going to have to wait for me to be done with having babies.
I know some people who had to give up involvements in various parish services that they really wanted to do, but it just messed with their ability to keep a good, sane, family life. I have a lot of respect for them for making that decision and keeping first things first, rather than letting themselves get overridden by guilt, peer pressure, or FOMO.
A bit transactional but we put out a QR code for OCIA participants to scan then participate in Saturday evening/Sunday liturgy. Those candidates I see scanning it (at fixed windows before the start of Masses) are with others and attend Mass (I have not seen any “scan & ran’s) when I usher or serve as Mass coordinator. An assignment may work better, but liturgy is meant to be heard and sung and prayed, so we opt to “put down the books and journals, use missals for songs, and LISTEN.” Prepare the readings before Mass etc.
Ohhh, you're going to get me started on the tech thing. This year at our parish all the confirmation paperwork and assignments are online. This is probably very, very convenient for the people checking up on us, but we're a low-tech family with high restrictions on usage. I do not like, at all, having my child sit down in front of a screen every week to prove he was at Mass, when our pastor, DRE, and others who are very involved at the parish see him serving (and if they want proof there's a schedule with his name on it), and see our family participating in various parish activities (some charitable, some social, some devotional). We're known people.
If we had to scan QR codes to prove attendance I would probably give somebody a thorough scolding, which is not something I am generally inclined to do. If that did not prove fruitful I would find another way for my children to receive their sacraments, including switching parishes. I can understand the significant administrative burden on pastors and staff, and that there are a lot of families out there who don't care and it's hard to figure out how to get them to, but that sort of tech-based check in seems particularly likely to backfire. A QR code scan says to me, "We can't be bothered to actually check in with you and say hello and get you involved in the parish, but lucky for you, that's not what's important here. Hope you have a smartphone."
Your last sentence is way off base. I volunteer every year to sponsor someone (male adult) I don’t even know. Several of us do. Nothing more technical than scanning a QR code on your way into Mass. Our pastor and 3 deacons all teach OCIA live sessions and devote a lot of time. Deep breath.
If ensuring attendance by some official means is absolutely necessary, why not use a sign in sheet in the sacristy or some other predetermined location? Why does a person need to bring a high tech device into a church just to prove they were there?
I'm not saying you or any of the clergy or parish staff don't actually care, but means like this definitely can give the impression that you don't. It can also place an undue burden on a person who has to ask for an exemption (for such a reason as, "I don't use a smartphone," which is in fact a thing for many people, even young people or those who grew up with that kind of tech.)
Paper gets lost. All of our liturgical ministers sign in to MinistrySchedulerPro. Even that is not a slam dunk since a liturgy coordinator has to monitor it. Technology is not the enemy. Our narthex is crazy hectic before Sunday liturgies.
Technology can very much be an enemy. It can be convenient (I actually like MinistrySchedulerPro, for a group of already committed volunteers), but it can also cause a lot more problems than it solves. (It is not lost on me the irony that I have learned so much about the harms of too much tech by using said tech, but...there it is.)
I'm not a fan of unnecessary tech. A posted sign in sheet on a bulletin board in a consistent location will work most of the time. If one gets lost once in a while, I still think it's the better option. Hymnals in the pews get damaged, but you're not going to persuade me that it's a good idea to install a projector screen into Mass for people to follow along, though some parishes do it.
We can barely keep track of paper registration sheets from our ministry fairs. I’m a retired IT/ERP program manager so paper is admittedly anathema to my skill set and patience. Our QR code probably checks a box in Googlesheets or some back end database. In any event, I am an unpaid flunky and the pastor and paid staff make the rules and set the tools. I’m fast losing my will to push people toward sacramental life and heaven if they don’t really want it. I’m old, tired, and willing to do some of my own heavy lifting for the Lord Jesus. You can’t lead every horse to springs of living water.
Yes & we always keep our phones in our car’s glovebox. If we brought them in our small kids would try to play with them or throw them around.
Yep. I got my first smartphone a couple years ago, never bothered to learn how to scan a QR code, and I'm in my 30s and write code for my job.
But I don't see why providing a sign-in sheet for us luddites should prevent others from using a QR code.
Right there with you. Proof of mass attendance by smartphone no less is … disgustingly transactional and pharisaical.
Is it? I guess we should not accept non-parishioners either? Call me a Pharisee when the adult strangers I sponsor and gift with a Catholic Study Bible vanish after confirmation and I never see them again. Your criticism is Pharasaic. Provide a solution from behind your smartphone, please.
Overly legalizing mass attendance with electronic tracking is legalistic. Yes. It is a legalistic policy.
No bearing on non parishioners attending I don’t know what that even means. And it is not a personal attack on you or your commitment to serve in your parish.
This is not a loan from a bank. This is nota government agency program with proof of qualification. Conversion requires heart work. Not tech work. If people on rcia or sacramental prep are not invested enough to attend mass that becomes an issue between them and God. We can’t make catechesis so transactional as to require QR codes like a restaurant menu. You can teach and lead and pray but ultimately a conversion is on THE PERSON (or the parents for little ones). Mass tracking is not the answer.
The heart work was supposed to be done by the parents for 7-16 years before Confirmation. Nearly everything that predicts faithfulness through young adulthood is related to the parents. Catechesis is the most non-parental part, and even that ought to have significant parental involvement. It is not sensible to expect catechists to make up, in 2 hours a week for 9 months of Confirmation classes, for years of religious neglect.
Putting lots of effort into people who don't care and won't stay is thoroughly demoralizing. When somewhere around 40% leave as teens/young adults, and the teachers and sponsors can do little about that, I think the only way to get along is to do it heartily for God, and to simultaneously be thoroughly detached from the results.
But there is another aspect that plays into Confirmation: The Confirmation sponsor has an obligation to "take care that the person confirmed behaves as a true witness of Christ and faithfully fulfills the duties inherent in this sacrament." It's not just an obligation to be nice to the sponsee and give them religious things. Perhaps this is the answer: sponsors who are convinced their sponsee is not going to remain Catholic, should refuse to sponsor them.
Oh i couldn’t agree more! But this requirement was specified to be for RCIA too which would be adults new to the faith. Aka even more absurd to legalize attendance bc if they didn’t want to be there why would they? But yes for children prep I second your points 1000 percent
If it's important to be logged as having attended Mass, then it's probably also important enough to provide context before Mass, for what's to come. I'd imagine it'd be more welcoming to have someone sit in the narthex to sign in OCIA participants and give them a study aid or something -- even to just connect with them with a smile.
Logging attendance for the sake of attendance seems like a wonky metric to track. I'd rather incentivize attendance by offering a special welcome and mini-catechesis, so you get the touch plus the proof of attendance, than have a QR code *or* a sign-in sheet.
TL;DR -- if you don't care enough to give them a specific reason to sign in, that's useful in the moment, then don't ask them to sign in. It's OCIA, not parole.
The simple mention of a QR code seemed to trigger a technophobic $h1+ show and now monitoring Mass attendance is pharasaic. Any remaining objectors - please call my bishop or pastor. I’m out. I just set up for Mass and make sure the Presider starts on time.
In my experience as a volunteer CCD teacher, as soon as a class receives Confirmation some parents stop bringing their children. This is less true of students who have received the sacraments of initiation with their parents who are sufficiently enthused about the Church to see that their children attend.
Stories like these make me wonder what would have happened to the Ethiopian Eunuch in today's church....
I actually just wrote to our pastor a couple weeks ago because I noticed that he was splitting up the sacraments of initiation for people who were entering the Church as adults and suggested that this wasn't allowed. Beyond that, as we now have two children entering sacramental preparation (one for First Communion and one for Confirmation), what bothers me is that — as was my experience with marriage preparation — it's "programming". I think all too often the parish/diocese purchases a "program" for sacramental preparation and it has the effect of making them feel like they are doing something ("we have a program!"), when it's not actually personal or sensitive to what each person needs to grow in faith. Our parish now makes children wait an extra year to receive First Communion and our 8 year old, who is deeply formed in the faith, must go through 6 months of classes with videos of "Olivia the owl" that are — in my estimation — absolute garbage. Sorry, I guess this touched a nerve.
Olivia the owl?
I remember when I was a kid and participation trophies were the rage. The adults thought they were great, the kids threw them away. I expect something similar is going to happen with all these attempts to make learning fun by adding special characters and technology while removing actual substance.
I'm sorry your daughter will have to wait another year to receive Our Lord in the Eucharist.
There is at least one archdiocese I know of that has a particular law allowing pastors to delay confirmation, so as to have the children join the confirmation cohort at the usual time (in their teens) and be confirmed together. This is for confirmation only, not for holy communion.
I teach faith formation for 7th grade. Believe me most don't have parents that are Pillar readers.
We require two years of faith formation before receiving Confirmation and it is probably all they will ever get.
I always pray that they receive enough to come back as adults
My suspicion is they’d be more inclined to stick around if they weren’t treated as muddlebrained infants for two years, and instead received very direct, mindful, clear instruction for about six months and could go on with living and loving the faith instead of being imprisoned in classrooms with volunteer catechists for years on end.
The sad truth is that they and their parents do not attend church and they are simply checking a box.
Honestly, I think only a volunteer could handle the lack of faith. A professional would simply weep.
I've been invited a couple of times to apply for staff faith formation positions. In the end I decline every time for exactly this reason. I don't know if my faith could survive working for the Church.
Every year the Holy Spirit sends me someone that lets me know he has a plan.
Originally I was only planning to do it for 1 year……15 years ago.
You should definitely try it. If only because it makes you treasure the faith even more.
Not at my parish. Our middle school RE and confirmation programs, whatever its faults may be, do not come remotely close to treating kids and families like muddle-brained infants. The content, especially from the 7th/8th teacher is thoughtful, challenging, orthodox, and deep. Our paid confirmation coordinator manages to rope in many teens for additional years in the program after confirmation is administered. It still mostly whooshes right by and is not affirmed in the family.
When you look at the rate at which people stop attending after receiving sacraments, I don't know if making people prepare longer is such a bad idea. In the early church, people were required to be a catechumen for three years before baptism!
The canon law issues need to be resolved, but requiring more catechesis is not a bad thing in my opinion. Especially in a diocese like Salt Lake City. It's my diocese, and as you can expect, Catholics are a minority in Utah.
This is not a place where casual faith exists. I don't mean that Utah is hostile to Catholics, that's not my experience, I love it here, but if you're not practicing the faith, there is nothing culturally that will connect you to the faith.
When I lived in Houston, TX, it seems like every other person I met was Catholic, some practicing, some not. But in Utah, I think I've only met one Catholic at an event that was not related to the church. It is very easy here to lose a connection to the church if you are not actively practicing.
I came into the church in the Diocese of Salt Lake city. I just want to say, from the time he's taken to speak to people like myself, that Bishop Solis has a pastor's heart and I trust his intentions here.
I have no doubt.
Kids over the age of 7 is a tricky one to deal with. There’s a world of difference between a 7 yr old and a 17 year old, intellectually, emotionally and physically and have different needs from ‘good catechesis’. Presumably, the younger they are, they are getting baptised as a family, or are the children of immigrants/refugees who missed infant baptism for logistical reasons. These also have different needs.
I really don’t think that today, you could argue against a universally longer formation process for all catechumens. If kids need more time for formation, so do adults 90% of the time.
I feel like universally longer formation for all catechumens makes sense. But remember that the soul and the intellect are not the same thing so the disparity in intellectual maturity between a 7-year-old and a 17-year-old is not really relevant when dealing with the Sacraments of Initiation.
A soul IS an intellect and will. That is why we bother with a catechumante in the first place and spend so much time, energy and resources on education in general. A 17 year old is an adult in many respects and deserves intellectual and spiritual formation in an adult manner. They’ve had a decade of spiritual and intellectual
Formation (good and bad) that needs to be sifted, healed or embraced. A 7 year old is very capable and has a strong intuitive and instinct for the cardinal virtues, but is only beginning his or her journey into forming their will and intellect for the spiritual life. They have an innocence there that deserves to be respected.
Is that innocence respected by ignoring canon law and withholding the real grace of Confirmation from people who are eligible to receive it? I was chrismated (confirmed) as an infant. I am now a Latin Rite Catholic and live in a restored order diocese, so perhaps it’s my background in the Eastern Rite coupled with the influence of the diocese in which I live coming out when I say this. But there is no substantive benefit to having children go through late elementary and middle school years without the benefits of confirmation. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are MORE needed today than ever before, for the individual Christian AND for the communities with which they interact. Parishes might choose to use discretion in how they structure formation groups for OCIA, but a 7-year-old is capable of receiving the grace of the Sacrament.
I think you missed my point. OF COURSE a 7 year old can receive the sacraments. I never said they couldn’t. In my diocese, 6-8 yr olds receive confirmation before their first communion and reconciliation before both. They are prepared in small groups over 4-6 weeks.
However, I would not subject a 17 yr old to preparation materials made for 6-8 yr olds. My Greek Orthodox friends all did ‘Sunday school’ during the first part of Divine Liturgy and returned to receive with the congregation. Formation of children even if they have received all the sacraments is their right and our responsibility as adults. I think we actually agree here…
My comment is not directed toward the Salt Lake City situation but is more general. I am firmly of the opinion that Confirmation, in most cases, needs to happen in proximate conjunction with first Reconciliation and Eucharist between 5-10 yrs old (rough numbers). Baptism > (Reconciliation) Confirmation > Eucharist. This is the preferred order of the sacraments of initiation, and the Eucharist is rightly the summit. Why should confirmation be earlier? It reflects a proper theology of the sacraments and grace! Why do we hold out confirmation like a carrot on stick to teenagers, when they could have already lived +5 years with the sacramental grace of confirmation? We must not underestimate the power of God's grace. The reasons I've heard for a later age are 1) it will keep them active in the parish or 2) it will be an opportunity for them to "confirm their faith" and "make it their own." Neither of these are at all satisfactory to me, so if someone is able to offer other reasons that have a bit more meat to them, I would sincerely appreciate it.
And of course, catechetical formation is certainly important. I'm not denying that. What did Jesus command the apostles to do? "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing (sacraments) them... teaching (catechesis) them to observe all that I have commanded you.
Yeah, growing up in the Episcopal Church i never even understood what confirmation was. We were literally told, by everyone from the priests on down, that it was about confirming the choice your parents made for you in baptism. I don't think that's actually what TEC teaches about confirmation but how should I know, it's hard to pin them down on anything.
Anyway I did not wind up doing their confirmation ceremony because it seemed to me that I was being asked to sign on the dotted line about something that I still didn't understand. I couldn't even find a "faithful Episcopalian" to be my sponsor because the only ones I knew were my mom and grandma.
To the extent that some catholic parishes/ dioceses are still using this kind of language, it needs to stop. It's almost exactly contrary to the point of the sacrament and the teens can sense that there's something off about it
I grew up Episcopal and ACNA, and I had the same experience. Went through confirmation with little explanation further than 'choosing the faith for yourself' and something about church membership.
I'm guessing in ACNA they probably didn't have you read selections from the Baghavad Gita though? 😭 the confirmation teacher said it had been a really important part of his spiritual journey...
The only scripture I remember reading was the story of the talking donkey. I don't remember what they were using that passage to teach.
We also watched The Motorcycle Diaries, and wrote our very own Creeds.
Yeah it ... wasn't like that lol
“Why should confirmation be earlier? It reflects a proper theology of the sacraments and grace! Why do we hold out confirmation like a carrot on stick to teenagers, when they could have already lived +5 years with the sacramental grace of confirmation? We must not underestimate the power of God's grace”
Yes, I couldn’t agree more! Most catechists are frustrated that the teens (and parents) think that Confirmation is graduation, but our system sends that message.
If it’s all about grace, why can’t our kids have it at least by the age of reason?
Parents tend to pull their children from catechesis once they have received all the sacraments.
I was just talking to a DRE about how many more school aged children are getting baptized. With fewer parents baptizing their kids I’m surprised this is the first diocese to get a plan together. It will only become more common.
This is absolutely horrifying.
Are the sacraments freely given instruments of grace that work spiritual effect ex opere operato?
Or are they mere rites of passage for the “worthy few” who have been properly socialized?
If a German bishop ordered his entire diocese to suspend canon law to deny children - children! - their ecclesial *right* to receive sacraments of initiation, we would all be up in arms.
I was raised Protestant, and I thank God every day that my “sacramental preparation” involved me being “moved by the spirit” to just walk up to a church volunteer after Sunday school and tell her I wanted to accept Jesus into my heart and ask for baptism.
It led to a lifelong devotion to Christ that has now lasted nearly 30 years of my 37 years.
I’d have been *turned away* by Bishop Solis, the old rat.
I'm sympathetic to what you're describing here, and largely agree, but I have to speak against calling the bishop an old rat, regardless of how angry he makes you. There's only one right Judge of any man's heart and worthiness, and thanks be to God it's neither you nor me. Let's leave that to Him.
I must confess I have always found it puzzling that one can do a 1 in 3 special offer. It does seem to me, but what do I know, more logical to split the progress in 2 or 3 chunks. Not sure what the logic behind the bogof is.
I was baptized as a young adult. My kids have made that comparison (especially when complaining about the level of busywork prep that is "required" of them as cradle Catholics), but I tell them that it definitely wasn't fun bumbling about in the dark for twenty years (and the knowledge of just how hard it was only came with grace).