Sometime early on, as I recall it, during the Maida Era, the bishops of the United States began examining yet again the proper age for administering the Sacrament of Confirmation. Over the years in many places various customs and practices had emerged.
While the general practice seems to be Confirmation sometime around grade four, five or six, some parishes were being given permission to request Confirmation prior to First Communion. That had been in many places up to the early years of the Twentieth Century the common practice. Of course, in the Easter Catholic traditions that has always and still remains the practice. In fact in many of these traditions Confirmation is administered immediately after Baptism. And yes, that means to infants.
In the Roman Tradition according to the directives of the RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) or as it is coming to be known these days, the OCIA (Order of Christian Initiation of Adults) Confirmation is administered immediately after Baptism and prior to First Communion. The thinking behind this practice is that one is admitted to Eucharistic Communion as fully initiated, which means Baptized and Confirmed. Matter of fact in the directives for the RCIA (ok - the OCIA) it is stated that the practices of this Rite set the norm and standard for our practices with our infants and youth.
Add to all of this the fact that back in the days of that What Age debate there were also places, whole dioceses in fact, where Confirmation was being delayed until young adulthood, around ages 18, 19.
Many different views, approaches, manners of handling this thing called Confirmation. All of which makes me recall that sit down discussion I had so many years earlier with our then Archbishop, John Dearden.
And now Adam Maida was in the thick of the matter - not with me directly as of yet but as a part of the group of American Bishops, discussing and debating what to do with this thing called Confirmation.
And let us add to this mix still another factor. And this is one that usually makes me less than popular with this group, but, hey, I have to say what I have to say.
This group would be the very dedicated, very noble ministers involved in the field of Religious Education. While Liturgy and Liturgical Theology may not be their forte, concern for our youth and for their faith certainly is. And that is a force coming into play in the Confirmation Age debate.
In this field Confirmation coming too early, like say before First Communion, just might mean we loose too many right after First Communion. Making the age for Confirmation some years later means these youngsters need to stick with the program at least for a few more years, longer to work with them in the faith. Much experience has taught us all that a good number of parents stop "fighting" with their young about religious education just as soon as Communion has been received and those Confirming Oils have dried. Our liturgical rites are seen as a sort of Religiion Graduation. So, the longer the delay, the more time we have to teach.
And the question continued - when should we Confirm? At what age?
That is when I decided to enter the debate, uninvited of course, but eager and willing nevertheless.
I wrote and researched a paper on the very question. Citing history, historical and liturgical practices, theological and scriptural sources and all of that good stuff which you have just read plus more, I produced a paper that maintained that asking when to Confirm was really the wrong question. What was needed was to ask why we Confirm.
When we ask the "Why," we develop the theology of Confirmation. However, when we ask the "When," we are tempted to create all sorts of "theologies" for this sacrament. Like, for example, teaching that Confirmation is affirming those Baptismal promises made by godparent and parents for an infant, or Confirmation is entering Christian Adulthood. None of these are historically, theologically or scripturally justified!
So I produced my paper.
And presented it to gatherings of clergy and theology minded folk for response, reaction and review, all affirming and acclaiming the work.
And then I sent it off to Archbishop Maida, hopefully, to provide him with some solid material to take into the discussions, debates and decisions on the subject taking place at that time.
And, sort of disappointingly, I never heard a word back!
Not even a simple acknowledgement that the document had been received let alone actually read.
I simply say that I did try to serve with a little theological insight.
But a lot of years have passed now, a whole lot of years.
And still I wait to hear something.
While around me the Confirmation Graduation Dance into Adulthood (and out of Religious Education) continues.
Of Course: The Maida Era continues
