> Daniel+: A demurr. Many of us in the West would not be comfortable with
your B2. We understand ,and were taught that, Firmunng (Confirmation) IS
a sacrament and nothing less or else. It may not be necessary to
salvation but it is wrong to deny it to anyone. This is one of the
problems that my Orthodox confreres have with this; they see the 'gap'
as a dangerous thing to souls and I agree. This is why many Western
priests (both RC and Anglican) will confirm in case of pastoral
necessity as I myself have done on more than one occasion using oil
blessed by no less than an Archbishop. There are many like me.
Blessings. GDVW+                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                 In a message dated 8/25/2003 6:48:05 AM
Central Daylight Time,
> mward@... writes:
>
> << It might be helpful if you gave us a brief outline of the difference
>  between confirmation and chrismation.>>
>
> DKD:  Oi vey, Mark+, you don't know what you're asking of me!  ;-)
>
> To do this right, one would have to trace the rites of Initiation from
> their  origin to the present, which is pretty much like trying to locate
> and map the  infamous Ho Chi Min Trail through Vietnam.  But I'll try to
> summarize things  below.
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
> I.  CHRISMATION.
>
> A.  DEFINITION: When used in Christian initiation, Chrismation refers to
> a  post-baptismal unction observed in both Eastern and Western rites,
> normally  administered by priests with oil consecrated by bishops.
>
> (1) In Eastern Initiation rites, it seems to have originally been
> administered by bishops, but quickly became delegated to priests who are
> the normal  ministers of it to this day.
>
> (2) In the Roman rite of Initiation, Chrismation seems to have always
> been  administered by priests, as is still the case today.
>
> B.  SIGNIFICANCE.
>
> (1)  The East views Chrismation as completing the rite of Baptism,
> conferring  the Spirit upon the newly baptized.  It is not really
> accurate to think of  Chrismation as a distinct sacrament apart from
> Baptism, but rather as an  integral component, along with Baptism and
> the Eucharist, of the full rite of  Christian Initiation.  Chrismation
> is also used for the restoration of apostates and  the reception of
> Christians from other communions, and so always maintains its
> fundamental connection to Baptism.
>
> (2)  The West views Chrismation more as a sacramental used in
> conjunction  with those Sacraments that confer a character upon the
> recipient (Baptism,  Confirmation, and Holy Orders).  In this sense, the
> Western attitude towards  Chrismation is much like its attitude towards
> other sacramentals, like, e.g., the  blessing of waters at Baptism --
> important for the fullness of the rite but not  detrimental to the
> Sacrament if lacking.  When used in conjunction with  Baptism,
> Chrismation symbolizes the giving of the Spirit to the neophyte (i.e.,
> regeneration) that happens at Baptism.  A vestige of this rite is found
> in the  Anglican signing of the Cross at Baptism.
>
> II.  CONFIRMATION.
>
> A.  DEFINITION:  A Western Sacrament deriving from the rites of
> Initiation of  the early Roman Church.  Confirmation has varied in its
> administration over  time but normally involves any one or a combination
> of the following  components: (1) unction, (2) laying on of hands, (3)
> signing with the Cross on the  forehead.  The one invariable feature is
> that its administration is reserved for  bishops (though there have been
> some exceptions!).
>
> (1)  EARLY PRACTICE.  Originally administered in one compound rite of
> Christian Initiation in the following order:  Baptism, Chrismation (by
> presbyter),  Confirmation (by bishop), and first Communion.
>
> (2)  LATER PRACTICE.  The insistence on reserving the episcopal
> prerogative  of Confirmation resulted over time in the separation of
> Confirmation from the  rest of Christian Initiation.
>
> (3)  IMPACT ON WEST.  The imposition of the Roman discipline over the
> rest of  the Western churches (starting in the 8th century) not only
> meant the  eventual acquiescence of Confirmation throughout the West
> (and its absence in the  East), but also contributed to the demise of
> paedocommunion in the West and the  understanding of Confirmation as a
> "coming of age" rite, especially in those  churches which retained it
> after the Reformation.
>
> II.  SIGNIFICANCE.
>
> A.  TRADITONAL CATHOLIC SIGNIFICANCE:  Confirmation is a rite that
> confers  the Holy Spirit in some new or fuller way than that which is
> conferred in  Baptism.  Liturgically speaking, Baptism is a believer's
> "Easter", while  Confirmation is a believer's "Pentecost".
>
> B.  POST-REFORMATION SIGNIFICANCE (both RC and Protestant):
> Confirmation  serves a catechetical end, marking one or more of the
> following: (1) one's  instructional preparation for receiving Holy
> Communion, (2) one's personal  re-affirmation of baptismal vows, (3)
> one's personal commitment (by vow) to the Church,  (3) one's commission
> to full membership and lay service in the Church.
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to
> <faithandlife-unsubscribe@...>



-----------------------------------------

This email was sent using FREE Catholic Online Webmail.
http://webmail.catholic.org/