First Holy communion

panda100

So its that time of year again where young boys and girls up and down the country receieve Jesus in the eucharist for the first time. Now I dont want this thread to be about howmuch is spent on the communion day (dresses,fake tan,makeup,hair etc) and the materialistic side.I just want to ask do you think the traditional age of 7-8 is just too young to have this very special ceremony?

As a catholic I wish I hadnt made my first holy communion when I was 7 or indeed my confirmation when I was 14. When your 7 your too young to know what your doing so it really does become a day about how much money you get from your relatives or how you look like a princess in your white dress. Now I know no one will ever fully understand the eucharist but at least if you wait until your 18 for your first holy communion you can make the descision for yourself and make it a day you will remember for the rest of your life. As a catholic,my confirmation and first holy communion should have been great occasions in my spiritual life.Yet they were far from this as when your that age you are just not spiritual aware.

I was just wondering if anyone knew why first holy communion and confirmation is done so early on in life and does anyone else agree that these important events should be done as an adult??

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

panda100 wrote:

So its that time of year again where young boys and girls up and down the country receieve Jesus in the eucharist for the first time. Now I dont want this thread to be about howmuch is spent on the communion day (dresses,fake tan,makeup,hair etc) and the materialistic side.I just want to ask do you think the traditional age of 7-8 is just too young to have this very special ceremony?

As a catholic I wish I hadnt made my first holy communion when I was 7 or indeed my confirmation when I was 14. When your 7 your too young to know what your doing so it really does become a day about how much money you get from your relatives or how you look like a princess in your white dress. Now I know no one will ever fully understand the eucharist but at least if you wait until your 18 for your first holy communion you can make the descision for yourself and make it a day you will remember for the rest of your life. As a catholic,my confirmation and first holy communion should have been great occasions in my spiritual life.Yet they were far from this as when your that age you are just not spiritual aware.

I was just wondering if anyone knew why first holy communion and confirmation is done so early on in life and does anyone else agree that these important events should be done as an adult??

I could be cynical and say because the church wants to recruit them while they're young...!!! Seriously, though, I think it's more of a tradition - I have two cousins who made their communion at ages 9 and 10 in England. Mind you, all they were interested was the material side of things.

Also, is there a line in the bible/cathecism that says a child under 7 is considered incapable of sin...? Vague memories of this from childhood...

Killaqueen!!!

I totally agree. I've yet to meet someone who didn't only see the materialistic side of holy communion and confirmation. I think these sort of important ceremonies can wait until one is 18 years old. It makes much more sense.

I suppose it is a tradition but even still...

Hermione*

I made my First Communion at 6, and was confirmed aged eleven. I actually understood most of what it was about also.

I would have said my interest in the day was about 40/60 in favour of the materialism. Not so much the money, but the dress, attention etc.

I think ten for Communion and fifteen for Confirmation would probably be better.

Excelsior

Why do you have "First" communion at all? Why can't parents in conjunction with the leadership of the church and in conversation with the child decide when he or she is ready to participate in the Lord's Supper?

(Just my anarchist tendencies at work no doubt...)

Asiaprod

Excelsior wrote:

Why do you have "First" communion at all? Why can't parents in conjunction with the leadership of the church and in conversation with the child decide when he or she is ready to participate in the Lord's Supper?

Now that would be a very sensible way to approach the subject IMHO

Gurgle

panda100 wrote:

I was just wondering if anyone knew why first holy communion and confirmation is done so early on in life

For the parents/community:
tradition
tradition
tradition
For the kids:
money
money
money

Nothing to do with religion. If it was in the spirit of godliness, don't you think there would be a tradition of donating the money to charity?

lowdenclear

I think it comes down to the fact that at aged 7-8, a child has reached the "age of reason". Of course children mature at different rates, so this may happen earlier or later for some. In general, if a child doesn't understand that its not just "a bit of bread", they should leave it until they do... Though that's not very likely to happen as its become a thing for the whole class in school. There was talk of reducing the age at one point, as there have been cases where children of a much younger age have understood, e.g. Little Nellie of "Holy God"

panda100

Excelsior wrote:

Why do you have "First" communion at all? Why can't parents in conjunction with the leadership of the church and in conversation with the child decide when he or she is ready to participate in the Lord's Supper?

(Just my anarchist tendencies at work no doubt...)

I totally agree with you.All I know is that when I have kids Im definatly not going to inflict this day on them tradition or no tradition

Cantab.

Gurgle wrote:

For the parents/community:
tradition
tradition
tradition
For the kids:
money
money
money

A very simplistic analysis.

Gurgle wrote:

Nothing to do with religion. If it was in the spirit of godliness, don't you think there would be a tradition of donating the money to charity?

You'll find that a lot of the bling-bling limos and tackyness comes from the type of people who never had proper money before in their lives, feel the need to flaunt it all of a sudden in the most untasteful of manner. Whether it's their inherent inferiority complex or just downright ignorance, sacred Church grounds should not be used to facilitate such carry-on.

I was at a recent talk at the Knights of the Columbanus where the Arch-Bishop, Diarmuid Martin, was talking about the confirmation he celebrated. And he made the very point that children should reflect on the real meaning of God's love and that they should donate a percentage of monies received to a reputable christian charity.

Asiaprod wrote:

Now that would be a very sensible way to approach the subject IMHO

Now on the issue of whether a person should wait until they are 18 before they make a choice - well, this is liberal codswollop. A catholic couple have every right to decide what religion they want their child to choose. If the parents don't teach them their religion (through catechesis, prayer, study and attending Sunday Mass) and place them in an appropriate Catholic school, then how is the child ever to be expected to learn about Jesus in an unbiased manner? Afaik, all religions are not equivalent and an invasion by the state into the education of a private couple's offspring is an Orwellian fool's paradise.

We give (you might say impose) names (often Catholic) to our children at birth - should we wait until they are 18 before giving children a name? And besides, if you belive Christianity is the key to salvation (which I do), then it only makes sense to introduce it to my children as soon as possible.

panda100 wrote:

I totally agree with you.All I know is that when I have kids Im definatly not going to inflict this day on them tradition or no tradition

And imposing the spirit of debonair nihilism is not in itself dogmatic?!

Hermione*

Cantab. wrote:

Now on the issue of whether a person should wait until they are 18 before they make a choice - well, this is liberal codswollop. A catholic couple have every right to decide what religion they want their child to choose. If the parents don't teach them their religion (through catechesis, prayer, study and attending Sunday Mass) and place them in an appropriate Catholic school, then how is the child ever to be expected to learn about Jesus in an unbiased manner? Afaik, all religions are not equivalent and an invasion by the state into the education of a private couple's offspring is an Orwellian fool's paradise.

I find it very interesting that you mention four ways of teaching religion to a child and not one of them is throught the example of living a Christian life, and practicisng charity and kindness to those you meet. I was taught by the nuns in my school that the single most important way to practise your religion was through your actions. I wouldn't count Mass in this instance, important as it is, because Mass is a set of prescribed responses and reactions.

Also, while I have every intention of raising my children in the Catholic reigion, I wouldn't call that an unbiased childhood! The childhood you describe seems very biased imo.

Also, the state provides education, so it has to 'invade', as you put it. It also pays the teaches in the Catholic schools. I'd have taught footing the bill would give them some rights. Thirteen years of free Catholic education for your son or daughter in return is a decent enough transaction.

Excelsior

Hermione* wrote:

I was taught by the nuns in my school that the single most important way to practise your religion was through your actions.

Just as a mischievious aside, that wouldn't be completely accurate...

I just want to clarify for Cantab that I am not proposing that kids should wait until 18 before communing over the Eucharist. What I suggest is that communion should be withdrawn from the school system so that parents in conjunction with their kid's development and the advice of their church leadership, can decide when it is appropriate to bring them into Communion. I diverge from the majority Presbyterian position by believing that children should share communion within in a church context as decided by the stakeholders.

The benefit of removing it from the curriculum is that transparency would be increased since kids of non-Catholic parents wouldn't be proposed for Communion, avoiding the materialism and the hypocrisy that abounds this time of the year. In place of Eucharistic preparation, other core Gospel issues (including some discussion of Transubstantative Communion) could be dealt with.

(You might even find time to infect a generation with the idea of Grace and not works )

panda100

Cantab. wrote:

And he made the very point that children should reflect on the real meaning of God's love and that they should donate a percentage of monies received to a reputable christian charity.

I underlined and highlighted the most important word here....CHILDREN!!How is a child meant to understand that they are recieving Christ in the Euchartist for the first time? A child just cant understand it so taking holy communion comes just a tradition with no meaning. This sets the pattern for the rest of your life,well it has for me anyway. The eucharist means nothing to me when I go up to recieve and I have tried to understand it and make it mean something. I know that not even the pope will fully understand recieving Christ in the eucharist but by recieving communion as a child it makes it easier to fall into the habit of it not meaning anything and just recieving cos everyone else is doing it and its the things to do.

panda100

Excelsior wrote:

Just as a mischievious aside, that wouldn't be completely accurate...

I just want to clarify for Cantab that I am not proposing that kids should wait until 18 before communing over the Eucharist. What I suggest is that communion should be withdrawn from the school system so that parents in conjunction with their kid's development and the advice of their church leadership, can decide when it is appropriate to bring them into Communion. I diverge from the majority Presbyterian position by believing that children should share communion within in a church context as decided by the stakeholders.

The benefit of removing it from the curriculum is that transparency would be increased since kids of non-Catholic parents wouldn't be proposed for Communion, avoiding the materialism and the hypocrisy that abounds this time of the year. In place of Eucharistic preparation, other core Gospel issues (including some discussion of Transubstantative Communion) could be dealt with.

(You might even find time to infect a generation with the idea of Grace and not works )

I agree. Wow you are the coolest anarchist ever!!:)

Excelsior

It is because of the routine-isation of Communion that I loved the Presbyterian approach when I first started going to Lucan Presbyterian Church. They only have communion every month or so and they tell you well in advance that it is happening. That way, you can prepare yourself prayerfully in the days before it and it really means something.

Hermione*

Excelsior wrote:

Just as a mischievious aside, that wouldn't be completely accurate...

Clarification would be genuinely appreciated in that case.

Though tbh, I see little point to professing a faith, attending Mass, receiving Communion etc if you don't treat people well.
'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' ... for me, one of the most important teachings of Catholicism.

BrianCalgary

Hermione* wrote:

Clarification would be genuinely appreciated in that case.

Though tbh, I see little point to professing a faith, attending Mass, receiving Communion etc if you don't treat people well.
'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' ... for me, one of the most important teachings of Catholicism.

If I may wade in here.


That is a good rule to live by.

The last commandment that Jesus gave was to Matthew 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

This I think is the focus of our lives. What can I do to further disciple others and have them baptised. It is our mandate to bring the good news to those that need to hear it. It is not to observe all the rites and rituals of any one denomination, unless those rites and rituals can help us maintain our focus on bringing the gospel to others.

Excelsior

The clarification I would make Hermione is just that, a minor point to focus an otherwise beautiful teaching.

Christianity is about regenerating and reconciling the whole of Creation- the Earth, nature and humankind. Christians are called to participate with God in this project. On this, you, me and the nuns are in complete aggreement.

But the minor point of clarification I would make is the motivation for these efforts. We cannot participate in this project in an effort to earn God's approval but rather, believing that God approves of us upon confession and faith in Jesus, we participate out of gratitude. So the point I would make isn't that faith should not be judged by the fruit (that is what Jesus said after all) but that the soil that the faith grows in has to be one of gratitude for what God has done for us independent of our worth and not working to earn something for God.

Hermione*

Excelsior wrote:

The clarification I would make Hermione is just that, a minor point to focus an otherwise beautiful teaching.
So the point I would make isn't that faith should not be judged by the fruit (that is what Jesus said after all) but that the soil that the faith grows in has to be one of gratitude for what God has done for us independent of our worth and not working to earn something for God.

Oh no, what I meant was actions was how one should practice one's faith, not out of desire for the rewards of those actions, but because it is what is the Gospel tells us. So we agree Probably, as I tend to do on occassions, I didn't express myself clearly enough.

humbert

I think if communion and confirmation were not at such young a lot of the youth of today would have outgrown religion and either refuse to engage or simple not bother, I think the church would find this much more objectionable than the kids not fully understanding their full meaning.

robindch

> I think if communion and confirmation were not at such young a lot of
> the youth of today would have outgrown religion [...]

Well noticed.

The process that's going on here is called imprinting, where susceptible organisms are subjected to repeated and repetitious stimuli until they 'learn' the correct 'response' to the stimulus. The Wikipedia article on imprinting is a good short intro to the topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprinting_%28psychology%29

...and it's as applicable to humans as it is to chickens and geese. Religion evolved this human imprinting mechanism a long, long time ago to ensure religion's own survival. Have you noticed how much time and resources that religions in general spend working with kids in one way or another (orphanages, schools, first communion, confirmation, etc)? This evolved behaviour is not just an occasionally happy coincidence!