For backstory, I've recently been looking for confirmation that I'm really saved. I've started to repent of all my sins (that I know of) about 1-2 weeks ago. I've pretty sure I've been saved since I was 8 years old, but I dedicated myself to God again, just to make sure. So I've recently been listening to an audio teaching about prayer, and the last little bit of the teaching is about healing yourself and others in the name of Jesus. I was having a bit of a headache, so I decided to try it out on myself when I got home instead of just using painkillers. I got home, and spoke to my body. I put my hand on my temple and said, "temple, you will stop hurting in the name of Jesus" or something along those lines. And it worked! That was the first time I've ever healed myself in Jesus name. Does the fact that God was able to heal me through myself mean that I'm saved for sure? Or could someone who isn't saved do exactly what I did? This is assuming they have faith that God will heal them as well.

> As in the case of Baptism and Confirmation this share in Christ's office is granted once for all. the sacrament of Holy Orders, like the other two, confers an indelible spiritual character and cannot be repeated or conferred temporarily (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1582) A 1954 Time magazine article citing Rev. Daniel A. Poling estimated that, in the decade prior, as many as 4 million Catholics converted to Protestantism. This is from a 2015 Pew research article on "faith switching": > One-in-five people who were raised Catholic now say they have no religious affiliation, while 10% identify with evangelical denominations, 5% with mainline denominations and smaller numbers with other faiths. My question is: What is the Catholic view of those very many (multiple millions) of Baptized and Confirmed Roman Catholics who have later (in adult life) had the experience of being saved in the evangelical sense? ________________________________________________________________________ Definition: Evangelicals believe that salvation is a personal and transformative experience that involves a "born-again" encounter with Jesus Christ. This experience is considered a passage from spiritual death to spiritual life. It encompasses all the abiding and immediate effects (albeit some of the language is different) that are supposed to have been conferred in Catholic Baptism and Confirmation, especially the immediate results (copied from this question ), such as: Abiding Effects Baptism: Incorporates us into Christ and his Church Baptism: Capacity to receive other sacraments Baptism: God's life, the life of the Holy Spirit Confirmation: Configuration to Christ's priesthood Confirmation: seals our souls like armor so that we can be knights in combat for Christ Immediate Results Baptism: Forgiveness of sin Baptism: Bestowal of Sanctifying Grace Baptism: Infusion of the Supernatural Virtues Baptism: Infusion of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit Baptism: Conferral of Actual Graces Confirmation: Grace of mature, Christian witness Confirmation: Grace of spiritual soldiery

If a person wasn't repentant (sorry for their sins and living sinfully still) when they got baptized/confirmed/received the Eucharist in a cathedral but later on they repent (feel sorry for their sins) do all they have to do now is go to confession? Are they a valid catholic? Can you cite some sources too if you can please. Thanks.

When I was a baby I was baptized in a Reformed church descended from the [Dutch Reformed Church](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Reformed_Church) . I still have my certificate of baptism. Then I went to Sunday school with other kids in the neighborhood. When I was in middle school, I went to catechizing class taught by the pastor along with the other Sunday school kids my age. After about a year, there was a [public confirmation ceremony](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation#Presbyterian,_Congregationalist_and_Continental_Reformed_Churches) (part of a regular Sunday service) where I received another certificate. From then on, I became an official member of the church and I needed to go to the "adult" service. I didn't know much about Reformed theology at the time. I didn't even know that my church's theology was "Reformed". I found out later that the pastor recommended Louis Berkhof's [Systematic Theology](https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/berkhof/systematic_theology.html) if I wanted to learn more, and that's how I knew that my church was Reformed. In Catholicism, there is a sacrament of Confirmation, which is also given at about the same age (11-16) for candidates already baptized (baptism is when they received the indwelling Holy Spirit). The sacrament's primary purpose is exactly what the priest said as he traces the sign of the Cross on the forehead of the candidate as he says "Be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit." (*[source](https://www.cathedral.dol.ca/confirmation)*) . Unfortunately I didn't remember what the pastor said during the ceremony when I was confirmed, nor do I remember what gestures he used. **My question**: In comparison with the Catholic sacrament of confirmation, what is the purpose of confirmation according to Reformed theology? Related questions that an answer may want to address as well: - Is it understood that there is a similar "sealing with the gift of the Holy Spirit"? - Is there a connection with the forvigeness of Original Sin which in the Catholic understanding was given in infant baptism so babies can go to heaven, but in Reformed theology this "not going to heaven if you are not baptized" is no longer applicable because of predestination? - What is the Biblical basis for this practice in Reformed churches? - What did Calvin say about it? - Since when it was practiced? - Which Reformed denominations do public confirmation today?

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the sacrament of Catholic confirmation was temporarily changed, in some locations. The changes involved no touch what so ever, instead implements were used. This violates Code of Canon Law, even Pope Paul 6 forbid the use of implements. How were those confirmations during Covid *"really"* valid? There are priests who have contended it was not valid. Canon Law specifies human touch to administer the oil. The Bible specifies human touch. Also a document was released this year by the Vatican which specified the sacraments **must be done** according to Canon Law. Someone please make this make sense.

My son was asking me this question and I'm actually not sure of the answer so I figured I'd ask here for him. In all the years I've taught confirmation nobody's tried using their same name, but if you're named after a saint, my assumption is that that saint is already your Christian name - in Baptism, therefore you'd be doubling up. Now, I'd imagine there's no rule on this, if there is, it probably short circuits the question, but if there isn't, what are the pros and cons of choosing your own name as a confirmation patron?

I was putting together a confirmation class for this week and was a little surprised to learn that your confirmation saint has to be the same sex as yourself. At least that's what the [religious hippie says]( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v04xKawMas&t=117s) What is the reason for that? And is that something from canon law or just tradition?

My son’s grandmother was Roman Catholic and she wanted us to have him baptised without delay. However, given we did not intend to bring him up in the Catholic faith, that would not have been possible. I found lots of information in this article: [Infant Baptism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_baptism#Roman_Catholic_Church) . I am also aware that confirmation takes place later, at around age 7, the age of discretion. Source: [Confirmation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_baptism#Confirmation) Since then, I have wondered if baptised infants of Catholic parents are identified as being a member of the Catholic Church. Is a baptismal certificate given to the parents, and, if so, what does it say? Or does a child not become a recognised Catholic until after confirmation? And what obligations and responsibilities does that confer upon the child?

In a paragraph of the write-up on Roman Catholic Saints at britannica.com , it is written that many Catholics take or are given a saint’s name for their Confirmation. Normally, a Catholic child on its Baptism is given a saint's name which may be different from the child' s name as entered in civil records. But are there places where children are given saint's names on their Confirmation ?

There's some movement to a "restored" order for the reception of the Sacraments of Initiation, but with some sort of assumption that it should be received as early as age seven. I was listening to the Catholic Man Show [episode on teenagers](https://open.spotify.com/episode/5fuDGFpVtJnyYO5V4xZT7k?si=9983967898bc43a3) one of the hosts said that he didn't know the answer to this question and didn't get back to answering it. I teach a Confirmation class to high schoolers, the kind of material we go cover would go way over the heads of seven year olds (it barely resonates with teenagers), so I don't wholly understand how the same sort of formation would be possible for younger kids and as far as I can tell there is absolutely no formal preparation for confirmands in the Latin Rite as it currently stands. When I watch a movie like, the Song of Bernadette or hear stories about St. Therese, where these saints received the sacraments of initiation as teenagers, I have to think that the old ways were best. However, the normal age for confirmation hasn't really changed has it - or was there a period when Confirmation was received at an earlier age?

(NOTE: I am aware that a similar question has been asked on this site before, but I have first hand experiences which seem to contradict the one answer - at the time this question was asked - to that other question.) The standard practice of the western churches which make use of the **sacrament of confirmation** - e.g. the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion - is that this sacrament is only to be conferred by a bishop - except where a bishop delegates this responsibility to a priest for some practical reason. Those, as I understand it, are the requirements for the conferring of the sacrament to be **licit**, but might a conferral of the sacrament under different circumstances still be **valid**, even if it was illicit? This might seem to be one of those silly brainteasers, but I ask for a very concrete, personal reason. I was born into a relatively observant Anglican family, was baptised and later confirmed according to the rites of that church, in which I spent the first thirty years of my life, until, in 2021, I was received into the Roman Catholic Church. As part of the process of my being received, I had to provide my baptismal certificate; there was, of course, no question of my being re-baptised, since, in principle, anyone can baptise anyone else. I was pleasantly surprised to be told that I wouldn't have to be re-confirmed either; the opinion of the diocese was that the Roman Catholic and Anglican sacraments of confirmation were 'the same'. In the service in which I was received, I simply recited the Nicene Creed solo, and then received the bread and wine shortly after. Unfortunately for my brain, I've never been able to stop wondering why the Roman Catholic Church viewed my Anglican confirmation as valid! I understand the logic regarding baptism; again, anyone can baptise anyone else. But, to be valid, doesn't confirmation have to be performed by a bishop, or at least a priest acting on a bishop's behalf? And doesn't the Roman Catholic Church view Anglican ordinations as null and void? Or is it that a confirmation performed by a non-priest could be valid, at least in principle, but would be illicit? Some short specific questions which summarise the issues I raised above: 1. Who can validly confer the sacrament of confirmation according to the Roman Catholic Church? 1. Is the sacrament of confirmation as practied by Anglicans recognized as valid by the Roman Catholic Church? 1. If a priest conferred the sacrament of confirmation without a bishop's approval, I imagine that would be illicit, but would it also be invalid, with the person in question needing to be re-confirmed? 1. What is the impact of this issue on Christians who move between sacramental traditions - Eastern Catholic, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, etc, etc - each of which has slightly different views on how the sacrament of confirmation is to be conferred?

The Catholic Catechism (1305) says: > "the confirmed person receives the power to profess faith in Christ publicly and as it were officially (quasi ex officio)." Does this mean that a confirmed person has more privilege to profess their faith in Christ than an unconfirmed person in the eyes of the Church or is it an acknowledgment that the confirmed person will be more apt to profess their faith in Christ (and that the Sacrament of Confirmation is a channel for that grace)? Or something else?

Is there a list of specific differences between what Confirmation is and what Baptism is, and why we need both (especially Baptism) in the Catholic Church? From an observer, they seem pretty similar. Anointing, sponsors, lots of things suggesting the Holy Spirit. But there has to be some reason that both continue to exist as separate sacraments, so what are the differences between the two and what does Confirmation do that Baptism doesn't?

I'm trying to figure out whether it is a good idea to attempt to get my kids confirm in the Extraordinary Form, while it lasts, or go through the regular parish way of doing things. My family and I attend a Traditional Latin Mass and I missed the prior chance to have a few of my kids get confirmed that way. However, I see a lot of merit in the normal catechetical process and formation. It seems almost sneaky or in some way disobedient to go out of my way to circumvent the process that my parish and diocese has in place, even if I do need my pastor's sign off on it. And yes, I'm going to ask a priest, I'm just wondering what the benefits that some Traditional Latin Mass going Catholics see in doing the EF Confirmation over and above doing it the normal way with their parish.

In Catholicism we are given certain sacramental character and effects after we receive the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation: ***Res Et Sacramentum*: the abiding purpose, the sacramental character**: - Baptism: Incorporates us into Christ and his Church - Baptism: Capacity to receive other sacraments - Baptism: God's life, the life of the Holy Spirit - Confirmation: Configuration to Christ's priesthood - Confirmation: seals our souls like armor so that we can be knights in combat for Christ ***Res Tantum*: the immediate result, the sacramental effects**: - Baptism: Forgiveness of sin - Baptism: Bestowal of Sanctifying Grace - Baptism: Infusion of the Supernatural Virtues - Baptism: Infusion of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit - Baptism: Conferral of Actual Graces - Confirmation: Grace of mature, Christian witness - Confirmation: Grace of spiritual soldiery (*source*: [Lesson 78: The Sacraments](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/the-sacraments) and [Lesson 79: Baptism and Confirmation](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/baptism-and-confirmation) from the Aquinas 101 course) **My question is**: once we confess our mortal sin and receive absolution in the sacrament of reconciliation, **how do we regain the effects of these two sacraments that were lost** when we committed mortal sin? The points I hope a good answer will clarify / verify are: - Is something else needed beyond the priest's absolution? If the answer is no, do all the effects described above came back to our soul automatically? - [One explanation](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Week-6-The-Tri-Partite-of-Baptism.pdf) is that mortal sin **introduces** an obstacle (*obex*) in the path of *Res Tantum* but the character (the *Res et Sacramentum*) remains, like the SPQR tattoo in a Roman soldier. Absolution removes the *obex* and does not require the soldier to be re-tattooed. *Does it mean that the life of the Holy Spirit remains in the Catholic even when he/she is in the state of mortal sin?* How do we reconcile the seemingly incongruent idea that the life of the Holy Spirit can coexist with the state of mortal sin? I hope the answer will clarify this point. - Is there anything we need to do (including certain posture of mind/will/emotion) to help restore those character and effects? *Is the posture required for a valid confession enough?* - Given that there are 2 sacraments where Confirmation intensifies the gifts, I'm wondering whether a "re-intensifying" phase is needed post absolution. Or maybe the absolution removes the *obex* so that the one-time Confirmation does not need to be repeated and that the full effects of the sealing are restored automatically. *I hope the answer will verify this, if it is true.* ----- This is a Part Two question to [In Catholicism, what happened to the gifts of the Holy Spirit after we committed a mortal sin?](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86599/10672) For a background explanation of the Catholic tri-partite theory of sacrament: - Read [this short summary of the theory](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Week-3-Tri-Partite-Theory.pdf) and the [summary application to the 7 sacraments](https://holytrinityelo.org/fr-kopps-introduction-to-the-sacraments/) by Fr. Kopp. He also wrote short articles on the theory's application to [Baptism](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Week-6-The-Tri-Partite-of-Baptism.pdf) , [Confirmation](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Week-11-The-Tri-partide-Theory-of-Confirmation.pdf) , [Eucharist](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Week-16-The-Tri-partite-Theory-of-the-Eucharist.pdf) , [Confession](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/28-Tri-partite-of-Confession.pdf) , [Anointing](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Weeks-33-and-34-Tri-Partite-of-Anoint-and-Catechism.pdf) , [Matrimony](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Week-20-The-Tri-partite-Theory-of-Matrimony.pdf) , and [Holy Orders](https://holytrinityelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Week-24-Tri-partite-Theory-of-Holy-Orders.pdf) . - Watch the well produced and well illustrated [short video series](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/christ-and-the-sacraments) (about 6-9 minute each) from the Aquinas 101 course of the Thomistic Institute on how through God's incarnation Christ gives us a share in His life through the sacraments (Lessons 71-86). [Lesson 78](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/the-sacraments) explains the tri-partite theory with application to [Baptism and Confirmation (Lesson 79)](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/baptism-and-confirmation) , [The Eucharist (Lesson 80)](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/the-eucharist) , [Penance and Anointing (Lesson 83)](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/penance-and-anointing) , [Marriage (Lesson 84)](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/marriage) , and [Holy Orders (Lesson 85)](https://aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/holy-orders) .

What would be the consequences for a teenage child of committed Australian Anglican parents who chose to refuse confirmation? The confirmation may be refused either before the ceremony, i.e. refusing to attend, or during the ceremony. I'm interested in what church doctrine would say as to how to deal with such a person.

Catholics almost always have first and second names indicating devotion to some saints, expecting special help and intercession from them. I feel, that there is no good saint which can be my patron saint and intercessor and who can I refer in my middle name. Instead I would like to have middle name which indicates my special devotion to the Holy Trinity. Is there such middle name? There is name Trinity, but it is rarely used as a man name (it would be interesting to know the reason). And then there is first name Emmanuel (God is with us, there is also form with one 'm') but I feel that there can be name that is still more closed to the God and that can have some more trinitarian reference. Is there such name for baptism (as the first name) or confirmation (as the middle name)?

A little context, Acts 8 tells us about Philip baptizing the people of Samaria, however people that have not received the Holy Spirit, even after baptism, until Peter and John lay their hands on them on verse 16 . How do Lutherans and other mainline protestants, who believe the Holy Spirit descends upon a believer at baptism reconcile this idea with this verse? I'm asking about mainline protestants like Lutherans and Reformed Christians because this obviously is not a problem for credo-baptist Christians or for Orthodox and Catholic who affirm the sacrament of confirmation.

If the Sacrament of Confirmation gives all the Gifts of the Holy Spirit , including the gift of fortitude , why are we still afraid to do the right thing?

Why do the American and Canadian Rites of Initiation differ in numbering and in the way that the rites are sometimes celebrated?