Day 67 – The Laying on of Hands II – Confirmation

Today, I cannot emphasize enough, the importance of what we learn in the readings.

Saul has begun the persecution of Christians in Jerusalem and the fledgling community is scattered. We see this has the opposite effect than Saul intended. The Gospel begins to spread outwards from Jerusalem. It’s amazing how God always can write straight with crooked lines and make good come from bad.

Phillip, one of the Deacons appointed in Acts 6, goes down to Samaria, makes converts and baptizes them. (As an aside remember that Stephen who was listed first has just been martyred for the faith. Phillip was listed second and the narrative now continues with his story. This shows the order in which people are listed is generally not random but has significance). Now Phillip, who had been living with the Apostles in Jerusalem and was undoubtedly instructed by them, would certainly have known how to baptize people but despite this when the Apostles hear of the converts, Peter and John immediately pick up and travel from Jerusalem to Samaria, a distance of approximately 40 miles. Why?

The text tells us that the converts had not yet received the Holy Spirit!

But wait! These are converts; didn’t they get the Holy Spirit when they converted? Wasn’t it the Holy Spirit that caused their conversion in the first place? Notice, there is nothing here about the converts saying the “Sinner’s Prayer” and being saved, once or always, by their faith alone. Something is missing. Further, we know that Baptism conveys the Holy Spirit for we saw it descend upon Jesus at his baptism, we heard Peter preach “baptism now saves you” and we know the Lord would not command baptism if it was a meaningless ineffectual ritual. So we can be very confident that these converts received the Holy Spirit at least twice already (at their conversion and baptism). However, the text tells us that the Holy Spirit is then conveyed to the converts by Apostles by the laying on of hands.

It is so important to understand that the Holy Spirit comes to us in many ways over our lives. He comes to us from prayer, when we ask for faith or conversion. He comes to us in Baptism when we are united to the body of Christ. And He comes to us in the laying on of hands, in the Catholic sacrament of Confirmation.

We see from the text that this authority, to convey the Holy Spirit to converts by the laying on of hands, is not granted to everyone. Despite being a deacon, Philip did not have the authority and that is why the Apostles had to come down from Jerusalem. This act of the Apostles, to go out and confirm what Phillip has done shows that even at the very early stages of the Church there was authority and hierarchy. We see from this text that after one is baptized, one must also be Confirmed. One must also have hands laid on them by someone with authority to do so, by an Apostle. In our modern times this must be done by the successor of an Apostle – a Bishop.

The passage also gives us an insight into the interplay between scripture and tradition. Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus say, ‘after someone is baptized you Apostles must lay hands on them and call down the Holy Spirit to complete their conversion and entrance into the Church.” But we see it happen here in today’s Scripture reading. The tradition of the Church has continued this practice for over 2,000 years. Like “confession” or “purgatory”, you don’t see the word “Confirmation” used in Scripture. But the sacrament of Confirmation has its basis here in Sacred Scripture. Why it is done, what it means, and how to do it are passed down is in sacred tradition. It is a great tragedy that it has been lost to many of our protestant brethren.

What you may ask, is the purpose of Confirmation? Why must we do this?

I remember my own confirmation. I was in my late 20′s. I had never had the sacrament and was getting ready to be married. I remember my wife being there and that her parents came up from VA to NY for the ceremony is the little Church we loved in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn (and still make a special point of going back to whenever we visit NYC). Other than those details I can only tell you only one other thing about that day.

I remember the Bishop, laying hands on my head and saying, “…be sealed in the Holy Spirit”. I remember thinking, that the Bishop performing the ceremony had been ordained a Bishop by having hands laid on his head by a previous Bishop. And back and back and back all the way to Peter and the Apostles and Jesus. An unbroken line of succession stretching back 2,000 years to the Savior. The person whose hands that were touching my head, had been touched by someone who the Lord had physically touched.

And then the Bishop said to the group, “you now have the authority and responsibility to preach the Gospel to the world.” A feeling of panic came over me. “What? Wait! I’m not ready to do that. I mean, I know the basics but I can’t teach this stuff! … Well, I guess I will worry about that when the time comes.” A feeling of calm came over me. “Yep, I guess I figure it out when the time comes.” How am I doing?

BONUS: The text tells us that Simon, the magician, also converted and tried to purchase this power from the Apostles. They of course refuse him. To this day, attempting to purchase blessings or holy objects is known as “Simony”. Further, the fact that Simon seeks to purchase it implies that the Apostles could pass it on this authority to whomever they chose to.

This entry was posted in Bible Study, Catholic, Catholicism, Christianity and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Day 67 – The Laying on of Hands II – Confirmation

  1. Jon musso says:

    Ephesians is clear there no dispensation for the spirit from the God head. I agree that the spirit illuminates through out a life time, but there one conversion that times Is time of conversion. I still admire your experience, but Ephesians emphasize a single conversion!

    God bless


    • I don’t understand this, “Ephesians is clear there no dispensation for the spirit from the God head.” What does it mean? What verse?

      I was not suggesting multiple conversions. I was merely pointing out that despite receiving the Holy Spirit at the time of conversion the Apostles walked 40 miles through the dessert to give it to these converts AGAIN. That shows that it is (a) possible to receive the Holy Spirit more than once, (b) it is NECESSARY to receive the Holy Spirit more than once, (c) the Apostles had the authority to do this and others did not – that implies hierarchy, and (d) if it was important enough for them to do this then it must be important enough for us to still do today.

      So the question that follows is … WHO has laid hands on you?

      • Jon musso says:

        Dave the hand on experience is fine I’m not in oppostion to experience, but the apostle age is over bro it’s over! We have christ! I believe God is still present and the spirit is present but there one baptism one conversion to indicate a multiple baptism after pentocost is a heresy! God bless

      • Where is the bible verse that supports your position? There is none. In contrast I can point to Paul’s letter to Timothy where he tell him that Timothy is in charge of the church and that he must select new people and appoint them to succeed him.

  2. Jon musso says:

    I have tons of scripture evidence you just describe to them because they don’t support catholic postions, so you will get out your catholic hand book to back up your point!

  3. Jon musso says:

    Paul when he gives his ministry to Timothy he does not call him an apostle ! Why because the period ended!

  4. Just because Paul doesn’t call Timothy an Apostle doesn’t mean Timothy didn’t have authority. In fact, the entire letter from Paul is in substance Paul telling Timothy how to exercise his authority and run the Church that Timothy is in charge of.

    In fact, if you think about it, your comment proves my point. I have scripture verses. I take you at your word when you say you have scripture verses. How can we decide whose interpretation of scripture is correct? After all our eternal salvation may depend on it.

    It would seem shortsighted if Jesus did not leave us a way to answer this question. Being God, I’m fairly confident that Jesus was not shortsighted. So which interpretation is correct? And which Church is the Church founded by Jesus. Well, Jesus said that a lamp is not lit to be placed under a basket. The lamp is lit to be seen, so His Church must be fairly easy to spot. There is only one Church that can even make a credible claim to be that Church. As for how we know that that Church can interpret scripture we will see in Acts 15 the Council of Jerusalem, where the Church will definitively interpret how the Old Testament applies to the new converts.

    Like the lamp stand in Jesus’ example the Church is not hidden. It stands wide open. Everybody knows what Church it is. It has authority because as Jesus said He will be with it until the end of the age and the gates of Hell will not stand against it.

    • Jon musso says:

      The church is the true believer in Christ! We just have a different view of authority you have the church, I have the savior himself! I need to watch my mouth my heart sometimes get away from my head! Your a good man dave! We just interprete scripture differently! I’m open to your perspective, I sometime wish we could come to the same conclusion but we see the scripture differently! Again I apologize for my comments but we just see it so different!

      • We just read a few weeks ago Matthew 16 where Jesus says, “go tell it to the Church!” This shows that Jesus intended that the Church be a visable place where we can go to get questions exactly that his answered. We can’t to the “true believer in Christ” b/c there is no way to identify who that is. But Jesus said, “If you don’t listen to the Church then let them be as a gentile and a tax collector.” That means you can be kicked out. For someone to be kicked out there must be something to be kicked out of. You can try to deny the obvious for only so long. Your conscience convicts you. I can sense from the change in tone of your writing. God bless.

  5. Jon musso says:

    Dave I was wrong for my attacking comment toward you not my theology! I have had these debates for ever and they have strengthen my position not weakened my position! I appreciate your love for God and I think God got a special place for you in heaven, but theologically I think your position is folly! The catholic postion in my opinion is not base in the grace of the cross, but in a theolgical frame work that is based in a works based paradyme! Again I believe you love the lord and to be fair I appreciate your fire for scripture, but your presuppositions I again believe are folly! God bless

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s