Bring Back the Slap! By Thomas M. Cabeen

Blows on the cheek are not commonly associated with sacramental ceremonies nowadays, but until 1965, every confirmed Catholic received such a brief reproval. This action is known as the “Confirmation Slap”. Why it existed, why it doesn’t in the current Roman Rite, and why I think it should be brought back will be treated in this article.

Up until the Second Vatican Council in the mid- 1960s, during the ceremonies (that is, the actions that surround a sacrament but are not necessary for the validity of the sacrament) of Confirmation, the confirmandi would receive a “brief blow on the cheek” by the bishop after being anointed with the Sacred Chrism. While slapping the confirmandi the bishop would say, “Peace be with you”. The bishop slaps the one to be confirmed while blessing them with peace? To an uninformed ear this sounds like unnecessary and purposeless tradition. But as with many things in the Catholic Church, all that is needed is an explanation.

There are many reasons for the confirmation slap, both historical and practical. First, it represents the confirmandi’s willingness to suffer for Christ, His Church, and the Truth. Whether it be by ridicule, rejection, or by the path God gives us, every Catholic must suffer for his or her faith. Second, it refers to the ancient knighting ceremonies in the Middle Ages. In some variations of the knighting ceremony the one to be knighted was slapped on the cheek and hit on the shoulders with the broad side of a sword by the queen. This too represented his willingness to suffer.

The blows in both the knighting ceremonies and confirmation also are a way by which the confirmandi and the knight say, “this is the last time I will be hit without striking back.” Once a Catholic is confirmed he or she is promoted from citizen to soldier of the Kingdom of God, and a soldier protects. Up until he is confirmed, the Catholic is not required to defend his faith. He is required to be informed, but not to defend. But when he is confirmed, the Catholic is now solemnly required to know and defend his faith whenever and wherever it is attacked. But, you say, we are told to turn the other cheek by Jesus Himself. This is true, we must turn the other cheek at times. It is up to us to hone the virtues of Wisdom and Prudence so as to recognize the time to defend and the time to accept the attack. Finally, the confirmation slap is a helpful event to aid the confirmed Catholic in remembering her confirmation, the duties that are required of her, and the infusing of the Holy Spirit in her. The confirmation slap has wonderful meaning, all which have been with the blow since its institution.

We find the first known reference to the confirmation slap in the Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, a medieval manuscript on the liturgy by liturgist William Durandus (1237-1298). This means the confirmation slap stood in the liturgy of the Sacrament of Confirmation for over 700 years! It was taken out by the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s. I find this unfortunate, as the Sacrament of Confirmation seems underappreciated and undervalued in our time. Confirmation is the second most important event that will ever happen one’s life, so any remembrance point or rich tradition can greatly help the confirmadi.

The confirmation slap is not wholly gone, though. It is still used in the extraordinary form (also called the “Old Rite”, a still very valid from of the Mass and Sacraments) of the liturgy. But sadly, the extraordinary form is not very commonly used. I propose, then, that the confirmation slap be brought back to the current Roman Rite. Though the slap has been misunderstood, all that is needed is a greater effort in explanation. But all the better! Everyone should dig deep and understand the wonders and surprises of the Catholic Liturgy, especially the Extraordinary form. The confirmation slap is only one of the moments rich in tradition and meaning found throughout the liturgy. And now, when you think of Confirmation, you will think of knights, your duty, and blows to the cheek.

Types of Clergy, by Avery Bidelspach

The definition of Clergy is “The body of all people ordained for religious duties”. Examples of clergy are Deacons, Priests, Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope. The word clergy was first used in the 1200s and comes from two old French words: “clergie” and “clericatus”. “Clergie” means “learned men” and “clericatus” means “learning, knowledge, and erudition”.

The permanent Deacon is the first and lowest level of clergy. The Deacons assist the Priest or Bishop in the Mass. You must be 35 years old, baptized, and have a high school diploma to become a permanent deacon. It then typically takes five years to complete training.

Priests are the second level of clergy. You can be as young as 17 to enter the seminary and begin the 8-year training to become a Priest. Like a Deacon, you must have a high school diploma but also obtain a bachelor’s degree. The Priest celebrates the Mass.

Bishop is the third level of clergy and is in charge of a diocese. The Bishop is also the mentor and advisor to the Priests in his diocese. To become a Bishop, a Priest must have been ordained for five years and be 35 years old.

Cardinals are a special level of clergy and are appointed by the Pope. The Cardinals’ main jobs are electing the Pope and aiding in the Roman Catholic Church’s government. Cardinals are typically bishops or archbishops. Cardinals can be easily spotted because of their red vestments and are the only clergy who were red all year long.

The Pope is the fifth level of clergy and is the vicar of Christ. He is Pope for life. The Pope is elected by the college of Cardinals. The requirements for Pope are the same as Cardinal and Bishop, but no Pope has been elected under the age of 44.

There are many different types of clergy that serve our church. Each type of clergy has an important role, and the Church could not function without each of them.

The Moral Life and the Natural Law, by Ryan P. Hanson

First, we must establish what moral life is. Moral life is simply living by the moral law and the natural law. In the article we will briefly look at the natural law.

Say a child is playing with a toy and he gets up to do something, planning on coming back. When he comes back, he finds his brother playing with that toy. The child will go to the mother and say, “He took my toy, it’s not fair!” How does the child know what is fair and not fair, when he can barely count to ten on his own? It is that innate sense of right and wrong, that need for justice that we humans have. That is the natural law. It is something we are born with that no person created.

Some people would object to the existence of the natural law. They might say “well in the Middle Ages people would burn witches, we know now that that was wrong.” But our response could be that the natural law is still present. The reason they did what they did was to protect their people, as they thought that the witches were evil. The soldiers that stormed the coast on D-Day have been looked at as heroes, not murderers.

I think we can see all too well what a world without following the natural law looks like. We can turn on the news or walk down the street and see all that is wrong with the world. All this corruption is from ignoring both the natural and moral law. So, in short, is Moral Life necessary? Yes.

Good News Team and Contributors

Editor in Chief: Thomas M. Cabeen

Co-President: Ryan Hanson

Webmaster: Benjamin Wells

Contributors: Avery Bidelspach, Emma Bidelspach, Evelyn Wagner, Benjamin Wells, Alex Hanson, Gabriel Ringwald, Ryan P. Hanson, Mary Catherine Vallejo

Poet: Benjamin Cabeen

Head of Distribution: Benjamin Cabeen

Note on this digital issue

This is the digital version of this issue. This is the best way to view our issues, but the original print version can be found here.