What is a Confirmation?
Posted by Connor on May 31st, 2007
After a convert is baptized for a remission of their sins, they are confirmed a member of the Church.
What does that mean?
The Bible Dictionary entry for ‘confirmation’ defines it thusly:
Confirmation includes more than conferring the gift of the Holy Ghost. To confirm means to “make more sure.” The ordinance of confirmation completes the ceremonial process of becoming a member of the Church, and as such, it is complementary to water baptism.
What are we “making more sure” by being confirmed? Sure, we need to receive the Holy Ghost, but that is separate from our being confirmed a member of the Church.
I’m led to think that one would be confirmed (or “made more sure”) a member of the Church after having shown fruits of one’s baptism—acting as a Saint, attending your meetings, keeping the commandments, honoring your baptismal covenants, etc. In other words, you’re “making more sure” your testimony and desire to be included in Christ’s kingdom.
However, in our day when most confirmations are done the day of (or the day after) the baptism, it would seem that this application is rendered invalid.
What, then, is a confirmation, and what purpose does it serve?
I think of it as being confirmed a part of the kingdom. It also makes the baptism more sure (think Joseph Smith and the quote that you might as well baptize a bag of sand without giving the gift of the Holy Ghost). A phrase that comes to mind is “have place.”
Comment # 1 left by Michelle on May 31st, 2007
More fuel for the fire: Christ, after baptism, received the H.G. “as a dove”, but we have no record of his confirmation. Nor do we have any record of confirmations attending those who John (or Alma) baptized.
Are confirmations a modern device, or are we missing something from the primative church?
Comment # 2 left by Daylan on May 31st, 2007
This morning I ran across D&C 20:68 which sheds some additional light on this:
This verse would seem to imply the same thing that I’ve understood regarding confirmation—that there should be ample time between the baptism and the confirmation, to really “make more sure” their desire and commitment to be a member of the Church.
One of the purposes of baptism (as defined in the Bible Dictionary) is to become a member of the church. So if the person is “confirmed a member of the church”, that would mean that they are simply being “made more sure” that they really are a member, which took place at the time of their baptism… right?
Comment # 3 left by Connor on June 1st, 2007
The scripture you reference (D&C 20:68) is the reason the practice of “confirming at the water’s edge” was ended about 10 years ago. Today, missions are instructed to separate baptisms and confirmations by one week, with the 5th missionary lesson (”Laws and Ordinances”) taught during that period. As your reference indicates, prior to baptism the missionaries teach the Gospel. Between baptism and confirmation they ensure the new member understands the basics of Church organization and order.
Doctrinally, 2 Nephi 31:17 would seem to suggest the ordinance of confirmation is more than mere ceremony - I think of the baptism of water as a symbol of the covenant, and while it is required for the remission of sin, the Holy Ghost is the actual cleansing agent via the baptism of fire. Indeed, the baptism of water is half a baptism.
Comment # 4 left by John Barger on June 1st, 2007
On my mission (in Germany) we always waited a week before confirmation, as John said. It seems to me that baptism and confirmation are similar to initiatory and receiving the endowment in that baptism and initiatory are both purifying rituals before the covenants are made. In baptism, one is baptized. In confirmation, one is commanded to “receive the Holy Ghost.” Baptism is preparatory to receiving the Holy Ghost, initiatory is preparatory to receiving instruction and making covenants in the temple.
From what I understand, if someone is baptized but not confirmed, they are on the records of the Church, but are not considered members. I forget the term we used on the books, but it usually meant that an investigator was pressured into baptism without truly understanding what s/he was getting into. Usually, they just didn’t show up the next Sunday.
Comment # 5 left by SilverRain on June 1st, 2007
It probably is worth noting that the delay between baptism and confirmation does not apply to children of record, who are presumed to have been taught “all things concerning the Church of Christ” in their home or in Primary.
Today, baptisms and confirmations are recorded on the same form which is used to create a membership record. If the confirmation never takes place, no record of any type is ever created.
Comment # 6 left by John Barger on June 1st, 2007
Interesting. I have never seen this delay, neither on my mission or here where we have had a couple of convert baptisms. Hm.
Comment # 7 left by Michelle on June 2nd, 2007
Connor,
Are you lobbying for a doctrinal policy change? Shameful.
Comment # 8 left by Rabblerouser on June 3rd, 2007
Rabblerouser (Doc),
Nope. Just trying to understand its history and importance. No lobbying here.
Comment # 9 left by Connor on June 3rd, 2007