[Teacher317]

Yes, I read those posts... I just can't see why you respond the way you do. Here's an example: "To the office, since the bishop had no reason to deny the children the sacrament, but the choice of name destroyed the atmosphere of joy which should have attended the exercise of his office."

To me, the kids were saying, "We love you, even enough to take your name (Stephen), and we support you no matter what the leadership might say." I don't see how this exhibits a diminishment of joy... it seems to be an increased degree of brotherhood and love, not less. I understand that the bishop in question may not have been glorified by their expression of love for their priest, but I hardly think that negates the meaning of the ceremony or the expression of support. (Is the ceremony performed by the priest, or the bishop? I guess that would make a difference in determining whether it was a show of support or a swipe at the bishop.)

When I try to see the core message in those posts, the most consistent message that I can find is that the church leadership comes first, and total obedience is required. When a priest is removed, are the parishoners to disavow or hide all of their feelings, positive thoughts, and friendship with him? That seems to be what you are requiring of those children. Again, I'm an outsider, so I can only report what it looks like from 'out here'.

[Mike Fieschko]

I just can't see why you respond the way you do. Here's an example: "To the office, since the bishop had no reason to deny the children the sacrament, but the choice of name destroyed the atmosphere of joy which should have attended the exercise of his office."

I typed that, not freeper Ronaldus Magnus.

Is the ceremony performed by the priest, or the bishop? I guess that would make a difference in determining whether it was a show of support or a swipe at the bishop.)

The norm in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church is that the bishop adminsters the sacrament of confirmation.