OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 25, 2014, 12:17:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Are Catholics Christians?  (Read 5907 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #45 on: May 01, 2007, 02:03:20 PM »

Look on the bright side, at least you'll save money on Christmas presents this year.

 Cheesy
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,672


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #46 on: May 01, 2007, 10:31:39 PM »

    Also, the "valid Trinitarian baptism" spoken of is VALID in form only, but empty of grace-the use of economia in accepting Roman Catholics by chrismation is where the Church fills the void of grace in the so-called "valid trinitarian baptisms." As this concept is a bit hard to understand, I think that people take the easy path, and figure that "if they did not make me get baptized again, my original Roman Catholic baptism must have been valid." Sorry, no! By the way, I was raised Roman Catholic, and when I joined ROCOR in 1986, I was baptized (notice I did not say "rebatized"!!) I know a Roman Catholic man who was baptized by an Antiochian priest when he converted to Orthodoxy. SO not all the clergy of all the seemingly "feel goodZ" jurisdictions agree with the "feel good" way to go!
  • The Church (albeit Western now) practice of NOT baptizing those who had received a Trinitarian baptism in a heretic sect is actually a practice that even Pope St. Stephen of Rome deemed apostolic as early as c. 255.  (Most scholars today actually see Apostolic Canon No. 46 as being no older than about the 4th Century.)  The practice of (re)baptism appears to really be an Eastern (not necessarily apostolic) practice.
  • Most people, even among those Orthodox who should know better, judge only by external appearances and condemn others as demons simply because they're not visibly in the Orthodox Church.  Can those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and manifest the fruit of the Holy Spirit's presence in their lives even possibly be demons merely because they've not known the fullness of the Orthodox spiritual life?
« Last Edit: May 01, 2007, 10:34:31 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
nonchal
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116


« Reply #47 on: May 01, 2007, 11:33:26 PM »

  • The Church (albeit Western now) practice of NOT baptizing those who had received a Trinitarian baptism in a heretic sect is actually a practice that even Pope St. Stephen of Rome deemed apostolic as early as c. 255.  (Most scholars today actually see Apostolic Canon No. 46 as being no older than about the 4th Century.)  The practice of (re)baptism appears to really be an Eastern (not necessarily apostolic) practice.

As we know: In 255 St Cyprian rejected the view of Stephen. He taught that baptizing non-Orthodox who have received Trinitarian "baptism" in their sects is the apostolic practice.


[/list]
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,672


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #48 on: May 01, 2007, 11:42:50 PM »

    As we know: In 255 St Cyprian rejected the view of Stephen. He taught that baptizing non-Orthodox who have received Trinitarian "baptism" in their sects is the apostolic practice.


    [/list]
    Tis true, yet St. Vincent of Lerins and a few of St. Cyprian's Western contemporaries rejected Cyprian's doctrine on (re)baptism as a novelty with no basis in apostolic Tradition.  Who was right?  I don't know.  Huh
    « Last Edit: May 02, 2007, 12:25:02 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
    Tags: valid invalid ecclesiology ecumenism charismatic grace sacramental form sacraments schism heresy 
    Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
      Print  
     
    Jump to:  

    Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
    Page created in 0.052 seconds with 32 queries.