OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 30, 2014, 08:25:14 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: Chrismation  (Read 6086 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« on: October 20, 2007, 06:19:29 PM »

The Apostles at the beginning practiced "laying on of hands" as the means of receiving the Holy Spirit - not special oil applied to multiple parts of the body. This is evident in the book of Acts. After new disciples were baptized, the Apostles or Elders laid hands on them for the reception of the Holy Spirit.

Is it possible that the Sacrament of Holy Unction in the book of St. James later became part of one whole ceremony in receiving a new member: Exorcism, Baptism, Laying on of Hands, Holy Unction, Eucharist?

In other words, when a person receives Chrismation they are actually receiving "Laying on of Hands" along with "Holy Unction" for the healing of the body and spirit?

It seems the Sacrament of Holy Unction would have been involved in the reception of a new member just as Exorcism was, but it appears the direct practice of "Laying on Hands for reception of the Holy Spirit" is missing somehow...

Thanks for any insight.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2007, 06:29:05 PM by orthoglory » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2007, 07:42:34 PM »

A translation of an information pamphlet about Chrism which briefly outlines it's historical development and earliest references can be found here: http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8420.asp
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2007, 09:30:02 AM »

"When the Church spread throughout the world and the number of the baptized was greatly increased, it was not possible to continue the practice of Samaria. Consequently, the Apostles introduced the use of the sanctified Chrism.† The Holy Chrism was sanctified by the Apostles and was continued thereafter by the bishops through the Apostolic Succession. The "laying on of hands" was completely replaced by the Holy Chrism to transmit gifts of the Holy Spirit."

Is there any record of this change in the practice of the Apostles? Did they gather and decide to change the practice that they were handing down to bishops in each church? They had to gather for such a major change, wouldn't they?

Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2007, 10:15:53 AM »

Is there any record of this change in the practice of the Apostles?
St. Hippolytus of Rome in his work, "The Apostolic Tradition" (written in AD 215) mentions the use of two different oils at Baptism, which we still use today. He called them the "Oil of Exorcism" and the "Oil of Thanksgiving". The latter is what we now call Holy Chrism. Here is St. Hippolytus' description of the rite which is the oldest surviving mention of Chrism:
Quote
"At the time determined for baptism, the bishop shall give thanks over some oil, which he
puts in a vessel. It is called the Oil of Thanksgiving. He shall take some more oil and
exorcise it. It is called the Oil of Exorcism. A deacon shall hold the Oil of Exorcism and
stand on the left. Another deacon shall hold the Oil of Thanksgiving and stand on the right.
When the elder takes hold of each of them who are to receive baptism, he shall tell each
of them to renounce, saying, "I renounce you Satan, all your servicea, and all your works."
After he has said this, he shall anoint each with the Oil of Exorcism, saying, "Let every
evil spirit depart from you." Then, after these things, the bishop passes each of them on
nude to the elder who stands at the water. They shall stand in the water naked. A deacon,
likewise, will go down with them into the water. When each of them to be baptized has
gone down into the water, the one baptizing shall lay hands on each of them, asking, "Do
you believe in God the Father Almighty?" And the one being baptized shall answer, "I
believe." He shall then baptize each of them once, laying his hand upon each of their
heads. Then he shall ask, "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was
born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and
died, and rose on the third day living from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sat
down at the right hand of the Father, the one coming to judge the living and the dead?"
When each has answered, "I believe," he shall baptize a second time. Then he shall
ask, "Do you believe in the Holy Spirit and the Holy Church and the resurrection of the
flesh?" Then each being baptized shall answer, "I believe." And thus let him baptize the
third time.Afterward, when they have come up out of the water, they shall be anointed by the
elder with the Oil of Thanksgiving, saying, "I anoint you with holy oil in the name of Jesus
Christ." Then, drying themselves, they shall dress and afterwards gather in the church.

Source: http://www.bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html
« Last Edit: October 21, 2007, 10:31:59 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2007, 11:19:48 AM »

the next verse just after what you posted:

21 The bishop will then lay his hand upon them, invoking, saying,
"Lord God, you who have made these worthy
of the removal of sins through the bath of regeneration,
make them worthy to be filled with your Holy Spirit,
grant to them your grace,
that they might serve you according to your will,
for to you is the glory,
Father and Son
with the Holy Spirit,
in the Holy Church,
now and throughout the ages of the ages.
Amen.

22 After this he pours the oil into his hand, and laying his hand on each of their heads, says,
"I anoint you with holy oil
in God the Father Almighty,
and Christ Jesus,
and the Holy Spirit."


The second anointing of oil appears to be the Chrismation. The laying on of hands appears to be for the reception of the Holy Spirit. The Chrismation does not appear to be for the reception of the Holy Spirit here.

Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2007, 06:27:45 PM »

I'm sorry, I should have been clearer. When I said "The latter is what we now call Holy Chrism" I meant that the "Oil of Thanksgiving" consecrated by the Bishop is what evolved into Chrism.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2007, 11:36:18 PM »

But what happened to the "Laying on of Hands" as detailed above in the record of St. Hippolytus?

Holy oil was used after Exorcism, after Baptism, and finally again after the Laying on of Hands. But, from St. Hippolytus above, it does not appear that holy oil replaced the Laying on of Hands.

Doesn't this mean "Laying on of Hands" for the filling of the Holy Spirit, as in the Book of Acts, was still the tradition after the Apostles died and wasn't changed by the Apostles as claimed?
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 12:41:30 AM by orthoglory » Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2007, 09:52:00 AM »

I believe since the bishop isn't always present at baptism the Chrism may be representing both.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 10:17:19 AM by Demetrios G. » Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2007, 10:16:13 AM »

The "Laying on of Hands" that you are referring to in acts. Is the handing down of apostolic succession. Not to be confused with baptism.
This is different.
The "laying on of hands" orthoglory is talking about is how the Mystery of Confirmation was conferred by the Apostles after baptism:
"And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.” Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” When they heard this,  they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied." (Acts 19:1-6)
We now Chrisimate to Confirm rather than the Bishop laying hands on the newly baptised as St. Paul did.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2007, 10:18:56 AM »

It hit me.  I revised my reply before you posted.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #10 on: October 22, 2007, 11:30:27 AM »

"We now Chrisimate to Confirm rather than the Bishop laying hands on the newly baptised as St. Paul did."

It wasn't changed by the Apostles as claimed. Who changed it and when?

The laying on of hands existed well into the 300's. Somewhere along the way it was dropped. Not a small thing being an Apostolic practice and instruction from the Apostles themselves.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #11 on: October 22, 2007, 11:35:07 AM »

orthoglory,
Have you actually witnessed an Orthodox baptism and confirmation?

From the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese webpage:

http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7105.asp

Quote
The Sacrament of Chrismation (Confirmation) immediately follows baptism and is never delayed until a later age. As the ministry of Christ was enlivened by the Spirit, and the preaching of the Apostles strengthened by the Spirit, so is the life of each Orthodox Christian sanctified by the Holy Spirit. Chrismation, which is often referred to as one's personal Pentecost, is the Sacrament which imparts the Spirit in a special way.

In the Sacrament of Chrismation, the priest anoints the various parts of the body of the newly-baptized with Holy Oil saying: "The seal of the gifts of the Holy Spirit." The Holy Oil, which is blessed by the bishop, is a sign of consecration and strength. The Sacrament emphasizes the truths that not only is each person a valuable member of the Church, but also each one is blessed by the Spirit with certain gifts and talents. The anointing also reminds us that our bodies are valuable and are involved in the process of salvation.

The Sacraments of initiation always are concluded with the distribution of Holy Communion to the newly-baptized. Ideally, this takes place within the celebration of the Divine Liturgy. This practice reveals that Orthodoxy views children from their infancy as important members of the Church. There is never time when the young are not part of God's people.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 11:47:44 AM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2007, 02:21:00 PM »

"We now Chrisimate to Confirm rather than the Bishop laying hands on the newly baptised as St. Paul did."

It wasn't changed by the Apostles as claimed. Who changed it and when?

The laying on of hands existed well into the 300's. Somewhere along the way it was dropped. Not a small thing being an Apostolic practice and instruction from the Apostles themselves.


Technically, one must lay there hands on you to receive the oil. No?
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2007, 02:26:34 PM »

Technically, one must lay there hands on you to receive the oil. No?

Even more than that, there is a prayer that the priest reads with his epitrahilion (stole) over the head of the newly baptized asking the Spirit to come down into the person.  I've always then understand the final part "the seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit" as being the culmination of the entire event. 
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2007, 02:43:48 PM »

Laying on of hands still occurs during the Ablution. The priest lays his hands on the newly illumined individual and reads the following prayer:

Quote
Priest: Sovereign Master and Lord our God, Who through the baptismal Font bestows heavenly Illumination to them that are baptized; Who has regenerated this Your servant bestowing upon him (her) forgiveness of his (her) voluntary and involuntary sins; do You lay upon him (her) Your mighty hand, and guard him (her) in the power of Your goodness. Preserve unspotted his (her) pledge of' Faith in You. Account him (her) worthy of Life everlasting and Your good favor. For You are our sanctification and to You do we send up all Glory; to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, both now and ever, and to the ages of ages.

People: Amen.

Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
FrChris
The Rodney Dangerfield of OC.net
Site Supporter
Taxiarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 7,252


Holy Father Patrick, thank you for your help!


« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2007, 02:48:25 PM »

Yeah...I just did this yesterday, and it's ironic I see this thread now!

 Smiley
Logged

"As the sparrow flees from a hawk, so the man seeking humility flees from an argument". St John Climacus
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2007, 03:17:25 PM »

Do to the nature of this topic I have a question myself. Why does the godparent also anoint with oil?
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2007, 03:44:07 PM »

Is the "laying on of hands" the bestowing of the Holy Spirit or is the "application of holy oil"?

I can understand the application of holy oil being part of the service as it had multiple uses, for example, the Holy Unction in St. James for forgiveness and healing. However, I don't understand why the application of holy oil is considered the "Laying on of Hands" itself. When the Apostles laid hands on certain individuals, the Holy Spirit fell on them at that point. It's confusing to me that such a Holy Tradition of the Apostles could be changed or could have evolved after being passed on.

(The quote from St. Hippolytus proves it was not changed by the Apostles at a certain point since it was still practiced then.)

I've seen several baptisms and there is no placing of the priests hand on the person baptized for the Gift of the Spirit. In most cases it goes straight from Immersion to Chrismation.

Some Coptic Orthodox apply oil directly with the hands, which I suppose is, as Demetrios G. noted, technically Laying on Hands.

Perhaps what happened is that the Application of Holy Oil after Baptism was combined with the Laying on of Hands. Then, in some churches, instead of applying the oil by hand, tradition evolved to where it is today in most churches: not Laying on Hands, but applying the Holy Oil by brush rather than hand...

Can anyone point me to a website where the prayers are, especially the prayer after the Immersion and before the Chrismation?

If anyone has online video that shows Laying on of Hands before Chrismation, that would be appreciated as well.

Thank you for your responses.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2007, 04:47:27 PM »

Chrismation IS the 'Laying on of hands'.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2007, 09:02:39 PM »

"Chrismation IS the 'Laying on of hands'."

Then why is there no "laying on of hands" as the Apostles did? As St. Hippolytus did as noted above?

Something changed along the way between the Apostles and today. Just trying to account for it.
Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2007, 10:53:16 PM »

I believe I gave you your answer on reply #7. But I didn't go into detail. I really don't have all the details. All I know is that. The Bishops only have the ability to seal the holy spirit. Because the churches were overwhelmed with so many baptisms. The bishops passed the task over to the Priests. If I'm not mistaken the actual laying on hands is in the chrism itself. Since it is formulated by the bishops only.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2007, 10:56:31 PM »

I believe I gave you your answer on reply #7. But I didn't go into detail. I really don't have all the details. All I know is that. The Bishops only have the ability to seal the holy spirit. Because the churches were overwhelmed with so many baptisms. The bishops passed the task over to the Priests. If I'm not mistaken the actual laying on hands is in the chrism itself. Since it is formulated by the bishops only.
But would this not be "laying on of hands" at a distance?  I'm sure no one, certainly not a bishop, has arms that long.
Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2007, 11:04:37 PM »

But would this not be "laying on of hands" at a distance?  I'm sure no one, certainly not a bishop, has arms that long.

 The bishop is in fact the only one that can seal the holy spirit. This is done through the holy chrism.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #23 on: October 22, 2007, 11:44:32 PM »

The bishop is in fact the only one that can seal the holy spirit. This is done through the holy chrism.
Yes, but the question is about the physical "laying on of hands" that was chrismation at one time.  Can you tell us why this practice has been discontinued?
Logged
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #24 on: October 23, 2007, 01:26:42 AM »

So, because of a change in culture, there was a necessary change in Apostolic practice.  I see...

Please read the ceremony above. The holy oil is applied, but the Laying of Hands is also there. If Chrismation IS Laying of Hands, then why does the above ceremony include both Chrismation AND Laying of Hands?

Since there are not so many Baptisms today, why not return to Apostolic practice? Isn't each church equal and have authority to both Baptize and Lay Hands?

Also, not all parts of the world had a large number of converts... so the theory that a large number of converts suddenly forced all the Churches of the world to invent the use of holy oil to replace the Apostolic practice of Laying on Hands can't be true. (We already know both Chrismation AND Laying Hands were practiced from above.)

How can such an important Apostolic tradition be dropped without some sort of major protest by those who were committed to sticking with the traditions as the Apostles taught it?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 01:28:32 AM by orthoglory » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #25 on: October 23, 2007, 01:39:58 AM »

So, because of a change in culture, there was a necessary change in Apostolic practice.  I see...

Please read the ceremony above. The holy oil is applied, but the Laying of Hands is also there. If Chrismation IS Laying of Hands, then why does the above ceremony include both Chrismation AND Laying of Hands?

Since there are not so many Baptisms today, why not return to Apostolic practice? Isn't each church equal and have authority to both Baptize and Lay Hands?

Also, not all parts of the world had a large number of converts... so the theory that a large number of converts suddenly forced all the Churches of the world to invent the use of holy oil to replace the Apostolic practice of Laying on Hands can't be true. (We already know both Chrismation AND Laying Hands were practiced from above.)

How can such an important Apostolic tradition be dropped without some sort of major protest by those who were committed to sticking with the traditions as the Apostles taught it?
So, just to examine a different aspect of your inquiry...

Communion on a spoon...
Required fast for several hours before Communion...

To my knowledge, both of these practices differ markedly from the traditions of the Apostles.  Why have we discontinued Apostolic practice in these regards, and should we not return to this practice?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 01:41:01 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Thomas
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,817



« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2007, 08:47:43 AM »

So, because of a change in culture, there was a necessary change in Apostolic practice.  I see...

Please read the ceremony above. The holy oil is applied, but the Laying of Hands is also there. If Chrismation IS Laying of Hands, then why does the above ceremony include both Chrismation AND Laying of Hands?

Since there are not so many Baptisms today, why not return to Apostolic practice? Isn't each church equal and have authority to both Baptize and Lay Hands?

Also, not all parts of the world had a large number of converts... so the theory that a large number of converts suddenly forced all the Churches of the world to invent the use of holy oil to replace the Apostolic practice of Laying on Hands can't be true. (We already know both Chrismation AND Laying Hands were practiced from above.)

How can such an important Apostolic tradition be dropped without some sort of major protest by those who were committed to sticking with the traditions as the Apostles taught it?

You are of course right! We could do as the Roman Catholics and Epsicopalians do.  Baptism could be seperated from Chrismation so that a child could be baptised and then wait to commune until many years later when a Bishop happens to be in the area to complete the sacrament by the laying on of hands like the Apostles.  In most Orthodox Churches in the US that could be shortened to 1-2 years for the "annual" visit to the Parish Church by the local Bishop. I personally believe that the Chrismation allows the Priest to stand in the place of the Bishop as he applies the Bishop's Chrism to the newly illuminated and thus fulfill the actions required to bring the newly illumined into full communion with the church rather than add yet another waiting period to the newly illumined before s/he is in full communion with Christ and His Church.

Thomas
Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: October 23, 2007, 09:50:50 AM »

You are of course right! We could do as the Roman Catholics and Epsicopalians do.  Baptism could be seperated from Chrismation so that a child could be baptised and then wait to commune until many years later when a Bishop happens to be in the area to complete the sacrament by the laying on of hands like the Apostles.  In most Orthodox Churches in the US that could be shortened to 1-2 years for the "annual" visit to the Parish Church by the local Bishop. I personally believe that the Chrismation allows the Priest to stand in the place of the Bishop as he applies the Bishop's Chrism to the newly illuminated and thus fulfill the actions required to bring the newly illumined into full communion with the church rather than add yet another waiting period to the newly illumined before s/he is in full communion with Christ and His Church.
Do Roman Catholics and Episcopalians admit people to Communion before they are Chrisimated/Confirmed?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #28 on: October 23, 2007, 10:00:41 AM »

Do Roman Catholics and Episcopalians admit people to Communion before they are Chrisimated/Confirmed?

Yes, for the Episcopalians (at least traditionally), and for Roman Catholics since the 1930s or thereabouts. This has been one of the issues in the on-going theological dialogue. People like Lossky and Sherrard saw this -- and the lack of the epiklesis in the Tridentine Mass -- as a sign of the radical downplaying of the role of Holy Spirit in the Western experience.

Edit: Maybe earlier for the Roman Catholics. Hard to tell exactly. Maybe some of our Catholic board members know.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 10:23:15 AM by pensateomnia » Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #29 on: October 23, 2007, 11:32:23 AM »

So, because of a change in culture, there was a necessary change in Apostolic practice.  I see...

Please read the ceremony above. The holy oil is applied, but the Laying of Hands is also there. If Chrismation IS Laying of Hands, then why does the above ceremony include both Chrismation AND Laying of Hands?



 There isn't just one holy oil. There are three different oils used. Each one with it's own purpose. There is chrism, there is olive oil witch the god parent brings with them that is also used by the godparent. A portion of that oil that the godparent brings is blessed by the priest at the time of baptism and used by him as well. The laying on of hands is also done three times when the baptised is immersed. There is a prayer that is read over them each time before immersion. The elements are all there. Now all we need is someone to explain it to us. Cheesy If none comes up with the details I will ask my priest or bishop to fill in the blanks.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #30 on: October 23, 2007, 11:49:19 AM »

Hopefully this doesn't go off onto some other topic.

How can we account for the Laying of Hands being neglected in the churches today, having been replaced by something other than what the Apostles handed down to each Overseer in each city?

We've already noted above by clear historical reference that the Laying of Hands IS NOT Chrismation since Laying of Hands and Chrismation were clearly two separate things.

Oil was applied after Exorcism.
Oil was applied after Baptism.
Oil was applied after Laying of Hands.

Holy Oil after each Sacrament cannot replace the Sacrament itself, can it?

If so, the conclusion is that the college of Bishops have the authority to change Apostolic tradition if culture gets in the way of (or becomes inconvenient to) proper Apostolic practice.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 11:51:34 AM by orthoglory » Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #31 on: October 23, 2007, 11:56:20 AM »

Quote
"At the time determined for baptism, the bishop shall give thanks over some oil, which he
puts in a vessel. It is called the Oil of Thanksgiving. He shall take some more oil and
exorcise it. It is called the Oil of Exorcism. A deacon shall hold the Oil of Exorcism and
stand on the left. Another deacon shall hold the Oil of Thanksgiving and stand on the right.
When the elder takes hold of each of them who are to receive baptism, he shall tell each
of them to renounce, saying, "I renounce you Satan, all your servicea, and all your works."
After he has said this, he shall anoint each with the Oil of Exorcism, saying, "Let every
evil spirit depart from you." Then, after these things, the bishop passes each of them on
nude to the elder who stands at the water. They shall stand in the water naked. A deacon,
likewise, will go down with them into the water. When each of them to be baptized has
gone down into the water, the one baptizing shall lay hands on each of them, asking, "Do
you believe in God the Father Almighty?" And the one being baptized shall answer, "I
believe." He shall then baptize each of them once, laying his hand upon each of their
heads.
Then he shall ask, "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was
born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and
died, and rose on the third day living from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sat
down at the right hand of the Father, the one coming to judge the living and the dead?"
When each has answered, "I believe," he shall baptize a second time. Then he shall
ask, "Do you believe in the Holy Spirit and the Holy Church and the resurrection of the
flesh?" Then each being baptized shall answer, "I believe." And thus let him baptize the
third time.
Did you read what OZGeorge posted. This is still done today. Why are you insisting it's not?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 11:56:39 AM by Demetrios G. » Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 23, 2007, 12:56:18 PM »

Yes, for the Episcopalians (at least traditionally), and for Roman Catholics since the 1930s or thereabouts. This has been one of the issues in the on-going theological dialogue. People like Lossky and Sherrard saw this -- and the lack of the epiklesis in the Tridentine Mass -- as a sign of the radical downplaying of the role of Holy Spirit in the Western experience.

Edit: Maybe earlier for the Roman Catholics. Hard to tell exactly. Maybe some of our Catholic board members know.
Thanks for that! I had been under the impression that the Rites of Initiation had to be completed before First Communion in the Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches. So, in common practice, at what ages do "cradle" Catholics and Anglicans receive the Sacraments of First Communion and Confirmation?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #33 on: October 23, 2007, 01:17:23 PM »

So, in common practice, at what ages do "cradle" Catholics and Anglicans receive the Sacraments of First Communion and Confirmation?

I think it varies greatly. Where are our Roman rite Catholics?

I know that Roman Catholic canon law allows for variation in practice. I think the "traditional" (i.e. vintage 1950s, 60s, 70s) Roman Catholic practice has been that first communion takes place around seven years of age. Confirmation CAN take place at the same time, but it tends to be later, after the child undergoes a more formal catechism. Lutherans and Anglicans tend to confirm after instruction around age 12.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 01:24:19 PM by pensateomnia » Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #34 on: October 23, 2007, 03:19:39 PM »

http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8420.asp

I see. It looks like the chrism only comes out of Constantinople. I'm guessing it is a protective measure to keep the holy spirit in house. so to speak. Wink
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #35 on: October 23, 2007, 03:28:16 PM »

It comes from various autocephalous Churches who have their own Synods. Thus, for those Christians who fall under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, it comes from the Endemousa Synod.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
orthoglory
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #36 on: October 23, 2007, 08:54:18 PM »

>Did you read what OZGeorge posted. This is still done today. Why are you insisting it's not?<

Because it's not.

If you have video that proves me wrong, that shows that some churches still practice it, then by all means, please help me see my error. Otherwise, I have to "insist" based on what I've seen. What else can I do?

Why would someone claim Chrismation IS Laying on of Hands and another say that Laying on of Hands is still practiced alongside Chrismation? Seems a bit confusing... It's either one or the other. Either Chrismation REPLACED Laying on Hands or Chrismation is a seal AFTER Laying on Hands - as the historical account above showed.
Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #37 on: October 23, 2007, 08:58:03 PM »

It comes from various autocephalous Churches who have their own Synods. Thus, for those Christians who fall under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, it comes from the Endemousa Synod.
You really should read the article that was posted above your post. When the Chrism is made the Patriarch of Constantinople calls for representatives from all the Orthodox Churches in the world. While some of the slavic churches still make their own Chrism they all sent representatives and took back the Chrism made in 2002 in Constantinople. This is an ancient practice since even Rome received Chrism from Constantinople before they fell away from the Church.
Logged

Joseph
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #38 on: October 23, 2007, 09:19:20 PM »

I have read the article. I was simply emphasizing -- contra the joking comment above -- that several Churches with their own Synods do in fact consecrate their own Chrism. Strictly speaking, those Churches don't "need" the Chrism they receive from the EP, so the universal ceremony is not a monopoly or protective measure, but one of our voluntary universal ceremonies.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #39 on: October 23, 2007, 09:40:49 PM »

>Did you read what OZGeorge posted. This is still done today. Why are you insisting it's not?<

Because it's not.

If you have video that proves me wrong, that shows that some churches still practice it, then by all means, please help me see my error. Otherwise, I have to "insist" based on what I've seen. What else can I do?

Why would someone claim Chrismation IS Laying on of Hands and another say that Laying on of Hands is still practiced alongside Chrismation? Seems a bit confusing... It's either one or the other. Either Chrismation REPLACED Laying on Hands or Chrismation is a seal AFTER Laying on Hands - as the historical account above showed.

Could you please Identify witch church you belong to? Your making a serious accusation that some Orthodox churches don't practice the laying on of hands. I would like to know witch one. Even children that enter a church on their 40 day blessing have the priest lays his hands on the child while reading a prayer over them.  After confession the priest also lays his hands over the absolved sinner with his stole when he reads the prayer of absolution. Is this any different?
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #40 on: October 24, 2007, 12:00:33 AM »

orthoglory,

Maybe I need to reiterate this question that I asked earlier on this thread:
So, just to examine a different aspect of your inquiry...

Communion on a spoon...
Required fast for several hours before Communion...

To my knowledge, both of these practices differ markedly from the traditions of the Apostles.  Why have we discontinued Apostolic practice in these regards, and should we not return to this practice?

If you insist that we answer your questions re. Chrismation, then I will insist that you answer my questions on other liturgical practices. Wink
Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #41 on: October 24, 2007, 10:36:12 AM »

I don't want to sound so harsh orthoglory. The practice is still done. What changed is that the bishops couldn't be present at every batism so the practice fell to the priests. The bishops were the only ones that could deliver the holy spirit. They are the successors to the apostles. Since they couldn't preform the baptism themselves, the Chrism took their place. The laying of hands is still preformed but the HS is within the chrism.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2007, 10:37:06 AM by Demetrios G. » Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #42 on: October 24, 2007, 11:02:09 AM »

I think it varies greatly. Where are our Roman rite Catholics?


I was raised RC and had my first confession and first Holy Communion in second grade (age 7-8). 

I received the sacrament of Confirmation sometime in junior high school about the age of 13-14.  I remember one girl my age who I grew up with had already been confirmed and upon hindsight, I believe she was Greek Catholic, but I can't be sure.  That would certainly explain her having already received the sacrament, though.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #43 on: October 24, 2007, 11:21:18 AM »

I remember one girl my age who I grew up with had already been confirmed and upon hindsight, I believe she was Greek Catholic, but I can't be sure.  That would certainly explain her having already received the sacrament, though.
Do Greek Catholics Chrisimate immediately after infant baptism?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,481


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #44 on: October 24, 2007, 11:42:05 AM »

Do Greek Catholics Chrisimate immediately after infant baptism?

Yes, they do, generally speaking.  From what I understand (and I could be wrong and I'm sure Deacon Lance will point it out) it wasn't common practice to do so until the past 25 years or so, at least in the more Latinized churches.  I've been to a few baptisms in my short 6 years living as a Greek Catholic and all of those children have been chrismated immediately after baptism.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,962


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #45 on: October 24, 2007, 07:05:03 PM »

For Latin Catholics First Communion is done at age 7/second grade.  Confirmation varies.  Some diocese do it at the time of First Communion, others around 12, others wait until high school.  It was St. Pius X who allowed First Communion to be given before Confirmation which at that time was around 12/13.  Of note, it is common in some Latin American countries to confirm at baptism and this may be a carry over of the Mozarabic Rite which did so.

Ea Semper (1907) forbade Greek Catholic priests from chrismating, reseving it to the bishop, but of all the Latinizations that were ever attempted to be foisted upon Greek Catholics this one was, to my knowledge, universally ignored and was certainly a dead letter after the creation of the Exarchates in 1924. 

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
stewie
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 49


« Reply #46 on: April 17, 2008, 10:04:57 AM »

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but I thought it better than starting a new one.  My wife and I were wondering about this topic as we are planning the baptism of our daugher.

Now I'm from an Antiochian background and she from a Greek.  At the various baptisms we have attended, she was suprised that we don't have the godparents slather the child in oil after "the seal of the gift of the holy spirit".  I've never paid much attention to this, but apparently this is a big deal to the Greeks! 

Now my question is - is this a cultural thing?  I'm trying to satisfy her that it doesn't matter which church we go to for the baptism (we're members at both) but this seems to be a very important issue to her.  Of course, we can always ask our priest to allow it for the ceremony, but I was wondering what the origins of the practice were, and whether it is widely practiced among different jurisdictions.

Thanks.
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #47 on: April 17, 2008, 10:07:46 AM »

Yes it is cultural.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Tags: Chrismation 
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 0.137 seconds with 75 queries.