Topic: Conversion and get all new sacraments?

[Dave in McKinney]

If one converts to orthodoxy from Catholicism then I understand they will need new sacraments -- marriage, eucharist, etc?
What is the purpose? Do the Orthodox claim that God wasn't present in the previous sacraments?

Please excuse me if I sound like I am trying to start an argument or be polemical... I am earnestly questioning

[Cymbyz]

It greatly depends on the jurisdiction into which you're received.  The GOA, which I know best, receives Roman Catholics by simple acknowledgement, since it regards Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid and portable.  Other jurisdictions may not be so liberal.

[Shlomlokh]

It greatly depends on the jurisdiction into which you're received.  The GOA, which I know best, receives Roman Catholics by simple acknowledgement, since it regards Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid and portable.  Other jurisdictions may not be so liberal.

What do you mean by "simple acknowledgement"? I've known many GOA parishes to chrismate at the very least and even baptize former Roman Catholics. If what you say is true, it makes me even more wary of the GOA. Are you sure you aren't thinking of "Extreme Economia?"

To the OP:
My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized. St. Paul writes in his letter to the Ephesians that there is "One Lord, One Faith and One Baptism." If it's a different faith, then it's a different baptism. I believe that the Orthodox Church is the true Church of Christ, so I would also be inclined to believe that there is only one baptism and it is in the Orthodox Church.

Having said that, I do not believe that God would leave someone graceless if they did not know any better or were baptized as an infant into a heterodox community. God can use His grace wherever He wills. I have heard of priests performing an Orthodox crowning service for recent converts that came in as married from a heterodox faith, but they should not be viewed as living in fornication beforehand.

I hope that helps.

In Christ,
Andrew

[Thankful]

My husband and I (both Protestants for many years) were baptized, christmated and had our marriage blessed (a crowning ceremony) all in one day.  Yes, our priest says the same as above -- there's one baptism and one church; if the baptism wasn't in the one church, it wasn't a true baptism.  He baptizes all converts, and likewise blesses their marriage with a crowning ceremony.  But no, he didn't say we had been living in fornication prior to this.  

[samkim]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

[Shlomlokh]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

I don't follow. Please note that I said "strongly urges," not demands.

In Christ,
Andrew

[Alveus Lacuna]

It greatly depends on the jurisdiction into which you're received.  The GOA, which I know best, receives Roman Catholics by simple acknowledgement, since it regards Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid and portable.  Other jurisdictions may not be so liberal.

Are you serious?!?! The Greek Church in America really acknowledges Roman Catholic their mysteries outside of the Church? I think you must misunderstand your own jurisdiction's position on the matter, and if you priest is indeed doing this, I would talk to him about it, and if he confirms what you say and sees no error, then report him to the bishop.

[deusveritasest]

Do the Orthodox claim that God wasn't present in the previous sacraments?

Generally it is understood that those rites were without sanctifying grace and thus not efficacious.

[deusveritasest]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

What about Donatism? Saint Cyprian was anti-Donatist and recognized that there is no true Baptism outside the Church.

[samkim]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

What about Donatism? Saint Cyprian was anti-Donatist and recognized that there is no true Baptism outside the Church.

You seem knowledgeable. If it's not too much of a tangent, can you explain the holy father's position?

[Alpo]

It greatly depends on the jurisdiction into which you're received.  The GOA, which I know best, receives Roman Catholics by simple acknowledgement, since it regards Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid and portable.  Other jurisdictions may not be so liberal.

Are you serious?!?! The Greek Church in America really acknowledges Roman Catholic their mysteries outside of the Church?

Being a member of a different local church I don't know much about the issue but here's what one of their diocesan newsletter is saying:

For the record, the Eparchial Synod of Bishops of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, with the concurrence of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, has determined to recognize by extreme Oikonomia the heterodox Baptisms normatively performed according to the prescribed form in the following denominations and churches: (a.) Anglican Catholic (b.) Anglican Communion (Church of England, Episcopal, etc.) (c.) Assembly of God (d.) Baptist (e.) Church of the Brethren (f.) Lutheran (g.) Methodist (h.) Moravians (i.) Non-Chalcedonian and Monophysite Churches (j.) Old Catholic (Polish National Catholic Church, Church of Utrecht, Liberal Catholic Church, etc.) (k.) Presbyterian (l.) Roman Catholic (m.) United Church of Christ.

[Irish Hermit]

For the record, the Eparchial Synod of Bishops of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, with the concurrence of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, has determined to recognize by extreme Oikonomia the heterodox Baptisms normatively performed according to the prescribed form in the following denominations and churches: (a.) Anglican Catholic (b.) Anglican Communion (Church of England, Episcopal, etc.) (c.) Assembly of God (d.) Baptist (e.) Church of the Brethren (f.) Lutheran (g.) Methodist (h.) Moravians (i.) Non-Chalcedonian and Monophysite Churches (j.) Old Catholic (Polish National Catholic Church, Church of Utrecht, Liberal Catholic Church, etc.) (k.) Presbyterian (l.) Roman Catholic (m.) United Church of Christ.

This statement and the meaning of "extreme Oikonomia" was discussed briefly a couple of days ago.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28873.html

[Irish Hermit]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

What about Donatism? Saint Cyprian was anti-Donatist and recognized that there is no true Baptism outside the Church.

You seem knowledgeable. If it's not too much of a tangent, can you explain the holy father's position?

Concerning Baptism.

1.  If a person was baptized IN the Church, and then later went into schism, and then wished to return to the Church,  Saint Cyprian said that he must NOT be baptized.  There is only one baptism and he had already received it.

2.  If a person had never been a member of the Church but had received a baptism outside the Church, then Saint Cyprian said that he MUST be baptized with the Church's baptism if he decided to come into the Church. 

If you are interested, a scholarly Catholic known as "Irish Melkite" has written a brief explanation of this difference regarding baptism between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches.  See Message No.20 at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13357.msg185268.html#msg185268

[Dave in McKinney]

So if the only "real" effective sacraments/mysteries are in the OC then where is the evangelization?  To start with there are 1.5B Catholics... not mention all the protestants looking for something more.  Even the Southern Bapists in my area have gone liberal and folks are looking for mre.  Around here there's anew non-denom church starting up every week.... this is very fertile ground...

When I have visited OC's they sure weren't interested in knowing who the "stranger" was, much less saving my soul...

[Irish Hermit]

So if the only "real" effective sacraments/mysteries are in the OC then where is the evangelization?  

A new missionary church in Mongolia.... bringing Buddhists to Christ.

[Cymbyz]

And let's not forget Africa, where Orthodoxy is growing by leaps and bounds.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

And even in my own town, our parish has grown from a mission of just a few families to having a full-time priest, over 200 members, and an average attendance of about 70 in just the last ten years.

[Father Peter]

What are the backgrounds of your church members?

[rakovsky]

My husband and I (both Protestants for many years) were baptized, christmated and had our marriage blessed (a crowning ceremony) all in one day.  Yes, our priest says the same as above -- there's one baptism and one church; if the baptism wasn't in the one church, it wasn't a true baptism.  He baptizes all converts, and likewise blesses their marriage with a crowning ceremony.  But no, he didn't say we had been living in fornication prior to this.  

Again, it depends on Jurisdiction. In Russia, they don't have rebaptism, just Chrismation. In ROCOR, it's mixed. Seraphim Rose wasn't rebaptized, but he rebaptized others.

[rakovsky]

So if the only "real" effective sacraments/mysteries are in the OC then where is the evangelization?  To start with there are 1.5B Catholics... not mention all the protestants looking for something more.  Even the Southern Bapists in my area have gone liberal and folks are looking for mre.  Around here there's anew non-denom church starting up every week.... this is very fertile ground...

When I have visited OC's they sure weren't interested in knowing who the "stranger" was, much less saving my soul...

Dave, whether or not we have the only real effective sacraments, we should evangelize. However, the Orthodox believed that those who lack sacraments, like Catholics (Joke!), may still be saved. It's up to God and to the person whether or not they want to learn about Christianity. (ok, I am being funny again, but there is some truth to this, from all perspectives).

Meanwhile, I don't think we can just be satisfied that we have the truth, we know everything, and then not do anything, go to work and forget it all.

Regards.

[Rufus]

When I have visited OC's they sure weren't interested in knowing who the "stranger" was, much less saving my soul...

In some American parishes, Greek ones in particular, a lack of missionary impetus is a serious problem. I think the ecumenist tendencies of the Greek Patriarchate contribute sorely to this problem.

It greatly depends on the jurisdiction into which you're received.  The GOA, which I know best, receives Roman Catholics by simple acknowledgement, since it regards Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid and portable.  Other jurisdictions may not be so liberal.

Are you serious?!?! The Greek Church in America really acknowledges Roman Catholic their mysteries outside of the Church?

Being a member of a different local church I don't know much about the issue but here's what one of their diocesan newsletter is saying:

For the record, the Eparchial Synod of Bishops of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, with the concurrence of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, has determined to recognize by extreme Oikonomia the heterodox Baptisms normatively performed according to the prescribed form in the following denominations and churches: (a.) Anglican Catholic (b.) Anglican Communion (Church of England, Episcopal, etc.) (c.) Assembly of God (d.) Baptist (e.) Church of the Brethren (f.) Lutheran (g.) Methodist (h.) Moravians (i.) Non-Chalcedonian and Monophysite Churches (j.) Old Catholic (Polish National Catholic Church, Church of Utrecht, Liberal Catholic Church, etc.) (k.) Presbyterian (l.) Roman Catholic (m.) United Church of Christ.

In my Greek parish we recently admitted some RC's by chrismation. I think this fine. However, I don't see how you can accept the baptisms of groups like Baptists, since they deny the existence of Sacraments in the first place.

[rakovsky]

When I have visited OC's they sure weren't interested in knowing who the "stranger" was, much less saving my soul...

In some American parishes, Greek ones in particular, a lack of missionary impetus is a serious problem. I think the ecumenist tendencies of the Greek Patriarchate contribute sorely to this problem.

It greatly depends on the jurisdiction into which you're received.  The GOA, which I know best, receives Roman Catholics by simple acknowledgement, since it regards Roman Catholic Sacraments as valid and portable.  Other jurisdictions may not be so liberal.

Are you serious?!?! The Greek Church in America really acknowledges Roman Catholic their mysteries outside of the Church?

Being a member of a different local church I don't know much about the issue but here's what one of their diocesan newsletter is saying:

For the record, the Eparchial Synod of Bishops of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, with the concurrence of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, has determined to recognize by extreme Oikonomia the heterodox Baptisms normatively performed according to the prescribed form in the following denominations and churches: (a.) Anglican Catholic (b.) Anglican Communion (Church of England, Episcopal, etc.) (c.) Assembly of God (d.) Baptist (e.) Church of the Brethren (f.) Lutheran (g.) Methodist (h.) Moravians (i.) Non-Chalcedonian and Monophysite Churches (j.) Old Catholic (Polish National Catholic Church, Church of Utrecht, Liberal Catholic Church, etc.) (k.) Presbyterian (l.) Roman Catholic (m.) United Church of Christ.

In my Greek parish we recently admitted some RC's by chrismation. I think this fine. However, I don't see how you can accept the baptisms of groups like Baptists, since they deny the existence of Sacraments in the first place.

Glad I got Lutheran Baptism then. However, they might not call it a sacrament, but I think they believe the Holy Spirit comes on the person then, and they performed it with faith of that in the right formula, I think it should be ok, whether or not they call it sacrament, or have wrong idea of how many sacraments work.

In some American parishes, Greek ones in particular, a lack of missionary impetus is a serious problem. I think the ecumenist tendencies of the Greek Patriarchate contribute sorely to this problem.

On the other hand, you could some places are too insular and nonecumenist, so they never talk to anyone. The problem isn't ecumenism or anti-ecumenism, but failure to spread it.

I think ecumenism is ok, desire to reunite and efforts for that, but assimilation, which is occurring eg in Catholic churches, is a danger. And such assimilations are never made for real ecumenism, because it's not reuniting, it's abandonment.

[samkim]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

What about Donatism? Saint Cyprian was anti-Donatist and recognized that there is no true Baptism outside the Church.

You seem knowledgeable. If it's not too much of a tangent, can you explain the holy father's position?

Concerning Baptism.

1.  If a person was baptized IN the Church, and then later went into schism, and then wished to return to the Church,  Saint Cyprian said that he must NOT be baptized.  There is only one baptism and he had already received it.

2.  If a person had never been a member of the Church but had received a baptism outside the Church, then Saint Cyprian said that he MUST be baptized with the Church's baptism if he decided to come into the Church. 

If you are interested, a scholarly Catholic known as "Irish Melkite" has written a brief explanation of this difference regarding baptism between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches.  See Message No.20 at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13357.msg185268.html#msg185268

Again, if it's not too off topic, what exactly were the official rulings at the local councils at Carthage against the Donatists (and other relevant councils), and of what consequence are they to Orthodox ecclesiology?

[CRCulver]

A new missionary church in Mongolia.... bringing Buddhists to Christ.

Please link to some documentation that this is a missionary church. It may well be meant mainly for Russians living in Mongolia. At least in Central Asia, the Russian Orthodox Church has no interest in bringing the secular or Muslim locals to Christ, and as the Russian population of the 'Stans disappears, so do the Orthodox parishes that were once there.

[ialmisry]

A new missionary church in Mongolia.... bringing Buddhists to Christ.

Please link to some documentation that this is a missionary church. It may well be meant mainly for Russians living in Mongolia. At least in Central Asia, the Russian Orthodox Church has no interest in bringing the secular or Muslim locals to Christ, and as the Russian population of the 'Stans disappears, so do the Orthodox parishes that were once there.

Russian Orthodoxy in Asia today
From 18 to 23 December 2009 there were celebrations dedicated to the tenth anniversary of the Orthodox Church in Thailand, which was headed by Archbishop Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Volokolamsk. Rectors of many parishes of the Moscow Patriarchate in Asia came for this holiday: from Mongolia, China, Singapore and Indonesia. They were all very glad to have this opportunity to congregate together, share experiences, discuss pressing issues, because their parishes are living in similar conditions, and have essentially the same problems and challenges. Such a meeting has been so useful that there were suggestions that Asian parishes would sometime in the future form, as a minimum a separate deanery, to be able to coordinate joint efforts to solve all problems facing them.

Addressing the gathering, Archbishop Hilarion, said: "Your service is of particular significance for our Church. This is truly a missionary and selfless ministry, which takes place in difficult conditions - not only climatic, but also psychological and spiritual. You live in conditions as closely resembling those in which the apostles lived and served. This imposes a special responsibility on you, but at the same time requires special internal strength. Not every priest is able to endure those conditions in which you find yourself?

I managed to talk with the participants of the meeting. Each of the priests serving in these Asian parishes, I asked the same four questions. The responses provide a fairly good impression of the situation of the Russian Orthodox Church in Asia, particularly the Orthodox life and pastoral ministry in this region, as well as the prospects of the mission.

– Please tell us about your parish.
Priest Alexis Trubach, rector of Holy Trinity parish in Ulan Bator (Mongolia): Our parish was founded in the XIX century, with Russia's consulate. In 1872 the church was consecrated, and unfortunately, was closed in 1921, after the horrible killing of the last abbot by white Baron Ungern von Sternberg. Since 1927 the temple was used for various household needs. Since 1996, priests started coming in Ulan Bator, and in 1998 the parish was given the land and two-storey building of the former Russia's trade mission in Mongolia for their use, which was before vacant. This, incidentally, is not so far from the old temple, and it survived, there is now an internet cafe, but if you go inside, it is easy to recognize the features of the old temple. Initially, we converted part of the upper floors given to us in building into the church, where I started the ministry, but later we managed to build a separate large Orthodox church, the consecration of which took place in 2009. And this is the first time in the history of Mongolia, as even the pre-revolutionary church was connected with the building of the consulate, and the last abbot, Father Theodore Permyakov, wrote that the whole community wanted and collected funds for the construction of a separate church. We can say we carried out the aspirations of so many Orthodox Christians, who lived in Mongolia. We have now about 60 people attending Sunday worship and during the Nativity and Pascha we have about 300. The parish mainly consists of Russian, but there are Orthodox Mongols, and Serbs, Bulgarians, and Americans. Of course, in the future basis for the parish should be local residents - the Mongols and the Russian, who were born here. We try to create a community, which could be attended by all. Therefore, among the main activities are missionary. We have translated a large part of the service into the Mongolian language, and some services are conducted in it; sermon is delivered in two languages. 25 Mongols have already converted to the Orthodoxy, many of whom actively attend church and participate in parish life. The choir consists entirely of local residents. Also, we are publishing: print newspapers, brochures, we are translating, and also conducting a Sunday school for children and adults....

– What are the particulars of spiritual life of Orthodox Christians in Asia, and especially the pastoral ministry in a foreign and foreign-language environment?
Priest Alexy Trubach (Mongolia): Of course, the main problem is how the newly converted Christians can be Orthodox, while remaining members of the society in which they grew up and still are part of. The peculiarity of Mongolia - a very strong family and kinship ties, and here it is very important to have recognition of relatives. Therefore the main challenge for us — is not so much the conversion of individuals, but entire families. And now we have two families - one already baptized, the other going thru— catechization and is about to be worthy of baptism. Need education work not only among those who already want to convert, but also among their relatives, although sometimes it is difficult to do. This imposes specific nature on pastoral activities, as well as the need to learn the local language and local culture. A priest who serves in such a country has to communicate a lot with local people, and not only with the Orthodox. Engage in social work, contact with the media, and do much more in order to create good information field around the parish. This helps the converts not to feel alienated in the surrounding society.

– Share your impressions about acquaintance with the Orthodox community in Thailand.
Priest Alexis Trubach (Mongolia): Of course, a very good impression. Indeed, here one feels a mystical connection, which exists in the Universal Orthodox Church. One wonders how often ideas and their execution coincide and, in many ways I felt a similarity of our Mongolian community with Thai Orthodox community. Of course, the Thai community is more successful in the preaching of Orthodoxy, and there already exists a priest from the local community, and we are only preparing two local boys to enter the seminary - God willing, this will happen next year. Moreover, the interesting coincidence of names: here the first Thai priest in baptism was given the name of Daniel, and we have an Altar server, which we hope to send to the seminary, so that he will became the first Mongolian priest, was also baptized with the name of Daniel. Apparently, this is no accident, for God has no accidents. And we'll follow in the footsteps of Thai parish, and hopefully, will bring this Orthodox Mongol to ordination and further service in the parish...
– What is the future of Orthodoxy in Asia?
Priest Alexis Trubach (Mongolia): I think, of course, there are prospects, and large prospects. As in Mongolia, and Thailand there are many opportunities not used, but with time they should be used. The main issues that stand on that road are the same as were in the XIX century - the problem of funding the mission and the problem of getting staff missionaries from Russia. These problems are open and required solutions. As for the conversion of Asians to Orthodoxy ... we have before our eyes a magnificent example of Indonesia. Here, in Bangkok, I met with Father Ioasaph, who created a magnificent parish in a rather complicated non-Christian environment, he has already more than fifty members, and he is going to continue to develop it. And I think our meeting in Bangkok was important precisely for this opportunity to learn the missionary experience of each other. Indonesian congregations are encouraging optimism in the future development of Orthodoxy in Asia. Their experience is valuable to all of us. I think maybe we're not going to convert people as fast, as Protestants, but this process, which is already in progress will continue. . 

http://www.orthodox.cn/news/20100112interview_en.htm

[Rufus]

In my Greek parish we recently admitted some RC's by chrismation. I think this fine. However, I don't see how you can accept the baptisms of groups like Baptists, since they deny the existence of Sacraments in the first place.

Glad I got Lutheran Baptism then. However, they might not call it a sacrament, but I think they believe the Holy Spirit comes on the person then, and they performed it with faith of that in the right formula, I think it should be ok, whether or not they call it sacrament, or have wrong idea of how many sacraments work.

Actually, Baptists ironically do not believe in baptismal regeneration. They believe that the Holy Spirit is received at the moment when one believes. The only reason they perform baptism is as a formality--as a public declaration of faith commanded by the Lord. I actually have several friends in the Baptist community, and the concept that something actually happens when you are baptized really wigs them out.

If they do not believe in actual baptism, then it is absurd to accept their baptisms as valid. At the very least a blessing should be given by the Church sanctifying their previous baptism, as was done with the Arians.

In some American parishes, Greek ones in particular, a lack of missionary impetus is a serious problem. I think the ecumenist tendencies of the Greek Patriarchate contribute sorely to this problem.

On the other hand, you could some places are too insular and nonecumenist, so they never talk to anyone. The problem isn't ecumenism or anti-ecumenism, but failure to spread it.

I think ecumenism is ok, desire to reunite and efforts for that, but assimilation, which is occurring eg in Catholic churches, is a danger. And such assimilations are never made for real ecumenism, because it's not reuniting, it's abandonment.

I agree about the radically anti-ecumenist groups within the Church sometimes being an impediment to evangelism. By “ecumenism,” I meant collapsing differences for the sake of re-accepting non-Orthodox groups back into communion.

[rakovsky]

In my Greek parish we recently admitted some RC's by chrismation. I think this fine. However, I don't see how you can accept the baptisms of groups like Baptists, since they deny the existence of Sacraments in the first place.

Glad I got Lutheran Baptism then. However, they might not call it a sacrament, but I think they believe the Holy Spirit comes on the person then, and they performed it with faith of that in the right formula, I think it should be ok, whether or not they call it sacrament, or have wrong idea of how many sacraments work.

Actually, Baptists ironically do not believe in baptismal regeneration. They believe that the Holy Spirit is received at the moment when one believes. The only reason they perform baptism is as a formality--as a public declaration of faith commanded by the Lord. I actually have several friends in the Baptist community, and the concept that something actually happens when you are baptized really wigs them out.

If they do not believe in actual baptism, then it is absurd to accept their baptisms as valid. At the very least a blessing should be given by the Church sanctifying their previous baptism, as was done with the Arians.

Makes sense. However, it seems like their baptism would be treated the same as other Calvinists. I mean they are pretty much the same as Calvinism, right? And Orthodox church should have had experience with Calvinists a long time ago. The Polish princes who ruled Bela-russia (Belarus), Lithuania, and Poland were Calvinist. I think this was in the 17 or 18th centuries. A historical oddity for a monolithic Slavic Catholic country far from the Calvinists of Northwest Germany, but true.

[Cymbyz]

Calvinist theology, congregationalist polity.

[Rufus]

Calvinist theology, congregationalist polity.

Yeah, and a lot of Arminianism, too, which, IMO, is easier to work with (Calvinism teaches people to be more stubborn).

[ialmisry]

In my Greek parish we recently admitted some RC's by chrismation. I think this fine. However, I don't see how you can accept the baptisms of groups like Baptists, since they deny the existence of Sacraments in the first place.

Glad I got Lutheran Baptism then. However, they might not call it a sacrament, but I think they believe the Holy Spirit comes on the person then, and they performed it with faith of that in the right formula, I think it should be ok, whether or not they call it sacrament, or have wrong idea of how many sacraments work.

Actually, Baptists ironically do not believe in baptismal regeneration. They believe that the Holy Spirit is received at the moment when one believes. The only reason they perform baptism is as a formality--as a public declaration of faith commanded by the Lord. I actually have several friends in the Baptist community, and the concept that something actually happens when you are baptized really wigs them out.

If they do not believe in actual baptism, then it is absurd to accept their baptisms as valid. At the very least a blessing should be given by the Church sanctifying their previous baptism, as was done with the Arians.

Makes sense. However, it seems like their baptism would be treated the same as other Calvinists. I mean they are pretty much the same as Calvinism, right? And Orthodox church should have had experience with Calvinists a long time ago. The Polish princes who ruled Bela-russia (Belarus), Lithuania, and Poland were Calvinist. I think this was in the 17 or 18th centuries. A historical oddity for a monolithic Slavic Catholic country far from the Calvinists of Northwest Germany, but true.

It gets odder in Romania: Transylvania's Orthodox Church for a period had an official Calvinist Superintendent (predating Peter's Ober-Procurator) and catechism (which everyone ignored), because the Hungarian Prince was a Calvinist and wanted to depend on the Orthodox's number versus the Vatican's favorite in Vienna, while the Orthodox wanted cover from Florence and Brest-Lvov. A result was the transition from Slavonic to Romanian in the DL.
Calvinism on the frontier, 1600-1660: international Calvinism and the ... By Graeme Murdock
http://books.google.com/books?id=UESVpu-do8sC&pg=PA136&dq=Orthodox+Transylvania+Calvinist+catechism&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Orthodox%20Transylvania%20Calvinist%20catechism&f=false

[samkim]

My priest (and Bishop, too) strongly urges converts to be baptized.

What about Donatism? I'm genuinely curious.

What about Donatism? Saint Cyprian was anti-Donatist and recognized that there is no true Baptism outside the Church.

Wiki said that the Donatists cited the authority of St. Cuprian...?

[rakovsky]

In my Greek parish we recently admitted some RC's by chrismation. I think this fine. However, I don't see how you can accept the baptisms of groups like Baptists, since they deny the existence of Sacraments in the first place.

Glad I got Lutheran Baptism then. However, they might not call it a sacrament, but I think they believe the Holy Spirit comes on the person then, and they performed it with faith of that in the right formula, I think it should be ok, whether or not they call it sacrament, or have wrong idea of how many sacraments work.

Actually, Baptists ironically do not believe in baptismal regeneration. They believe that the Holy Spirit is received at the moment when one believes. The only reason they perform baptism is as a formality--as a public declaration of faith commanded by the Lord. I actually have several friends in the Baptist community, and the concept that something actually happens when you are baptized really wigs them out.

If they do not believe in actual baptism, then it is absurd to accept their baptisms as valid. At the very least a blessing should be given by the Church sanctifying their previous baptism, as was done with the Arians.

Makes sense. However, it seems like their baptism would be treated the same as other Calvinists. I mean they are pretty much the same as Calvinism, right? And Orthodox church should have had experience with Calvinists a long time ago. The Polish princes who ruled Bela-russia (Belarus), Lithuania, and Poland were Calvinist. I think this was in the 17 or 18th centuries. A historical oddity for a monolithic Slavic Catholic country far from the Calvinists of Northwest Germany, but true.

It gets odder in Romania: Transylvania's Orthodox Church for a period had an official Calvinist Superintendent (predating Peter's Ober-Procurator) and catechism (which everyone ignored), because the Hungarian Prince was a Calvinist and wanted to depend on the Orthodox's number versus the Vatican's favorite in Vienna, while the Orthodox wanted cover from Florence and Brest-Lvov. A result was the transition from Slavonic to Romanian in the DL.
Calvinism on the frontier, 1600-1660: international Calvinism and the ... By Graeme Murdock
http://books.google.com/books?id=UESVpu-do8sC&pg=PA136&dq=Orthodox+Transylvania+Calvinist+catechism&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Orthodox%20Transylvania%20Calvinist%20catechism&f=false

?? The church in Heresy?