OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 26, 2014, 03:19:56 PM *
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 3 4 5 6 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Can and should I be baptized again?  (Read 10192 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #45 on: August 23, 2010, 07:10:49 PM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.


OK! Pouring or sprinkling I always heard it was condemned,,It had to be Immersion three times.... Grin
Hope you don't have a grudge anything against me... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #46 on: August 23, 2010, 07:26:51 PM »

Stashko,
AFAIK, the Serbs of Voivodina and Banat (including those in the Romanian Banat) have been routinely baptizing by pouring.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #47 on: August 23, 2010, 07:35:42 PM »

Stashko,
AFAIK, the Serbs of Voivodina and Banat (including those in the Romanian Banat) have been routinely baptizing by pouring.
Thanks for the info....
It is confusing,Holy Orthodoxy Has to get togeather and decide ,on either pouring ,sprinkling,or immersion,
and stick with it ,and no excuses to deviate from it....I like the music from romunska banat  and srbska banat, very good ... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2010, 08:48:41 PM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.


OK! Pouring or sprinkling I always heard it was condemned,,It had to be Immersion three times.... Grin
Hope you don't have a grudge anything against me... Grin

Well, I think it's true that triple immersion is the canonical norm which is expected when it is possible. However, the Didache does provide for pouring as acceptable when immersion is not possible. I actually received something sort of in between the two. Sprinkling, however, I do not think has ever been provided for.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2010, 10:53:02 PM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.  It should be noted that the trough is purchased new for the purpose of being used as a baptismal font.  In other words, nobody's getting the horses' water trough from a nearby pasture and rolling it into the church, or anything like that.  This is a clean and economical way to accomplish immersion baptism of adults, and is no less holy than one performed in a church that can afford a purpose-built adult-sized font.

If you still have a problem with it, well, I'm sad that anyone would put the fancy appearance of a font over the ability to perform the optimal practice of immersion.  Some parishes have to improvise in order to provide even a baby-sized font.

Seriously though, I would assume that perhaps pouring is necessary in more arid regions, or in the winter when local bodies of water are frozen, but the idea that a parish has to pour out of necessity because they "only have a font for babies" seems a bit ridiculous to me.

I guess it's a good thing you're not in a position to make decisions about baptisms, then, since a real problem seems "ridiculous" to you.  Every parish should have an adult font; I've seen some with large above-ground fonts, and a few with walk-in fonts.  But not every parish has one (especially since 95%+ of baptisms are performed on children), so the issue of "what to do with an adult baptism" becomes a real and serious question, not one to be confronted with dirty streams and horse troughs.

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using a horse trough.  Functionally, it's just a big tub that is just as holy and good for its purpose as any fancy, expensive pool that most parishes cannot afford to build.  

I was received into the church through Holy Baptism, which took place in a tub that was originally sold as a horse trough, but never used as such, as it was purchased to be used as a baptismal font.  That does NOT make my baptism any less holy or reverent than one that would have taken place in whatever font you would have approved of for my baptism.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 10:57:18 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,198


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #50 on: August 24, 2010, 01:03:15 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.
Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 01:06:32 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #51 on: August 24, 2010, 01:14:38 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,198


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #52 on: August 24, 2010, 01:25:48 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #53 on: August 24, 2010, 01:33:31 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.

Post a link or a picture Please....  It must be online.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,198


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #54 on: August 24, 2010, 01:46:44 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.

Post a link or a picture Please....  It must be online.... Grin
No.  I'm not going to post a picture to satisfy your judgmental demands.  I owe you no explanation of anything.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #55 on: August 24, 2010, 01:57:45 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.

Post a link or a picture Please....  It must be online.... Grin
No.  I'm not going to post a picture to satisfy your judgmental demands.  I owe you no explanation of anything.

 Your Judging Me thinking I'm Judging which I'm not , I Said It sounds Like It....
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #56 on: August 24, 2010, 02:10:25 AM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.


OK! Pouring or sprinkling I always heard it was condemned,,It had to be Immersion three times.... Grin
Hope you don't have a grudge anything against me... Grin

Well, I think it's true that triple immersion is the canonical norm which is expected when it is possible. However, the Didache does provide for pouring as acceptable when immersion is not possible. I actually received something sort of in between the two. Sprinkling, however, I do not think has ever been provided for.
A question...
Your really up on this religous stuff It's Amazing ...Can A Orthodox Lay Christian Baptize anyone ,Not  just  in a emergency Like Inpending death, But if someone requests it and will the church recognize it....
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #57 on: August 24, 2010, 09:33:29 AM »

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this. 

Glory to God for all things!

It should be noted that the trough is purchased new for the purpose of being used as a baptismal font.  In other words, nobody's getting the horses' water trough from a nearby pasture and rolling it into the church, or anything like that. 

That's a relief... jk.  I had assumed that this was the case in 100% of the cases.

This is a clean and economical way to accomplish immersion baptism of adults, and is no less holy than one performed in a church that can afford a purpose-built adult-sized font.

I would never think otherwise, and have not stated or implied anything to the contrary.

If you still have a problem with it, well, I'm sad that anyone would put the fancy appearance of a font over the ability to perform the optimal practice of immersion. 

Caricature much?  It has nothing to do with the appearance of the font, thank you very much; you can find my objections earlier in the thread.

Some parishes have to improvise in order to provide even a baby-sized font.

Glory to God that everyone who wishes to be Baptized is able to be Baptized!

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using a horse trough.  Functionally, it's just a big tub that is just as holy and good for its purpose as any fancy, expensive pool that most parishes cannot afford to build. 

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using Hawaiian bread as Prosforon; however, there are intent and form that are not congruent between the Hawaiian bread and Prosforon.  However, if a parish needs to use Hawaiian bread as Prosforon because people were not able or willing to make/bring it, then Glory to God - it will still become the Body of Christ.

I was received into the church through Holy Baptism, which took place in a tub that was originally sold as a horse trough, but never used as such, as it was purchased to be used as a baptismal font.  That does NOT make my baptism any less holy or reverent than one that would have taken place in whatever font you would have approved of for my baptism.

I have never stated or implied that your, or anyone else's, baptism was less valid, holy, or reverent than one performed in any sort of purpose-built baptismal font.  Take your straw man elsewhere.  In fact, I seem to recall your having to clarify a similar position elsewhere, so I figure you can get the gist of my argument and its real implications:

I didn't say priests in collars couldn't be holy.  I just really dislike that kind of clothing, both for itself and for the reasons it's worn by Orthodox priests.  I'd much rather see a priest in street clothes than a collar.

People seem to be taking this far too personally - if you were baptized in a trough, pool, river, lake, ocean, font, fountain, sewer, etc, you've still been baptized, receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit, entrance into the Body of Christ, washing of regeneration, and participation in His Crucifixion and Resurrection.  My personal opinion that a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism does not indicate a belief that anyone baptized in a horse trough has somehow received a less "holy or reverent" baptism. 
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 09:36:26 AM by Fr. George » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
NorthernPines
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 934



« Reply #58 on: August 24, 2010, 10:19:14 AM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.


Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #59 on: August 24, 2010, 10:59:03 AM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.




No ! Ididn't say that ,it's just the more ornate they are, the better i like them ,thats all.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,198


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2010, 02:05:08 PM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.




No ! Ididn't say that ,it's just the more ornate they are, the better i like them ,thats all.... Grin
But, speaking as a member of the parish whose temple you just disparaged, I can tell you that you spoke of something you know nothing about.  You cannot possibly be able to say, "have to stay away from that one," based on what little I said to describe my church.  For one, "simply" does NOT mean "bare bones"--that's a connection you made from reading my post, but I did not say that.  (Bare bones is also an adjective I would never use to describe my church.)  And for two, I really didn't say anything more about my church to give anyone any kind of idea what it DOES look like.  Rather than see you post disparaging comments about my church based on the extremely limited description I provided, I invite you to come and see.  Come and see for yourself what our church really looks like.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 02:05:29 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2010, 03:11:10 PM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.




No ! Ididn't say that ,it's just the more ornate they are, the better i like them ,thats all.... Grin
But, speaking as a member of the parish whose temple you just disparaged, I can tell you that you spoke of something you know nothing about.  You cannot possibly be able to say, "have to stay away from that one," based on what little I said to describe my church.  For one, "simply" does NOT mean "bare bones"--that's a connection you made from reading my post, but I did not say that.  (Bare bones is also an adjective I would never use to describe my church.)  And for two, I really didn't say anything more about my church to give anyone any kind of idea what it DOES look like.  Rather than see you post disparaging comments about my church based on the extremely limited description I provided, I invite you to come and see.  Come and see for yourself what our church really looks like.

Hey ! I remember if im right,You Posted Something in another posting about your Parish /church ,ill have to look up your older posts and see for myself what it looks like, where it is ,and maybe pay a visit there when i get some free time... Grin
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 03:39:02 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2010, 04:02:31 PM »

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.  

Glory to God for all things!

It should be noted that the trough is purchased new for the purpose of being used as a baptismal font.  In other words, nobody's getting the horses' water trough from a nearby pasture and rolling it into the church, or anything like that.  

That's a relief... jk.  I had assumed that this was the case in 100% of the cases.

This is a clean and economical way to accomplish immersion baptism of adults, and is no less holy than one performed in a church that can afford a purpose-built adult-sized font.

I would never think otherwise, and have not stated or implied anything to the contrary.

If you still have a problem with it, well, I'm sad that anyone would put the fancy appearance of a font over the ability to perform the optimal practice of immersion.  

Caricature much?  It has nothing to do with the appearance of the font, thank you very much; you can find my objections earlier in the thread.

Some parishes have to improvise in order to provide even a baby-sized font.

Glory to God that everyone who wishes to be Baptized is able to be Baptized!

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using a horse trough.  Functionally, it's just a big tub that is just as holy and good for its purpose as any fancy, expensive pool that most parishes cannot afford to build.  

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using Hawaiian bread as Prosforon; however, there are intent and form that are not congruent between the Hawaiian bread and Prosforon.  However, if a parish needs to use Hawaiian bread as Prosforon because people were not able or willing to make/bring it, then Glory to God - it will still become the Body of Christ.

There is simply no equating a horse trough font with a "dirty stream" like you did.  This kind of object is manufactured and sold because it's useful for providing water to livestock, but the bottom line is that IT'S JUST A BIG TUB.  Why would it be any different from any other vessel that holds 150 gallons of water?

I was received into the church through Holy Baptism, which took place in a tub that was originally sold as a horse trough, but never used as such, as it was purchased to be used as a baptismal font.  That does NOT make my baptism any less holy or reverent than one that would have taken place in whatever font you would have approved of for my baptism.

I have never stated or implied that your, or anyone else's, baptism was less valid, holy, or reverent than one performed in any sort of purpose-built baptismal font.  Take your straw man elsewhere.  In fact, I seem to recall your having to clarify a similar position elsewhere, so I figure you can get the gist of my argument and its real implications:

I didn't say priests in collars couldn't be holy.  I just really dislike that kind of clothing, both for itself and for the reasons it's worn by Orthodox priests.  I'd much rather see a priest in street clothes than a collar.

People seem to be taking this far too personally - if you were baptized in a trough, pool, river, lake, ocean, font, fountain, sewer, etc, you've still been baptized, receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit, entrance into the Body of Christ, washing of regeneration, and participation in His Crucifixion and Resurrection.  My personal opinion that a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism does not indicate a belief that anyone baptized in a horse trough has somehow received a less "holy or reverent" baptism.  

Holy straw men, Batman!  That is a completely different situation.  My comments about clergy dress are about priests who deliberately choose to dress up as heterodox clergy.  The situations would *only* be comparable if parishes were having their adult-size baptismal fonts filled in with cement, and using horse troughs instead.  Every priest who can get his hands on a collar and suit has the means to get a cassock.  Not every parish has the means to build a baptistery.  

And yes, I do think you imply some baptisms are holier than others, despite your protests to the contrary, when you say things like "a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism".  A purpose-built adult-size font is either a tank above ground, or a hole in the ground.  The only thing making it holier than any other tank or hole is the fact that it's used for baptisms.  Why should a big tub used for baptisms be any different?
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 04:03:08 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #63 on: August 24, 2010, 11:23:07 PM »

There is simply no equating a horse trough font with a "dirty stream" like you did.  This kind of object is manufactured and sold because it's useful for providing water to livestock, but the bottom line is that IT'S JUST A BIG TUB.  Why would it be any different from any other vessel that holds 150 gallons of water?

I've given my reasons before.  You don't like them, fine - you don't have to.  But repeating your question over and over is not going to elicit a different response from me.

Holy straw men, Batman!  That is a completely different situation.  My comments about clergy dress are about priests who deliberately choose to dress up as heterodox clergy.  The situations would *only* be comparable if parishes were having their adult-size baptismal fonts filled in with cement, and using horse troughs instead.  Every priest who can get his hands on a collar and suit has the means to get a cassock.  Not every parish has the means to build a baptistery. 

I didn't equate the situations to which our comments were directed, only the situations that arose from our comments.  ISTM you are unwilling or unable to continue in a rational discussion on this subject.

And yes, I do think you imply some baptisms are holier than others, despite your protests to the contrary, when you say things like "a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism".

Even though I have stated both that I did not imply that some are holier, and have gone out of my way explicitly to state that none are holier than others, you choose to believe that I said something different than what was plainly stated.  Why should I believe that you are willing or able to continue a rational discussion on the subject matter when you choose to interpret my intent differently than how I explicitly explained it?  Do you think I am being facetious when I say "Glory to God for all things?"  Do you think I am toying with you when I state that those baptized in a "trough, pool, river, lake, ocean, font, fountain, sewer, etc," have received the same baptism?  God forbid!  If I were, I would be called to account for it at the Second Coming, and I would have no answer to give.  You could have been baptized in a disease-infested mud hole - but if you have been baptized, then your baptism is equal in holiness, reverence, grace, etc. to someone baptized in the most opulent font at the Cathedral in Moscow.  If you continue to choose to state that I somehow imply otherwise, fine, but I'm not going to continue attempting a rational dialogue with you here if you choose to do so contrary to the explicitly stated intent.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #64 on: August 25, 2010, 09:47:26 PM »

There is simply no equating a horse trough font with a "dirty stream" like you did.  This kind of object is manufactured and sold because it's useful for providing water to livestock, but the bottom line is that IT'S JUST A BIG TUB.  Why would it be any different from any other vessel that holds 150 gallons of water?

I've given my reasons before.  You don't like them, fine - you don't have to.  But repeating your question over and over is not going to elicit a different response from me.

You called it disgusting and distasteful to use an "animal feeding device".  

I pointed out that a "horse trough" used as a baptismal font is not, in fact, an animal feeding device at all.

You respond by stating that I am

unwilling or unable to continue in a rational discussion on this subject.

I therefore respond by stating my perplexity that you did not respond to the statement that the object in question is not, in fact, an "animal feeding device", but in fact a big tub that may have been sold with that purpose in mind but has never been used as such, and instead chose to accuse me of not being able to respond rationally to you.

Here's what I'm getting out of all this:
You:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Me:  "It's not an animal feeding device."
You:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."

And yes, I do think you imply some baptisms are holier than others, despite your protests to the contrary, when you say things like "a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism".

Even though I have stated both that I did not imply that some are holier, and have gone out of my way explicitly to state that none are holier than others, you choose to believe that I said something different than what was plainly stated.  Why should I believe that you are willing or able to continue a rational discussion on the subject matter when you choose to interpret my intent differently than how I explicitly explained it?

It is not an uncommon condition to have a way of thinking that leads to a conclusion that is different from what one is willing to explicitly state.  

You may resist thinking that some baptisms are holier than others because you do think it's wrong to think such things, but it is quite possible to look at how you have explained your resistance to horse troughs (or if you prefer, "large tubs that happen to be sold with livestock hydration in mind but are no more specific to that purpose than any other large tub that holds liquid") and reach a different conclusion.

I don't doubt your sincerity, but I think there is a discrepancy you're not conscious of, and I think you should work through it instead of casting aspersions upon me.

If you choose to continue to think that a horse trough is invariably an animal feeding device and therefore not proper to be used in church, that's fine.  

In that case, I would like to point out that an animal feeding device was good enough for Baby Jesus to be born in, so I think it's fine for me to be born in, too.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 09:57:41 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2010, 10:23:04 PM »

You called it disgusting and distasteful to use an "animal feeding device". 

I pointed out that a "horse trough" used as a baptismal font is not, in fact, an animal feeding device at all.

You respond by stating that I am

unwilling or unable to continue in a rational discussion on this subject.

I therefore respond by stating my perplexity that you did not respond to the statement that the object in question is not, in fact, an "animal feeding device", but in fact a big tub that may have been sold with that purpose in mind but has never been used as such, and instead chose to accuse me of not being able to respond rationally to you.

Here's what I'm getting out of all this:
You:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Me:  "It's not an animal feeding device."
You:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."

Let's take a somewhat analogous situation (notice the qualifier), shall we?  Yes, it exists in the realm of the hypothetical (IME), but bear with me.

Parishes are supposed to use chalices (designed for the purpose of holding and distributing the gifts) to perform Divine Liturgies.  In case you haven't checked or noticed, Orthodox chalices are expensive.  Any proper drinking device (glass, wine glass, goblet) could theoretically be used if a parish were formed and did not have the means (either financial, or for procurement) to receive the gifts.  Say a parishioner has a goblet, plainly styled, that they are willing to donate for use; it is unused.  Similarly, another parishioner has a very large stein that they are willing to donate; it is also unused.  If I were the priest in the parish, I would say that using a stein for communion is distasteful, and I would rather use the smaller goblet.  My choice of the goblet would likely mean that, in this parish, people receive only a small amount of the Body and Blood, rather than a more sizable amount that could be afforded in the larger stein.

When speaking to a visitor, they explain to me that in their parish, formed under similar circumstances and experiencing a similar chalice-related problem, they chose a stein because they felt that it better fit their purposes.  Their choice of the stein does not make the act (Divine Liturgy) any less holy, reverent, etc. - it's still the Body and Blood of Christ.  My personal opinion that a stein isn't an appropriate vessel for the Blood of Christ does not mean that it is impossible to be used, or that it somehow desecrates the sacrament.  It's the same Body and Blood, period.  Full stop.  Same Liturgy, same Christ, same communion, same Church.

So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays.  If someone decides to use it, then Glory to God for all things.

It is not an uncommon condition to have a way of thinking that leads to a conclusion that is different from what one is willing to explicitly state. 

I am perfectly willing to state my opinion on subjects, even the most uncomfortable ones.  I try my best to be clear as to what my intentions are.  I have been more than clear in my intentions, but you have decided to interpret my statements in a manner differing from my own explicit instructions on how to interpret them.  It is not an uncommon condition to read other people's statements and draw unusual or unreasonable conclusions based on that.

You may resist thinking that some baptisms are holier than others because you do think it's wrong to think such things, but it is quite possible to look at how you have explained your resistance to horse troughs (or if you prefer, "large tubs that happen to be sold with livestock hydration in mind but are no more specific to that purpose than any other large tub that holds liquid") and reach a different conclusion.

You could also look at my hands and hear me explain that I hold things with them, and use them to communicate and form personal bonds through touch, and conclude that I use them to kill because they have the potential to be dangerous.  Potential /= (or if you prefer, "does not equal") reality.

I don't doubt your sincerity, but I think there is a discrepancy you're not conscious of, and I think you should work through it instead of casting aspersions upon me.

There is no cognitive (or otherwise) dissonance here, no discrepancy.  I have many thousands of personal faults to work through, but your perception of dissonance between my statements and my stated intent on issues of baptismal fonts is not one of them, since it is an issue that exists only in your view, not in reality.

If you choose to continue to think that a horse trough is invariably an animal feeding device and therefore not proper to be used in church.  That's fine. 

Actually, I don't think all horse troughs are invariably animal feeding devices; I think many are used for animal bathing, long-term storage of liquids, distillation of alcohol, etc.  That doesn't change the fact that it was designed to be used for equine hydration... Wait, why should I repeat my argument again, just because you've found a more creative way of misrepresenting my otherwise clear and explicit statements?

In that case, I would like to point out that an animal feeding device was good enough for Baby Jesus to be born in, so I think it's fine for me to be born in, too.

I'm glad you were born from above through Water and the Spirit in the adult font of your parish - your entry into the Body of Christ is a banner day, regardless of the means, location, etc.  As for your comment on the Lord's birth: There is nothing filthier for an infinite being than the dirtiness of finite existence; one you get past that point, everything else is gravy.  The Lord's being born in a cave and lain in a manger was the least unusual part of the Incarnation-Life-Passion-Crucifixion-Death cycle.  But He represents extreme humility, and I don't, so I will work harder at it. 

Aside: Baby Jesus?  Are we having a Talladega Nights moment here? Wink
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Punch
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,801



« Reply #66 on: August 25, 2010, 10:34:19 PM »


Parishes are supposed to use chalices (designed for the purpose of holding and distributing the gifts) to perform Divine Liturgies.  In case you haven't checked or noticed, Orthodox chalices are expensive.  Any proper drinking device (glass, wine glass, goblet) could theoretically be used if a parish were formed and did not have the means (either financial, or for procurement) to receive the gifts.  Say a parishioner has a goblet, plainly styled, that they are willing to donate for use; it is unused.  Similarly, another parishioner has a very large stein that they are willing to donate; it is also unused.  If I were the priest in the parish, I would say that using a stein for communion is distasteful, and I would rather use the smaller goblet.  My choice of the goblet would likely mean that, in this parish, people receive only a small amount of the Body and Blood, rather than a more sizable amount that could be afforded in the larger stein.

When speaking to a visitor, they explain to me that in their parish, formed under similar circumstances and experiencing a similar chalice-related problem, they chose a stein because they felt that it better fit their purposes.  Their choice of the stein does not make the act (Divine Liturgy) any less holy, reverent, etc. - it's still the Body and Blood of Christ.  My personal opinion that a stein isn't an appropriate vessel for the Blood of Christ does not mean that it is impossible to be used, or that it somehow desecrates the sacrament.  It's the same Body and Blood, period.  Full stop.  Same Liturgy, same Christ, same communion, same Church.



As a German, I find the above most disturbing.  I believe a stein to be the ultimate vessel.  Stein, meaning "rock" brings to mind Peter's Faith, and has a sound of power befitting the miraculous event taking place.  Goblet, on the other hand, sounds . . . well . . . kind of lame.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #67 on: August 25, 2010, 10:58:13 PM »

As a German, I find the above most disturbing.  I believe a stein to be the ultimate vessel.  Stein, meaning "rock" brings to mind Peter's Faith, and has a sound of power befitting the miraculous event taking place.  Goblet, on the other hand, sounds . . . well . . . kind of lame.

LOL.  Thank you for this; it's been a long night, short on levity. 
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Posts: 7,133


"My god is greater."


« Reply #68 on: August 25, 2010, 11:28:57 PM »


So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays. 

Not every parish is awash with Greek money.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #69 on: August 25, 2010, 11:51:29 PM »

So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays. 
Not every parish is awash with Greek money. 

Ahh, thrust a stereotype into the conversation to try and win points.  Old trick, old result - no dice.  I've seen fonts designed by parishioners, crafted with their own hands; no one said anything about having gold, silver, platinum, marble, etc. fonts.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #70 on: August 26, 2010, 12:14:43 AM »

Metropolitan Amphilochios (EP) is determined to baptize the whole country, Catholics included.  He is busy building baptismal troughs everywhere.

Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #71 on: August 26, 2010, 01:01:57 PM »

Metropolitan Amphilochios (EP) is determined to baptize the whole country, Catholics included.  He is busy building baptismal troughs everywhere.

Glory to God!  A few of his spiritual children who are priests here in the U.S. are moving your way (I think, though, ultimately to go to Fiji) to assist him in his quest.

(Btw: If it's built with the purpose of being an adult font, then it's a font, not a trough.  Calling something that was plainly designed for baptism a "trough" seems to be either a joke, or an attempt to stir the pot.)
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #72 on: August 26, 2010, 01:45:47 PM »

Here's what I'm getting out of all this:
You:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Me:  "It's not an animal feeding device."
You:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."

You've missed a few steps...  For the sake of consistency, I'll use your existing lines from above, even if I don't agree fully with the caricature.

Fr. G:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Orual:  "It's not an animal feeding device.  It's a bowl that happens to be used for animal feeding"
Fr. G: "Yes, but it's designed & sold with the purpose of feeding animals."
Orual: "But it's never been used to feed animals.  It's a bowl that was intended for feeding animals, but has only been used for baptisms."
Fr. G: "I don't like it (the trough), but the baptisms are equal anyway."
Orual: "You don't think the baptisms are equal."
Fr. G:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #73 on: August 26, 2010, 02:57:46 PM »

In Syriac, the word for God in the Trisagion is Alloho. I imagine it just means "the God" in Syriac as Al'lah does in Arabic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dlGR94v720
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Posts: 7,133


"My god is greater."


« Reply #74 on: August 26, 2010, 04:44:44 PM »

So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays.  
Not every parish is awash with Greek money.  

Ahh, thrust a stereotype into the conversation to try and win points.  Old trick, old result - no dice.  I've seen fonts designed by parishioners, crafted with their own hands; no one said anything about having gold, silver, platinum, marble, etc. fonts.

Again, parishioners with the time, skill, and resources to do this are not in every parish.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2010, 04:46:22 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #75 on: August 26, 2010, 05:15:03 PM »

Metropolitan Amphilochios (EP) is determined to baptize the whole country, Catholics included.  He is busy building baptismal troughs everywhere.

Glory to God!  A few of his spiritual children who are priests here in the U.S. are moving your way (I think, though, ultimately to go to Fiji) to assist him in his quest.

(Btw: If it's built with the purpose of being an adult font, then it's a font, not a trough.  Calling something that was plainly designed for baptism a "trough" seems to be either a joke, or an attempt to stir the pot.)

There is a third possibility.  I have spent 30 years wandering this country baptizing people in cow troughs and bathtubs, just as my holy Russian predecessor did.  Needs must.... laugh laugh
Logged
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,958



« Reply #76 on: August 26, 2010, 05:22:42 PM »

The Orthodox Church of Antioch (Antakya) is a canonical church, and they always used the word "Allah", since they adopted the Arabic language. The same is true for the holy churches of Jerusalem and Alexandria.

There is no problem with the word "Allah", it just means "al-ilah", "the God", like the Bible says in Greek "ho theos". Of course, the religion of Islam contains many errors and their view of God is certainly false. But the well-established Orthodox use of the word "Allah", which goes back to St. John of Damascus, has nothing to do with the beliefs of Islam, only which the Arabic language, which uses the word "Allah" for "the (one) God" .

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,968



« Reply #77 on: August 26, 2010, 05:34:59 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Posts: 7,133


"My god is greater."


« Reply #78 on: August 26, 2010, 05:37:43 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Not much more than Islam is an offshoot of Christianity.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,958



« Reply #79 on: August 26, 2010, 05:39:54 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Not exactly... they recognize Muhammad as an earlier prophet, but also Buddha... I would say that Baha'i has probably more of Kant than of Islam.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #80 on: August 26, 2010, 06:00:58 PM »


Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

Actually, Allah was also the NAME of the Meccan pagans' chief god. This was why Mohammad's pagan father had the name Abdallah, which means slave of Allah.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #81 on: August 26, 2010, 06:02:44 PM »


Not much more than Islam is an offshoot of Christianity.

Islam is an offshoot of Rabbinical Judaism+Meccan paganism+heretical sects of Christianity.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,958



« Reply #82 on: August 26, 2010, 06:09:23 PM »

Actually, Allah was also the NAME of the Meccan pagans' chief god. This was why Mohammad's pagan father had the name Abdallah, which means slave of Allah.  Wink

This is true. But pagans in Old testament times also used the name "El" (Old Testament name for God) for a pagan God.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #83 on: August 26, 2010, 06:16:32 PM »


This is true. But pagans in Old testament times also used the name "El" (Old Testament name for God) for a pagan God.

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,958



« Reply #84 on: August 26, 2010, 06:21:35 PM »

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)

Indeed, but the Christian equivalent (going back to the Septuagint) of "I am" is "ho kyrios"/"the LORD". And just as the Old Testament has El and "I am", the Orthodox Church has theos and kyrios, God and Lord, Allah and al-rabb...
Logged
Punch
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,801



« Reply #85 on: August 26, 2010, 06:49:33 PM »

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)

Indeed, but the Christian equivalent (going back to the Septuagint) of "I am" is "ho kyrios"/"the LORD". And just as the Old Testament has El and "I am", the Orthodox Church has theos and kyrios, God and Lord, Allah and al-rabb...

Come on people, we all know that God speaks German.  At least that is what I heard when I was growing up.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #86 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:29 PM »

Can A Orthodox Lay Christian Baptize anyone ,Not  just  in a emergency Like Inpending death, But if someone requests it and will the church recognize it....

If a Priest is actually available? I couldn't possibly understand why one would even seek to deviate from the Sacramental norm if it is not necessary. I think most Orthodox Christians would be highly skeptical of such a desire.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #87 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:29 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Yes.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #88 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:30 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Not much more than Islam is an offshoot of Christianity.

Ah, no. Baha'i came straight out of a staunchly Muslim society. The same cannot at all be said about Islam with Christianity.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #89 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:30 PM »


Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

Actually, Allah was also the NAME of the Meccan pagans' chief god. This was why Mohammad's pagan father had the name Abdallah, which means slave of Allah.  Wink

Yes, and it was also the name that Arabic Christians used to refer to God (there were Arabic speaking Christians even before the rise of Islam). Which just proves that it is a generic term for the deity that one believes to be the only god.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Tags: baptism 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »  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 0.193 seconds with 72 queries.