Topic: does the all holy theotokos needs christian baptism?

[marlo]

Does the theotokos needs christian baptism? what is the orthodoxy teaching?

thanks
marlo

[Alveus Lacuna]

Where the apostles baptized into Christian baptism?

[PeterTheAleut]

Does the theotokos needs christian baptism? what is the orthodoxy teaching?

thanks
marlo

What is Christian baptism that the Theotokos would need it?

[deusveritasest]

Given that the Logos took from her flesh and sanctified it and dwelt within her, I doubt that she would need to be Baptized to be considered a recipient of Christian redemption.

[deusveritasest]

Where the apostles baptized into Christian baptism?

No. I would think that the essential effect of Baptism would be understood to have been conveyed at the Descent of the Holy Spirit upon them.

[Melodist]

Does the theotokos needs christian baptism? what is the orthodoxy teaching?

thanks
marlo

Do you mean "Did she need to be baptised?"

Was she baptised?

She was fully united to Christ at the Annunciation and she was in the upper room with the apostles on the day of Pentecost when they received the Holy Spirit.

My opinion would be to put less focus on what "needed to happen", and more on "what did happen" in the events of her life as they are celebrated by the Church.

[Alveus Lacuna]

Were the apostles baptized into Christian baptism?

No. I would think that the essential effect of Baptism would be understood to have been conveyed at the Descent of the Holy Spirit upon them.

Sorry, I meant for this to be rhetorical.

[ialmisry]

Does the theotokos needs christian baptism? what is the orthodoxy teaching?

thanks
marlo

Yes. The only time it ever came up that I heard (this is pre internet days), it was to answer in the affirmative (the actual point at hand was unwritten Tradition, and the point 'who baptized the Holy Theotokos" was one example). But what would be the practical import of worrying about this?

[quietmorning]

Why do we assume that she wasn't baptized . . . or that the Apostles weren't baptized?  There are many many things not recorded about the Holy Theotokos and the Apostles.  Just because it wasn't recorded doesn't mean it didn't happen.  We simply don't know.

[marlo]

what i would like to know if she needs to be baptised?

thanks
marlo

Does the theotokos needs christian baptism? what is the orthodoxy teaching?

thanks
marlo

Do you mean "Did she need to be baptised?"

Was she baptised?

She was fully united to Christ at the Annunciation and she was in the upper room with the apostles on the day of Pentecost when they received the Holy Spirit.

My opinion would be to put less focus on what "needed to happen", and more on "what did happen" in the events of her life as they are celebrated by the Church.

[marlo]

but Christ said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God"

Also, the apostles baptized their followers with Water,even before Christ was crucified, therefore the apostles were baptized with Water and then Spirit

Were the apostles baptized into Christian baptism?

No. I would think that the essential effect of Baptism would be understood to have been conveyed at the Descent of the Holy Spirit upon them.

Sorry, I meant for this to be rhetorical.

[Alveus Lacuna]

Why do we assume that she wasn't baptized . . . or that the Apostles weren't baptized?  There are many many things not recorded about the Holy Theotokos and the Apostles.  Just because it wasn't recorded doesn't mean it didn't happen.  We simply don't know.

We can keep track of all of their bones and clothes, but we don't know if they were baptized?

[theistgal]

How would you know, if it wasn't recorded somewhere?

Events are harder to pin down than material objects like bones and clothes.

[ialmisry]

what i would like to know if she needs to be baptised?

thanks
marlo

If he Apostles needed to be baptized with water, she needed to be baptized with water.  If they did not, she did not.

[PeterTheAleut]

what i would like to know if she needs to be baptised?

thanks
marlo

What bearing does this have on your salvation today?  Is this some exploration into what we mean when we speak of the Theotokos as being sinless and all-pure?

[St. Christopher]

Since Christ was baptized "to fulfill all righteousness", I would think the Theotokos and the apostles would have been baptized as well.

[Melodist]

Since Christ was baptized "to fulfill all righteousness", I would think the Theotokos and the apostles would have been baptized as well.

The baptism that was performed by John the Baptist and the one performed by the Church are two different baptisms for accomplishing two different purposes.

[marlo]

i read something (maybe a prayer) about the Angles struck with Awe when they saw the Theotokos went inside the Holy of Hollies, i was thinking that the angels might expect that she would die, but she didnt, this happened before the passion of christ, so i was thinking, the angels amazement might be because of her true sinless nature, or without ancestral and personal sin, with this, i was wondering would she still need baptism or that would be unnecessary, if yes, why would she be exempted?

what i would like to know if she needs to be baptised?

thanks
marlo

What bearing does this have on your salvation today?  Is this some exploration into what we mean when we speak of the Theotokos as being sinless and all-pure?

[PeterTheAleut]

i read something (maybe a prayer) about the Angles struck with Awe when they saw the Theotokos went inside the Holy of Hollies, i was thinking that the angels might expect that she would die, but she didnt, this happened before the passion of christ, so i was thinking, the angels amazement might be because of her true sinless nature, or without ancestral and personal sin, with this, i was wondering would she still need baptism or that would be unnecessary, if yes, why would she be exempted?

what i would like to know if she needs to be baptised?

thanks
marlo

What bearing does this have on your salvation today?  Is this some exploration into what we mean when we speak of the Theotokos as being sinless and all-pure?

Again, I ask you.  What bearing does this have on your salvation?  It seems to me that you want us to answer an esoteric question that has no real relevance to us today.  What does it matter whether the Theotokos needed Christian baptism?  We need to be baptized, which is all I think we really need to be concerned about.

[orthonorm]

Again, I ask you.  What bearing does this have on your salvation?

Wouldn't this question apply to many threads here? Or is the definition of what THE Ukraine is essential for salvation?

[Pravoslavbob]

There is absolutlely no question at all that the Theotokos needed to be baptised, as did the apostles and everyone else.  She is one of us.  One reason why we sing over and over again `more honourable than the cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim`of the Theotokos is of course to praise her holiness, but really, I think it goes beyond this in that we are saying `look, here is this woman, she is just like us, and yet through her great holiness and obedience to the will of God she shows that it is our destiny to be `more gloriouis beyond compare than the seraphim` because of what Christ has done for us.  Wow!`  She is the great example of what we can attain if we accept the will of God for our lives.  And yet, no one achieves salvation on their own.  It is humanly impossible.  Just like us, the Theotokos needs a saviour.  That is why, without hesitation, one can reply to the OP that of course she needed to be baptised.  

[NorthernPines]

i read something (maybe a prayer) about the Angles struck with Awe when they saw the Theotokos went inside the Holy of Hollies, i was thinking that the angels might expect that she would die, but she didnt, this happened before the passion of christ, so i was thinking, the angels amazement might be because of her true sinless nature, or without ancestral and personal sin, with this, i was wondering would she still need baptism or that would be unnecessary, if yes, why would she be exempted?

Umm, since Orthodoxy doesn't accept the idea that the Theotokos was free from ancestral sin or that she had a "sinless nature" the question doesn't exactly make sense. What you're describing is essentially the Immaculate Conception, which we do not accept as it is a later theological opinion which has been dogmatized in the west. If you're asking how a Catholic views this subject, maybe you should ask it in the Orthodox-Catholic discussion board? I have no idea if they believe she was baptized with water or not, but obviously she was baptized with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It's kind of an interesting question but one I wouldn't personally get too worked up over. Then again it could be just because I personally do not care one way or the other. The Church has had a history of trying to answer questions like this for a long time, and in the end it usually comes down to the fact no one can answer such a question since we don't know. I would agree with Pravoslavbob though, that she was one of us, and the only reason I can imagine that she wouldn't have been baptized with water is not because she was somehow without need of it, but because she lived at the crossover period between Old and New Covenant. If she wasn't baptized it's not because she was free from original sin, but due only to some exception to the rule like the people in Acts being filled with the Holy Spirit BEFORE they were baptized. I think Isa's answer is the best though, if the Apostles were she was, if they weren't she wasn't. I think that's as close as we can get. But then again I'm not an expert on the Theotokos.

[PeterTheAleut]

Again, I ask you.  What bearing does this have on your salvation?

Wouldn't this question apply to many threads here? Or is the definition of what THE Ukraine is essential for salvation?

1.  That discussion is not on Faith Issues.
2.  That discussion doesn't touch on any issues of doctrine on faith or praxis.
3.  That discussion has no bearing on the subject we're discussing here on this thread.

[orthonorm]

Again, I ask you.  What bearing does this have on your salvation?

Wouldn't this question apply to many threads here? Or is the definition of what THE Ukraine is essential for salvation?

1.  That discussion is not on Faith Issues.
2.  That discussion doesn't touch on any issues of doctrine on faith or praxis.
3.  That discussion has no bearing on the subject we're discussing here on this thread.

1. OK. Couldn't your question to many of the threads in Faith Issues.
2. Begging the question.
3. Ummm, hence it being an example of another thread.

[PeterTheAleut]

Again, I ask you.  What bearing does this have on your salvation?

Wouldn't this question apply to many threads here? Or is the definition of what THE Ukraine is essential for salvation?

1.  That discussion is not on Faith Issues.
2.  That discussion doesn't touch on any issues of doctrine on faith or praxis.
3.  That discussion has no bearing on the subject we're discussing here on this thread.

1. OK. Couldn't your question to many of the threads in Faith Issues.
2. Begging the question.
3. Ummm, hence it being an example of another thread.

I applied my question to marlo because I thought it necessary to challenge his inquiry on the particular subject he brought up in the OP.  I'm sure I could find ways to apply that question to a lot of the threads I read on this forum, but I seldom think it necessary to do so.  If I do, I will.  If I don't, I won't.  If you want to question the value of other discussions on this forum, it's certainly your prerogative to do so, but don't expect me to apply my question to every thread where it's applicable just because you think I should.

Having said that, I'd rather not pick this bone with you anymore on this thread, since that would be a distraction from the thread's purpose.  If you wish to continue this side-discussion with me, I'd be glad to take it up with you somewhere else.

[deusveritasest]

but Christ said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God"

Also, the apostles baptized their followers with Water,even before Christ was crucified, therefore the apostles were baptized with Water and then Spirit

Were the apostles baptized into Christian baptism?

No. I would think that the essential effect of Baptism would be understood to have been conveyed at the Descent of the Holy Spirit upon them.

Sorry, I meant for this to be rhetorical.

Was the thief on the cross baptized with water?

[marlo]

exactly, through the merit of his sacrifice, whether before or after the passion, Christ has saved us.

[ialmisry]

exactly, through the merit of his sacrifice, whether before or after the passion, Christ has saved us.

Well good: since He saved every generation from Eve to the Theotokos, everyone starting with Cain could have been immaculately conceived.

[marlo]

nope, for those not baptised, he can apply his salvation on the cross, to anyone he wants especially his mother

exactly, through the merit of his sacrifice, whether before or after the passion, Christ has saved us.

Well good: since He saved every generation from Eve to the Theotokos, everyone starting with Cain could have been immaculately conceived.

[Michał]

Why do we assume that she wasn't baptized . . . or that the Apostles weren't baptized?  There are many many things not recorded about the Holy Theotokos and the Apostles.  Just because it wasn't recorded doesn't mean it didn't happen.  We simply don't know.

We can keep track of all of their bones and clothes, but we don't know if they were baptized?

I believe it was St. Augustine who claimed that John 13:10 says about the Apostles being baptized.