OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 20, 2014, 10:36:21 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What to make of my Orthodox baptism?  (Read 2864 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« on: May 13, 2011, 02:07:41 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,412


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2011, 02:12:18 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?
Have you thought of actually bringing this question up on a Catholic forum? This board here is more for Catholic dialogue with the Orthodox, not so much for Catholics to discuss internal matters amongst themselves.
Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2011, 02:20:19 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?
Have you thought of actually bringing this question up on a Catholic forum? This board here is more for Catholic dialogue with the Orthodox, not so much for Catholics to discuss internal matters amongst themselves.

I did once, but nobody could give me an answer.  I no longer bother to post on "Catholic forums" because they are, to a large degree controlled by fundamentalist people who don't like me very much.
It's not the most burning issue in my life, but it does sometimes give me pause.
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,412


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2011, 02:22:26 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?
Have you thought of actually bringing this question up on a Catholic forum? This board here is more for Catholic dialogue with the Orthodox, not so much for Catholics to discuss internal matters amongst themselves.

I did once, but nobody could give me an answer.  I no longer bother to post on "Catholic forums" because they are, to a large degree controlled by fundamentalist people who don't like me very much.
It's not the most burning issue in my life, but it does sometimes give me pause.
Well, I'm not sure you'd really want to hear what many of the Orthodox here think of your reversion to Catholicism.
Logged
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2011, 02:52:41 AM »

This is what the Catholic Church says about your baptism:

The first one, in which you were baptized as an infant in the Roman Catholic Church, is your only baptism.

The second one, while it would have been valid, meant nothing.

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

If you had had three baptisms by Protestants, I suppose that would count as triple immersion. :-p

But no one gets extra credit for four immersions and three splashes.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

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


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2011, 04:13:58 AM »


Quoting Scriptue here.....Doesn't It say, Not To Be Like A Dog, Retuning to his Own Vomit.....So why would you return to the catholic church with all it's problems, and some you find offensive and posted about it curious...... Huh



When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?
Have you thought of actually bringing this question up on a Catholic forum? This board here is more for Catholic dialogue with the Orthodox, not so much for Catholics to discuss internal matters amongst themselves.

I did once, but nobody could give me an answer.  I no longer bother to post on "Catholic forums" because they are, to a large degree controlled by fundamentalist people who don't like me very much.
It's not the most burning issue in my life, but it does sometimes give me pause.
Logged

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

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2011, 08:32:59 AM »

Very nicely done   Cheesy

This is what the Catholic Church says about your baptism:

The first one, in which you were baptized as an infant in the Roman Catholic Church, is your only baptism.

The second one, while it would have been valid, meant nothing.

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

If you had had three baptisms by Protestants, I suppose that would count as triple immersion. :-p

But no one gets extra credit for four immersions and three splashes.
Logged

jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,605


« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2011, 08:39:14 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

Yes, better ask the Catholics if you want a Catholic answer.  From an Orthodox understanding, you have had one baptism, the one performed by the ROCOR priest, and you are forsaking your baptism and apostasizing by going back to the Roman Catholic heresy. 
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2011, 08:46:45 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

Yes, better ask the Catholics if you want a Catholic answer.  From an Orthodox understanding, you have had one baptism, the one performed by the ROCOR priest, and you are forsaking your baptism and apostasizing by going back to the Roman Catholic heresy. 

That is not real.  There is no Roman Catholic heresy.  There is the Catholic Church [and now I speak inclusive of the Orthodox Churches].  Robb has returned to communion with Rome.

It would be good if he could stay put, but he's done no more than what papal Catholics do when they enter Orthodoxy.

It is the schism that distorts all of our interactions.  That is why it is evil and sinful and we should all be working daily to put an end to it gracefully and without anger or rancor or false accusations.
Logged

jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,605


« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2011, 08:51:46 AM »

Yes, better ask the Catholics if you want a Catholic answer.  From an Orthodox understanding, you have had one baptism, the one performed by the ROCOR priest, and you are forsaking your baptism and apostasizing by going back to the Roman Catholic heresy. 

That is not real.  There is no Roman Catholic heresy.  There is the Catholic Church [and now I speak inclusive of the Orthodox Churches].  Robb has returned to communion with Rome.

I was incorrect in my speech.  I should have said Roman Catholic heresies

It is the schism that distorts all of our interactions.  That is why it is evil and sinful and we should all be working daily to put an end to it gracefully and without anger or rancor or false accusations.

It is the Roman Catholic heresies which perpetuate the schism.  If you are working daily to put an end to the Roman Catholic heresies and return Roman Catholicism to the faith of the first millennium, then I commend you for this effort. 
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 08:52:04 AM by jah777 » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2011, 09:00:10 AM »


It is the Roman Catholic heresies which perpetuate the schism.  If you are working daily to put an end to the Roman Catholic heresies and return Roman Catholicism to the faith of the first millennium, then I commend you for this effort. 


That is not true.  IF that were true we would not be, at the highest levels, examining our respective beliefs to see how they can be understood rightly and accepted respectively and respectfully in harmony and communion.

So your assertion is more part of the problem than it is any part of the current working-group's solution.
Logged

Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Online Online

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,243



« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2011, 09:45:11 AM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue
Logged

I'll bet I look like a goof.

"And since when have Christians become afraid of rain?"
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,322



« Reply #12 on: May 13, 2011, 09:47:50 AM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue

According to the rules of the western churches, yes.
Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,605


« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2011, 09:58:34 AM »


It is the Roman Catholic heresies which perpetuate the schism.  If you are working daily to put an end to the Roman Catholic heresies and return Roman Catholicism to the faith of the first millennium, then I commend you for this effort. 


That is not true.  IF that were true we would not be, at the highest levels, examining our respective beliefs to see how they can be understood rightly and accepted respectively and respectfully in harmony and communion.

So your assertion is more part of the problem than it is any part of the current working-group's solution.

I’m afraid it is true.  Whether there is any value in these dialogues is another subject, but as you can see from the interview of Met Hilarion (Alfeyev), a major participant in Orthodox-Catholic discussions on the side of the Moscow Patriarchate, with the National Catholic Register, he clearly states:

Quote
So the basis for the restoration of the full communion would be, I believe, the faith of the Church east and west in the first millennium.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/archbishop-hilarion-on-christian-unity

This is exactly what I said above, although Met Hilarion and other participants in discussions with Roman Catholics do not often use the word “heresies”.  That Roman Catholics have adopted many heresies is clearly stated by many of our saints and Fathers, but today there is hope that in a warm and open atmosphere perhaps a careful, thorough, and friendly examination of facts will lead the Roman Catholics to return to the faith of the first millennium, and thereby discard all of the heresies which they since adopted.  I do not think we will see the day when the Roman Catholics will renounce their heresies, but Christians must have hope, and the Orthodox participants believe that they have to at least try, regardless of the apparent futility.  Nothing is impossible for God, after all.

Regarding the baptism of Roman Catholics being “Donatist”, this is certainly not the case.  According the 7th canon of the Second Ecumenical Council, a baptism that is not done with three full immersions does not qualify as even a valid form of baptism, and thereby those who have received an incorrect form of baptism outside of the Church should be baptized upon being received into the Church.  If a person receives the correct form of baptism by heretics who have Apostolic Succession, they can be received into the Church without baptism, as the previously administered empty sacramental form would not necessarily need to be repeated.  According to Orthodox ecclesiology, however, there is no sacramental grace outside of the Orthodox Church, so whether a bishop decides to baptize converts or accept a previously administered form and simply receive by chrismation or another right, is up to him.  If a bishop decides to baptize a Roman Catholic who already had received three full immersions as a Roman Catholic (pretty unlikely), there would be no problem in him doing so since Roman Catholics are heretics. 

http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/khrap_econ.aspx
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 10:07:53 AM by jah777 » Logged
Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Online Online

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,243



« Reply #14 on: May 13, 2011, 10:09:54 AM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue

According to the rules of the western churches, yes.


So from the western perspective, they were fine being in communion with Donatists (ie. Easterners) for 650+ years?  Huh
Logged

I'll bet I look like a goof.

"And since when have Christians become afraid of rain?"
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2011, 10:34:37 AM »


This is exactly what I said above, although Met Hilarion and other participants in discussions with Roman Catholics do not often use the word “heresies”.  That Roman Catholics have adopted many heresies is clearly stated by many of our saints and Fathers, but today there is hope that in a warm and open atmosphere perhaps a careful, thorough, and friendly examination of facts will lead the Roman Catholics to return to the faith of the first millennium, and thereby discard all of the heresies which they since adopted.  I do not think we will see the day when the Roman Catholics will renounce their heresies, but Christians must have hope, and the Orthodox participants believe that they have to at least try, regardless of the apparent futility.  Nothing is impossible for God, after all.



Universal Orthodoxy has had centuries to canonically formalize the ad hoc accusations made from time to time against the Catholic Church and have not done so.  In that light I reject all that you have said on the subject and offer you something familiar to consider as you work to smear more mud on the walls of the papal Church:

Quote
“Never have any of the ancient or modern heretics or heresiarchs been declared schismatics and deposed by Hierarchs who disagreed with them acting in isolation, without a trial and a defense, but by Synods and canonically established ecclesiastical tribunals, before which such people are summoned to defend themselves, and are only deprived of their rights as Hierarchs and of their authority to govern a Church and to celebrate the Mysteries of the Church validly, when, after the issues have been sufficiently clarified by the Synodal tribunal, they refuse to renounce their error, persisting unyieldingly and obstinately in their heretical ideas and erroneous beliefs.”

From a Pastoral Encyclical dated January 27, 1942
Logged

mabsoota
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 2,302


Kyrie eleison


« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2011, 10:48:44 AM »

robb,
i guess you covered all bases.  Wink
when the churches get more united you'll be sorted as you did all 3 groups!
i don't think you should worry too much, sure maybe you are a bit confused, but this is common, life is complicated sometimes.
i think you should focus on being the best Christian you can be and worry less about what denomination of Christian you are.
when you are closer to God, the rest becomes clear.
so pray and study the Bible a lot, fast (after pentecost!) regularly and also have times when you fast from tv, computer etc. in order to focus a lot on your spiritual life.
go regularly to confession, and ask God daily how you can become more like Him and serve the people around you and accept life's problems with peace and serenity. have a daily prayer habit that includes psalms, set prayers (eg. 'glory to God in the highest' from the catholic mass is fine for any Christian) and spontaneous prayers.
i, personally find the orthodox prayers very valuable and beautiful, but i think any ancient patristic prayers are valuable.

i recommend the orthodox study Bible, i don't think you will find it so 'orthodox' that it's not 'catholic' enough, and there is lots of sensible discussion there on matters of doctrine. also it doesn't get too complicated. once you have read it all, maybe you can move on to more complex theology, but it's enough for me, and i like to discuss doctrine quite a lot.

baptism doesn't 'do' stuff to you that is separate from the rest of your spiritual life. so live as closely to God as you can, follow the example of the desert fathers and the Christian martyrs down the centuries and spend plenty of time in church so you can go out to give God's love to those around you.

then once you've done all this, let us know how you're doing, coz at that time we will need your wisdom and guidance  Smiley
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,613



« Reply #17 on: May 13, 2011, 10:57:01 AM »

Christ is risen!
When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17).  
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid).  

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

Yes, better ask the Catholics if you want a Catholic answer.  From an Orthodox understanding, you have had one baptism, the one performed by the ROCOR priest, and you are forsaking your baptism and apostasizing by going back to the Roman Catholic heresy.  

That is not real.
Damnation is very real.
There is no Roman Catholic heresy.
LOL.  Vatican mantra adopted from Hinduism, just say it and it is true.
 There is the Catholic Church [and now I speak inclusive of the Orthodox Churches]

Don't. The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is the Orthodox Churches, and she does not agree to the heretical view you here express.
Robb has returned to communion with Rome
No, according to the Catholic Church he has left communion with Orthodox Rome to go back to communion with the heretical Vatican.

It would be good if he could stay put, but he's done no more than what papal Catholics do when they enter Orthodoxy.
They go to Light, he had turned his back on it.

It is the schism that distorts all of our interactions.  That is why it is evil and sinful and we should all be working daily to put an end to it gracefully and without anger or rancor or false accusations.
Then repent of them.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 10:59:00 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,613



« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2011, 11:00:39 AM »

Christ is risen!
When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

Yes, better ask the Catholics if you want a Catholic answer.
He is.  He is asking us.
From an Orthodox understanding, you have had one baptism, the one performed by the ROCOR priest, and you are forsaking your baptism and apostasizing by going back to the Roman Catholic heresy. 
Very nicely done   Cheesy
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,605


« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2011, 11:06:38 AM »

Universal Orthodoxy has had centuries to canonically formalize the ad hoc accusations made from time to time against the Catholic Church and have not done so. 

I think the 1848 Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs to Pope Pius the IX did a fairly thorough job:

http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/encyc_1848.aspx


In that light I reject all that you have said on the subject and offer you something familiar to consider as you work to smear more mud on the walls of the papal Church:

Quote
“Never have any of the ancient or modern heretics or heresiarchs been declared schismatics and deposed by Hierarchs who disagreed with them acting in isolation, without a trial and a defense, but by Synods and canonically established ecclesiastical tribunals, before which such people are summoned to defend themselves, and are only deprived of their rights as Hierarchs and of their authority to govern a Church and to celebrate the Mysteries of the Church validly, when, after the issues have been sufficiently clarified by the Synodal tribunal, they refuse to renounce their error, persisting unyieldingly and obstinately in their heretical ideas and erroneous beliefs.”

From a Pastoral Encyclical dated January 27, 1942

It is clever to quote against me a quote that I used in another post, but it doesn’t apply here.  If you read my entire post, I said that sacramental grace is lost either by deposition by a valid Synod or through prolonged schism according to the first canon of St. Basil. 

Quote
1st Canon of St. Basil

“…the beginning, true enough, of the separation resulted through a schism, but those who seceded from the Church had not the grace of the Holy Spirit upon them; for the impartation thereof ceased with the interruption of the service. For although the ones who were the first to depart had been ordained by the Fathers and with the imposition of their hands they had obtained the gracious gift of the Spirit, yet after breaking away they became laymen, and had no authority either to baptize or to ordain anyone, nor could they impart the grace of the Spirit to others, after they themselves had forfeited it. Wherefore they bade that those baptized by them should be regarded as baptized by laymen, and that when they came to join the Church they should have to be repurified by the true baptism as prescribed by the Church.

This would be applicable in the case of a prolonged schism where no heresies were involved.  However, in the case of Roman Catholicism, we have a case of prolonged schism and heresy, so it is not a pretty picture at all.  As the great contemporary Father St. Paisius (Velichkovsky) said to an Eastern Rite Catholic priest:

Quote
Depart and flee from the Unia as speedily as possible lest death overtake you in it and you be numbered among the heretics and not among the Christians. And not only go away yourself, but advise others to go away also, if in your conscience you know that they will hear you. And if they will not hear
you, then at least depart yourself from the nets of the enemy and be united in soul and heart with the Holy Orthodox Church, and thus, together with all [the faithful] holding the inviolate faith and fulfilling the commandments of Christ, you will be able to be saved.

I don’t think any member of the Catholic-Orthodox discussions understands the Orthodox faith as did St. Paisius. 
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,613



« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2011, 11:10:42 AM »

Christ resurrexit!
It is the Roman Catholic heresies which perpetuate the schism.  If you are working daily to put an end to the Roman Catholic heresies and return Roman Catholicism to the faith of the first millennium, then I commend you for this effort. 
That is not true.
True, you are sweeping the heresies under the rug and trying to put lipstick on that pig, instead of working daily to put an end to those heresies and return to the Faith of the first millenium.

As for the Vatican being mired in heresy, that's true. Deal with it.

IF that were true we would not be, at the highest levels, examining our respective beliefs to see how they can be understood rightly and accepted respectively and respectfully in harmony and communion.
The council of Ravenna has gone the way of the council of Florence.  May another never be convened.

So your assertion is more part of the problem than it is any part of the current working-group's solution.
Assertion of the truth and facts always solves the problem of the works of heretics.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #21 on: May 13, 2011, 11:39:11 AM »

robb,
i guess you covered all bases.  Wink
when the churches get more united you'll be sorted as you did all 3 groups!
i don't think you should worry too much, sure maybe you are a bit confused, but this is common, life is complicated sometimes.
i think you should focus on being the best Christian you can be and worry less about what denomination of Christian you are.
when you are closer to God, the rest becomes clear.
so pray and study the Bible a lot, fast (after pentecost!) regularly and also have times when you fast from tv, computer etc. in order to focus a lot on your spiritual life.
go regularly to confession, and ask God daily how you can become more like Him and serve the people around you and accept life's problems with peace and serenity. have a daily prayer habit that includes psalms, set prayers (eg. 'glory to God in the highest' from the catholic mass is fine for any Christian) and spontaneous prayers.
i, personally find the orthodox prayers very valuable and beautiful, but i think any ancient patristic prayers are valuable.

i recommend the orthodox study Bible, i don't think you will find it so 'orthodox' that it's not 'catholic' enough, and there is lots of sensible discussion there on matters of doctrine. also it doesn't get too complicated. once you have read it all, maybe you can move on to more complex theology, but it's enough for me, and i like to discuss doctrine quite a lot.

baptism doesn't 'do' stuff to you that is separate from the rest of your spiritual life. so live as closely to God as you can, follow the example of the desert fathers and the Christian martyrs down the centuries and spend plenty of time in church so you can go out to give God's love to those around you.

then once you've done all this, let us know how you're doing, coz at that time we will need your wisdom and guidance  Smiley

What a lovely, non-polemical response!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 13, 2011, 11:43:19 AM »


It is the Roman Catholic heresies which perpetuate the schism.  If you are working daily to put an end to the Roman Catholic heresies and return Roman Catholicism to the faith of the first millennium, then I commend you for this effort.  


That is not true.  IF that were true we would not be, at the highest levels, examining our respective beliefs to see how they can be understood rightly and accepted respectively and respectfully in harmony and communion.

So your assertion is more part of the problem than it is any part of the current working-group's solution.

They failed to accomplish it so it means our beliefs are different.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 13, 2011, 11:52:10 AM »

I keep the hardness of your heart and the weakness of some of your thoughts in prayer daily.


Christ resurrexit!
It is the Roman Catholic heresies which perpetuate the schism.  If you are working daily to put an end to the Roman Catholic heresies and return Roman Catholicism to the faith of the first millennium, then I commend you for this effort. 
That is not true.
True, you are sweeping the heresies under the rug and trying to put lipstick on that pig, instead of working daily to put an end to those heresies and return to the Faith of the first millenium.

As for the Vatican being mired in heresy, that's true. Deal with it.

IF that were true we would not be, at the highest levels, examining our respective beliefs to see how they can be understood rightly and accepted respectively and respectfully in harmony and communion.
The council of Ravenna has gone the way of the council of Florence.  May another never be convened.

So your assertion is more part of the problem than it is any part of the current working-group's solution.
Assertion of the truth and facts always solves the problem of the works of heretics.
Logged

J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #24 on: May 13, 2011, 11:52:48 AM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

Once again, a sincere inquiry has devolved into "us vs. them".  Robb, you probably would have been better off asking on a Catholic forum.  Or even better, asking your priest.  With only a few exceptions here, you have unfortunately and unwittingly awakened those who love a good fight and, especially, those who love to be "right".
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,410


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 13, 2011, 11:56:41 AM »

If I may, in they eyes of the RC, you're baptized and were from infancy.  Period.  What happened subsequently was of no consequence.  I'm assuming that you've been to confession with an RC priest since your return.  From the RC pov, any "stain" of sin was wiped away with the absolution he gave you.  Any other questions about this should really be asked of your priest and/or father confessor.  Any answers you're going to receive here will probably be polemical, confusing, and probably both.

IMHO, let it go. 
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #26 on: May 13, 2011, 12:03:34 PM »

If I may, in they eyes of the RC, you're baptized and were from infancy.  Period.  What happened subsequently was of no consequence.  I'm assuming that you've been to confession with an RC priest since your return.  From the RC pov, any "stain" of sin was wiped away with the absolution he gave you.  Any other questions about this should really be asked of your priest and/or father confessor.  Any answers you're going to receive here will probably be polemical, confusing, and probably both.

IMHO, let it go. 

Good answer!!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,959


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #27 on: May 13, 2011, 12:58:21 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue
Which heretics were they rebaptizing?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Asteriktos
Pegleg J
Protostrator
***************
Online Online

Faith: Like an arrow to the knee
Posts: 27,243



« Reply #28 on: May 13, 2011, 01:15:22 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue
Which heretics were they rebaptizing?

I can go through the councils and see, but before I do, did you have a particular reason for asking (ie. is there something in particular you wanted to know about as far as Eastern Church practices, or was it just a general question)?

Also, I should say that my statement earlier (with wagging tongue attached) was not meant to be an explicit condemnation of Catholics as heretics. I should have said this more plainly, but my point was mainly that there should be some consistency in how people are dealt with. Though now that I think about it, it's probably difficult to speak of consistency, since every situation will be different.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 01:16:16 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

I'll bet I look like a goof.

"And since when have Christians become afraid of rain?"
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,322



« Reply #29 on: May 13, 2011, 01:55:23 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue

According to the rules of the western churches, yes.


So from the western perspective, they were fine being in communion with Donatists (ie. Easterners) for 650+ years?  Huh

Um, yes? No? Maybe?

I mean, the reality is that you can make any issue a reason/excuse for division, but you don't have to. And by "don't have to" I mean that if you don't choose to fight over it, then there's no fight unless the details of any particular issue make conflict inescapable. No sacramental churches in the west, for example, says that anabaptist baptisms are no good simply because the anabaptist theory of the rite is wrong. Conceivably they could, but they don't. And in the same manner, when the Eastern churches adopt anabaptism for different reasons, a church can either ignore that, or not.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 01:56:08 PM by Keble » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #30 on: May 13, 2011, 02:01:06 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue

According to the rules of the western churches, yes.


So from the western perspective, they were fine being in communion with Donatists (ie. Easterners) for 650+ years?  Huh

Um, yes? No? Maybe?

I mean, the reality is that you can make any issue a reason/excuse for division, but you don't have to. And by "don't have to" I mean that if you don't choose to fight over it, then there's no fight unless the details of any particular issue make conflict inescapable. No sacramental churches in the west, for example, says that anabaptist baptisms are no good simply because the anabaptist theory of the rite is wrong. Conceivably they could, but they don't. And in the same manner, when the Eastern churches adopt anabaptism for different reasons, a church can either ignore that, or not.


I was once told by an Orthodox priest that *any* baptism done with the formula "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" was valid-with or without sprinkling or immersion, and even at the hands of a lay person.  Is this correct?

Reason for modification--I'm moving this to the "Faith" section as a new thread.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 02:18:24 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,959


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #31 on: May 13, 2011, 02:17:04 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue
Which heretics were they rebaptizing?

I can go through the councils and see, but before I do, did you have a particular reason for asking (ie. is there something in particular you wanted to know about as far as Eastern Church practices, or was it just a general question)?

Also, I should say that my statement earlier (with wagging tongue attached) was not meant to be an explicit condemnation of Catholics as heretics. I should have said this more plainly, but my point was mainly that there should be some consistency in how people are dealt with. Though now that I think about it, it's probably difficult to speak of consistency, since every situation will be different.
You are probably right that it is difficult because every situation is different. That being said, I know that there are some groups whose baptisms the Catholic Church sees as invalid. One such group is the Mormon Church.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #32 on: May 13, 2011, 02:47:18 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

Were the Fathers and Councils and whatnot who said to baptize the heretics of their time also Donatists?  Tongue

According to the rules of the western churches, yes.


So from the western perspective, they were fine being in communion with Donatists (ie. Easterners) for 650+ years?  Huh

Um, yes? No? Maybe?

I mean, the reality is that you can make any issue a reason/excuse for division, but you don't have to. And by "don't have to" I mean that if you don't choose to fight over it, then there's no fight unless the details of any particular issue make conflict inescapable. No sacramental churches in the west, for example, says that anabaptist baptisms are no good simply because the anabaptist theory of the rite is wrong. Conceivably they could, but they don't. And in the same manner, when the Eastern churches adopt anabaptism for different reasons, a church can either ignore that, or not.


I was once told by an Orthodox priest that *any* baptism done with the formula "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" was valid-with or without sprinkling or immersion, and even at the hands of a lay person.  Is this correct?

Reason for modification--I'm moving this to the "Faith" section as a new thread.

It is not valid of its own right. A heterodox baptism is not a valid Orthodox baptism until the person is Chrismated. It is valid in the context of reception into the Orthodox Church, and does not need to be repeated. The deficiencies of the heterodox baptism are redeemed in Chrismation.

That isn't to say a heterodox person cannot receive some level of grace in other ways, but it is not normative nor guaranteed.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 02:48:01 PM by bogdan » Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #33 on: May 13, 2011, 05:24:41 PM »

Sorry to have stirred the pot with this one.

I realize that many Orthodox would believe that I'm on a highway to Hell through my return to the RCC and I respect and accept their beliefs.  These divisions of the Churches are sad and I pray that they can one day be overcome and quickly.

I returned to the RCC because 1.  It is part of my heritage of faith and 2.  After much careful study and reflection I came to believe sincerely that the Papal system of government is the most practical and rational form of administration for the Church (Sorry to offend some, but this is just the way I see things).  If God were going to go through all the trouble to start a Church here on Earth then it just makes sense to me that he would put a visible leader in charge of things who could call the shots and organize us more efficiently then could a dozen or so local Church and their bishops are capable of.  I still love Orthodoxy and the eastern traditions though and it always has a soft spot in my heart.

It's true that I am somewhat liberal on some issues within the RCC, but just because the Pope and I have a few disagreements, this does not mean that I should abandone him as my spiritual father in the faith.  It's like having a few qualms with your psychical father and rejecting him over them, not at all necessary.

I try to live a good life and live by the golden rule.  I keep the proscribed fast and abstinence of my Church and try to pray on  regular basis.  Thankfully I have a good confessor who helps me a lot with difficult spiritual matters.  Thank God for all the good things in my life.
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,393


« Reply #34 on: May 13, 2011, 09:47:38 PM »

Sorry to have stirred the pot with this one.

I realize that many Orthodox would believe that I'm on a highway to Hell through my return to the RCC and I respect and accept their beliefs.  These divisions of the Churches are sad and I pray that they can one day be overcome and quickly.

I returned to the RCC because 1.  It is part of my heritage of faith and 2.  After much careful study and reflection I came to believe sincerely that the Papal system of government is the most practical and rational form of administration for the Church (Sorry to offend some, but this is just the way I see things).  If God were going to go through all the trouble to start a Church here on Earth then it just makes sense to me that he would put a visible leader in charge of things who could call the shots and organize us more efficiently then could a dozen or so local Church and their bishops are capable of.  I still love Orthodoxy and the eastern traditions though and it always has a soft spot in my heart.

It's true that I am somewhat liberal on some issues within the RCC, but just because the Pope and I have a few disagreements, this does not mean that I should abandone him as my spiritual father in the faith.  It's like having a few qualms with your psychical father and rejecting him over them, not at all necessary.

I try to live a good life and live by the golden rule.  I keep the proscribed fast and abstinence of my Church and try to pray on  regular basis.  Thankfully I have a good confessor who helps me a lot with difficult spiritual matters.  Thank God for all the good things in my life.
Welcome home! Smiley
Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #35 on: May 13, 2011, 10:32:17 PM »

Sorry to have stirred the pot with this one.

I realize that many Orthodox would believe that I'm on a highway to Hell through my return to the RCC and I respect and accept their beliefs.  These divisions of the Churches are sad and I pray that they can one day be overcome and quickly.

I returned to the RCC because 1.  It is part of my heritage of faith and 2.  After much careful study and reflection I came to believe sincerely that the Papal system of government is the most practical and rational form of administration for the Church (Sorry to offend some, but this is just the way I see things).  If God were going to go through all the trouble to start a Church here on Earth then it just makes sense to me that he would put a visible leader in charge of things who could call the shots and organize us more efficiently then could a dozen or so local Church and their bishops are capable of.  I still love Orthodoxy and the eastern traditions though and it always has a soft spot in my heart.

It's true that I am somewhat liberal on some issues within the RCC, but just because the Pope and I have a few disagreements, this does not mean that I should abandone him as my spiritual father in the faith.  It's like having a few qualms with your psychical father and rejecting him over them, not at all necessary.

I try to live a good life and live by the golden rule.  I keep the proscribed fast and abstinence of my Church and try to pray on  regular basis.  Thankfully I have a good confessor who helps me a lot with difficult spiritual matters.  Thank God for all the good things in my life.
Welcome home! Smiley

Thanks.
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,613



« Reply #36 on: May 13, 2011, 10:56:21 PM »

Christ is risen!
Sorry to have stirred the pot with this one.
No problem.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 3,704


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #37 on: May 14, 2011, 11:08:26 PM »

From an EO perspective (of course not knowing specifics of the baptism) and knowing the EO I know which are pretty conservative...

Your RC baptism is invalid.

Your EO baptism is valid.

Your going back to the RC church is not good.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Alcuin
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 122


« Reply #38 on: May 18, 2011, 01:16:09 PM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17).  
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid).  

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

I believe the Orthodox generally teach that Catholic sacraments are invalid, so they would simply say that your baptism in to the Orthodox Church was the first and only time you were baptized, I believe. Presumably the Baptists would hold to the same teaching as regards the Catholic baptism, I'm not totally sure though.

The Catholic Church accepts Protestant and Orthodox baptisms generally, but would hold that your Catholic baptism as an infant was the only time you were baptized, because baptism, performed with correct form and intention cannot be repeated. I don't know what was being specifically referred to earlier about re-baptizing heretics, but if the heresy was such that it corrupted the form or intention of baptism in the Catholic view, the Catholic Church may argue that these people were never baptized at all.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2011, 01:21:15 PM by Alcuin » Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,410


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #39 on: May 18, 2011, 01:28:14 PM »

From an EO perspective (of course not knowing specifics of the baptism) and knowing the EO I know which are pretty conservative...

Your RC baptism is invalid.

Your EO baptism is valid.

Your going back to the RC church is not good.


So, basically, you just admitted you have no idea what you're talking about.

Good post.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,571


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 18, 2011, 02:17:34 PM »

While there by no means is a consensus within Orthodoxy regarding the issue of 'rebaptism' and the validity of Roman Catholic sacraments, the degree of uninformed opinion that keeps on getting repeated in answer to questions like posed by the OP in thread after thread is astonishing. Doesn't anyone ever use the 'search' function before starting up the same discussions and making the same statements?

Frankly, if you decided in good conscience to return to the Roman Catholic faith, then ask your priest what to make of your Orthodox baptism if this is bothering you. Nothing we can say here will give you any real closure if that's what you are seeking.

In reverse, I would give the same advice to anyone returning to the Orthodox Church if something that occurred while you were involved with another faith were bothering you.

Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #41 on: May 25, 2011, 10:31:25 PM »

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

From a Romanist perspective, I would imagine that your first Baptism would have been valid, and the other two would have simply been redundant at best, not actually Sacraments, and probably something you should Confess.
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 #42 on: May 25, 2011, 10:31:26 PM »

The third one was unnecessary and reflects that some modern Eastern Orthodox are Donatists.

So Saint Cyprian was a Donatist?
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
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #43 on: June 01, 2011, 05:27:30 PM »

When I became OC ten years ago, I was received in a ROCOR parish and through baptism.  I had already been previously baptized RC as an infant (And once in a Southern Baptist church when I was 17). 
Since then I have returned to the RCC, but this still leaves me wondering about the re baptism I received.  What exactly did it do to me?  Also, what would the RCC think about my being conditionally baptized by an Orthodox priest (Considering the RCC accepts Orthodox sacraments as valid). 

I have been sacramentaly baptized twice and baptized by a protestant pastor (Who, of course has no orders) once.  Am a thrice blessed or just thrice confused?

If I were a traditionalist I would say that you have to publicly abjure of those baptisms you got among non catholics. But as I am not traditionalist, I would tell you to follow your priest, he will know what is enough.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2011, 05:28:41 PM by Inquisitor » Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #44 on: June 01, 2011, 05:38:09 PM »

I just went to confession and the priest said that, as far as he knew that should suffice. 

When I came back from the Baptist though, the priest made me read a profession of faith in front of the altar and then gave me a letter of good standing.  Maybe they take conversion to Baptist, evangelicals sects as a more serious offense then Orthodoxy?
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,730


« Reply #45 on: June 01, 2011, 05:49:30 PM »

I just went to confession and the priest said that, as far as he knew that should suffice. 
IMHO, just go with what your priest has said.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 01, 2011, 06:03:55 PM »

Maybe they take conversion to Baptist, evangelicals sects as a more serious offense then Orthodoxy?

Certainly.
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
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #47 on: June 01, 2011, 06:13:57 PM »

I just went to confession and the priest said that, as far as he knew that should suffice. 
IMHO, just go with what your priest has said.

I agree.
Logged
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #48 on: June 01, 2011, 06:15:58 PM »

I just went to confession and the priest said that, as far as he knew that should suffice. 

When I came back from the Baptist though, the priest made me read a profession of faith in front of the altar and then gave me a letter of good standing.  Maybe they take conversion to Baptist, evangelicals sects as a more serious offense then Orthodoxy?

Ok do what your priest tell you. Catholicism is about obedience.
Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #49 on: June 01, 2011, 06:17:14 PM »

The problem with this issue is that, unlike Orthodoxy most modern RC's don't have spiritual fathers.  You just go to confession and take whatever priest is in the box.  The parish I was in at the time had two or three priest assigned there.  The firs time I spoke personally to the Msgr. who helped me out.  The second I confessed to a Nigerian priest who was an assistant at the time.  I thought about maybe going back to the Msgr. for some clarification, but I figured that the priest I confessed to should have been competent enough to give me the right advice so I just dropped the issue and considered myself back in the RCC.

« Last Edit: June 01, 2011, 06:18:10 PM by Robb » Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
Inquisitor
Warned
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


« Reply #50 on: June 01, 2011, 06:26:31 PM »

The problem with this issue is that, unlike Orthodoxy most modern RC's don't have spiritual fathers.  You just go to confession and take whatever priest is in the box.  The parish I was in at the time had two or three priest assigned there.  The firs time I spoke personally to the Msgr. who helped me out.  The second I confessed to a Nigerian priest who was an assistant at the time.  I thought about maybe going back to the Msgr. for some clarification, but I figured that the priest I confessed to should have been competent enough to give me the right advice so I just dropped the issue and considered myself back in the RCC.



You are catholic, no doubt about. We catholics are too many for the few priest we have, thats a big problem, I don't know if in Rumania, Greace, Russia, they dont have problems on vocations and they have the same disposition of priest for al the eastern christians as in USA.
Logged
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #51 on: June 01, 2011, 06:35:22 PM »

The problem with this issue is that, unlike Orthodoxy most modern RC's don't have spiritual fathers.  You just go to confession and take whatever priest is in the box.  The parish I was in at the time had two or three priest assigned there.  The firs time I spoke personally to the Msgr. who helped me out.  The second I confessed to a Nigerian priest who was an assistant at the time.  I thought about maybe going back to the Msgr. for some clarification, but I figured that the priest I confessed to should have been competent enough to give me the right advice so I just dropped the issue and considered myself back in the RCC.



You are catholic, no doubt about. We catholics are too many for the few priest we have, thats a big problem, I don't know if in Rumania, Greace, Russia, they dont have problems on vocations and they have the same disposition of priest for al the eastern christians as in USA.

Somewhere I remember reading that, despite a married clergy the OC's are down on vocations too.

I defiantly consider myself RC all the way.
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 01, 2011, 07:20:58 PM »

The problem with this issue is that, unlike Orthodoxy most modern RC's don't have spiritual fathers.  You just go to confession and take whatever priest is in the box.  The parish I was in at the time had two or three priest assigned there.  The firs time I spoke personally to the Msgr. who helped me out.  The second I confessed to a Nigerian priest who was an assistant at the time.  I thought about maybe going back to the Msgr. for some clarification, but I figured that the priest I confessed to should have been competent enough to give me the right advice so I just dropped the issue and considered myself back in the RCC.



You are catholic, no doubt about. We catholics are too many for the few priest we have, thats a big problem, I don't know if in Rumania, Greace, Russia, they dont have problems on vocations and they have the same disposition of priest for al the eastern christians as in USA.

Somewhere I remember reading that, despite a married clergy the OC's are down on vocations too.

I defiantly consider myself RC all the way.

The Greeks...in Greece.  That was reported with the past week I think.
Logged

Tags:
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.2 seconds with 80 queries.