OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 01, 2014, 08:28:46 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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Catholic practices  (Read 2361 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« on: August 26, 2005, 10:41:11 PM »

hey everyone. In the modern Catholic church, infants and converts are baptised by having water poured over the head three times.

My (orthodox) priest told me that this baptism though not as technically correct as the triple immersion, is still valid because it started way back in the Middle Ages during times of drought and plague when water was especially precious. Even in normal times water was still precious. He even told me of this incident where a nurse at a hospital had to baptise a woman's baby in the air ("air baptism") 3 times because of fear that the baby would die (since it was already very sick).

That seems like a likely reason as to how baptism in the West is done today. What do you guys think? What about those orthodox bishops who say that it is not a true baptism? surely it is a true baptism even though it is not the ideal method?

Also, Catholics today usually only receive the Blessed Sacrament in the form of the Host and not the Precious Blood. Where did this practise come from and why didn't Pope Benedict (who is an 'orthodox' traditionalist) restore the ancient practices of the church; including pre-Vatican II liturgy?

Pre-Vatican II rules stated that to take communion you had to fast from midnight, but then it was shortened to 3 hours, and today it is either one hour, or nothing at all.
Logged
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2005, 11:08:57 PM »

Quote
Also, Catholics today usually only receive the Blessed Sacrament in the form of the Host and not the Precious Blood.

I keep coming across this claim on various websites and forums and I wonder why it's still passed off as being the standard form of receiving the Eucharist in the Catholic churches. Here in the states, I would be inclined to believe that many, if not most Roman Catholic Churches administer Communion from the chalice, along with the Host.

I myself have never been to a Catholic church where there was no chalice for people to receive from - except for churches which offered the Tridentine Mass, where people are communed via the Host alone.

Also, the teaching of the Catholic Church is that one receives Christ's True Body and Blood completely and fully if they receive Host by Itself or from the chalice alone - distinctions are not made saying that if one receives only the Host, they receive Christ's body (and not the Precious Blood), or if they receive only from the chalice, they receive Christ's blood alone. Catholics are permitted to receive under both forms, or just one.

Does the Catholic Church still commune under only one form outside of the US?

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
Saint Polycarp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 243



« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2005, 08:43:27 AM »


Actually it started in the first century. Read the Didache, it specifically says if there isn't any running water sprinkling 3 thimes is fine.


hey everyone. In the modern Catholic church, infants and converts are baptised by having water poured over the head three times.

My (orthodox) priest told me that this baptism though not as technically correct as the triple immersion, is still valid because it started way back in the Middle Ages during times of drought and plague when water was especially precious. Even in normal times water was still precious. He even told me of this incident where a nurse at a hospital had to baptise a woman's baby in the air ("air baptism") 3 times because of fear that the baby would die (since it was already very sick).

That seems like a likely reason as to how baptism in the West is done today. What do you guys think? What about those orthodox bishops who say that it is not a true baptism? surely it is a true baptism even though it is not the ideal method?

Also, Catholics today usually only receive the Blessed Sacrament in the form of the Host and not the Precious Blood. Where did this practise come from and why didn't Pope Benedict (who is an 'orthodox' traditionalist) restore the ancient practices of the church; including pre-Vatican II liturgy?

Pre-Vatican II rules stated that to take communion you had to fast from midnight, but then it was shortened to 3 hours, and today it is either one hour, or nothing at all.

Logged

Peace
FrChris
The Rodney Dangerfield of OC.net
Site Supporter
Taxiarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 7,252


Holy Father Patrick, thank you for your help!


« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2005, 09:18:54 AM »

Quote
  ÃƒÆ’‚Â
Actually it started in the first century. Read the Didache, it specifically says if there isn't any running water sprinkling 3 thimes is fine.



Well, sort of, and only if nothing better is available (in modern times we'd say 'least best alternative'ÂÂ  Wink )

http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas/nt/didache.htm

Quote

ÂÂ  Chapter 7
On Baptism.

7:1 But concerning Baptism, this is how you shall baptize.
7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize in living water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:3 But if you do not have running water, then baptize in other water;
7:4 And if you are not able in cold, then in warm.
7:5 But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.


'Living Water' means water that is flowing. Immersion is implied due to the use of the verb 'baptizo', which has a synonym for dipping, etc.

So, the Didache sets up a prioritization. It allows pouring water over the head of the person as a last resort. Some otherÂÂ  folks have decided that pouring means 'sprinkling' (actually, another case for studying the word used to denote its connotation).

From a personal viewpoint, I truly hope a Catholic baptism is 'valid', because so many people have so much riding on it. I would hate to think that anyone has delayed getting baptised because they were waiting for optimum conditions to occur at their nearest body of 'living water'.

Besides, I have never seen a baptismal font in a reasonably modern Church that is directly fed by a river.... maybe there is one, but I haven't seen it. I think I have heard of churches in the Middle East that were fed this way, and the commentators would address the situation as an innovative way the ancient people solved plumbing problems. Now we see why they did so!

Quote
ÂÂ  
Also, the teaching of the Catholic Church is that one receives Christ's True Body and Blood completely and fully if they receive Host by Itself or from the chalice alone - distinctions are not made saying that if one receives only the Host, they receive Christ's body (and not the Precious Blood), or if they receive only from the chalice, they receive Christ's blood alone. Catholics are permitted to receive under both forms, or just one.

This also in one of my big pet peeves...from the Catholic viewpoint, receiving the Body also indicates the Blood is being received. I have seen the claim about receiving under only one type but the accusation is groundless based on the teaching of their church.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2005, 09:31:23 AM by chris » Logged

"As the sparrow flees from a hawk, so the man seeking humility flees from an argument". St John Climacus
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2005, 02:13:29 PM »

Hi even in orthodox churches, our foonts dont necessarily run by "living" flowing water. At our parish we just pour from a bucket the waer inside the font and there is a little plug at the bottom and in the ground there is a drain so after the baptism we let the water run.

I have never completly understood indlugences and "graces". Catholics believe that when you pray the rosary or fulfill you sunday obligation then the Virgin Mary and Christ will grant you an indlugence which basically means what?...that even if you sin later that sin is already forgiven? This realyl confuses me. Isn't the whole thing with indulgences similar to the reason why Luther abandonend the Roman Church in the first place? In luther's case it had to do with the fact that your soul was saved once you "buy your salvation".

And what about purgatory? Isn't the orthodox toll houses a version of purgatory? (I'm not sure even exactly what to believe about pergatory).
Logged
SeanMc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2005, 02:48:19 PM »

Quote
I have never completly understood indlugences and "graces". Catholics believe that when you pray the rosary or fulfill you sunday obligation then the Virgin Mary and Christ will grant you an indlugence which basically means what?...that even if you sin later that sin is already forgiven? This realyl confuses me. Isn't the whole thing with indulgences similar to the reason why Luther abandonend the Roman Church in the first place? In luther's case it had to do with the fact that your soul was saved once you "buy your salvation".

Nothing more confusing than indulgences, I tell you. Ok, when man sins, he incurs both termporal and eternal guilt (only temporal guilt in terms of venial sins, however). Eternal guilt is only forgiven by going to confession and repenting, but temporal guilt from venial and mortal sins still remain and need to be expiated.

Now, temporal guilt can be remitted by different ways. The first way would be, after death, the person is purified from their temporal guilt in purgatory. The second way to remitt temporal guilt would be by doing penance: like fasting, alms-giving, and prayer. Now an indulgence is like penance, except less work. The Church, using her authority from Matt. 18:18, takes the surplus "merits" that the Saints have gained (through penance and other works) and apply them to the temporal guilt of the person receiving the indulgence. Now a person has to say a prayer or something that the Church requires to receive said indulgence.

This goes back to the penances that the Church exacted on people for certain sins. Now back in the day when Christians were still being martyred, the merits of a martyrdom of a person were substituted for those penances demanded by the Church.

That's how I understood it, at least.
Logged
Thepeug
CRXtraordinary
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic
Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Posts: 18

OC.net


« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2005, 06:47:29 PM »

Interesting.  I've often wondered whether or not indulgences had any connection with early Church practices.
Logged

“Every day I say to myself – today I will begin.”

– St. Anthony of the Desert
Philokalia
Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 173


Hail Mary Full of Grace


WWW
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2005, 06:24:55 PM »


Does the Catholic Church still commune under only one form outside of the US?

In Christ,
Aaron

No, I have been to Mass here in the UK and also in Belgium and Italy and Communion under both kinds was the norm
Logged

Violence is a lie, for it goes against the truth of our faith, the truth of our humanity. Violence destroys what it claims to defend: the dignity, the life, the freedom of human beings. Violence is a crime against humanity, for it destroys the very fabric of society.
SeanMc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 203


« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2005, 07:03:32 PM »

Quote
No, I have been to Mass here in the UK and also in Belgium and Italy and Communion under both kinds was the norm

Apparently you need an indult to do that as, as far as I know, it's only allowed for Maundy Thursday and the Easter Vigil. Of course, many people don't follow the rules anyway.
Logged
Kosmas
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2005, 01:13:35 PM »

Apparently you need an indult to do that as, as far as I know, it's only allowed for Maundy Thursday and the Easter Vigil. Of course, many people don't follow the rules anyway.

What's an indult? Is that special permission?
Logged

«Ουδείς εκών κακός» Σωκράτης
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2005, 04:37:25 PM »

Quote
What's an indult? Is that special permission?

Yes -- it's an exception granted to an otherwise binding norm. I've most commonly seen it in reference to the allowance made for priests to celebrate mass according to the Tridentine rite with the approval of their local bishop.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2005, 04:37:56 PM by yBeayf » Logged
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2005, 09:23:32 PM »

According to this website -

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/041125153738

Indulgences were also formerly employed in the Greek Orthodox Church....?  Huh  Undecided
Logged
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2005, 09:31:19 PM »

According to this website -

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/enarticles/041125153738

Indulgences were also formerly employed in the Greek Orthodox Church....?ÂÂ  HuhÂÂ  Undecided

Not exactly. You maybe getting absolutions mixed up with indulgences here.  The Greek church as since dispensed with the issuing of absolutions some time ago.

JoeS
Logged
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2005, 09:51:54 PM »

Quote
Not exactly. You maybe getting absolutions mixed up with indulgences here.  The Greek church as since dispensed with the issuing of absolutions some time ago.

JoeS

Well, technically it would be the website that is causing the mix-up - I only posted the link to see what people's opinions of it were and now you've already pointed out one flaw of it, which is good.  Smiley Perhaps it is just translational error, as the website is of Russian origin...?
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   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 0.067 seconds with 41 queries.