OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 20, 2014, 10:19:47 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is non-Orthodox Baptism valid?  (Read 5206 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Truth_or_Bust
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 63



« on: August 28, 2005, 08:25:11 AM »

Greetings,
I have a question.ÂÂ  I was baptised about six years ago by a fringe protestant preacher in a river.ÂÂ  Their faith is kinda
a mix of seventh day adventist and "ango-Israelism".ÂÂ  About three years ago I studied myself out of that mess but I
am wondering was the baptism itself valid? I was baptised in the name of "Yahshua", emersed one time.ÂÂ  From my studies
in the last two years I have found that many of the things I had believed do not match up with the Scriptures, including the
very name "Yahshua".ÂÂ  I am currently trying to find my place in Christiandom but at the same time feel disheartned as I bounce from
one belief to the next searching for the True meaning and practice that Christ taught.ÂÂ  

Any comments would help.

Thanks,
Truth_or_Bust
« Last Edit: August 28, 2005, 08:25:45 AM by Truth_or_Bust » Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2005, 09:32:25 AM »

Welcome to the forum, ToB.

Firstly, you can do a search through the Search function above and read other threads about the validity or non-validity debate.

Secondly, your questions:

I was baptised about six years ago by a fringe protestant preacher in a river...in the name of "Yahshua", emersed one time.

Well, I admire his actually seeking out running water!  The fact that you were only immersed one time is not (unfortunately) enough in and of itself to warrant an Orthodox baptism, but since the exact formula "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" was not used in your baptism (he may have added "Yeshua" or maybe just used that), it's almost guaranteed that, were you to join the Orthodox Church you would be received through baptism, as a baptism that uses ANYTHING other than what I just quoted is considered invalid. 

Quote
Their faith is kinda a mix of seventh day adventist and "ango-Israelism".

Are they trinitarian?

Quote
From my studies in the last two years I have found that many of the things I had believed do not match up with the Scriptures, including the very name "Yahshua".

Well, the name "Yeshua" or "Yahshua" is just the Hebrew name for Jesus, and probably what He was called by those who knew Him well.  The Scriptures call Him Iesous, as they're written in Greek.

Quote
I am currently trying to find my place in Christiandom but at the same time feel disheartned as I bounce from one belief to the next searching for the True meaning and practice that Christ taught.

What have you read from the early Church Fathers?  Look for The Apostolic Fathers at amazon.com or elsewhere--they were the letters written in the late first/early second centuries by people such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, etc. who knew the Apostles personally.  They'll give you a lot of insight as to what the Church was originally like in form and how it originally believed.  Also good are Hippolytus, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus.

Prayers for you in your search.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2005, 09:37:14 AM »

was the baptism itself valid?

The real question is, valid for what?

Let's look at it objectively first of all. Christ commanded his disciples to
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit". Matthew 28:19
I have to ask, if these people claim to be disciples of Our Lord Jesus Christ, why then do they not do as He said and baptise in the Name of the Holy Trinity? Most probably, because they confuse the meaning of "Baptism in the Name of the Lord Jesus" referred to in Acts.

In the book of Acts, the term "Baptism in the Name of the Lord Jesus" is used to differentiate between the Baptism of St. John the Baptist and Christian Baptism, as the book of Acts itself attests when we are told that St. Paul:

"found certain disciples, and said to them: received ye the Holy Spirit since ye have believed? They said to him: but furthermore whether it be of the Holy Spirit, we shall hear. He said to them: into what were ye baptised? They answered: into the baptism of John. Paul then said: John indeed baptised with the baptism of repentance having proclaimed to the people, that they should believe in the One coming after him, namely, Christ Jesus. Having heard this, they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus: and Paul laying his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them" (Acts 19:1-6).

The things to note from this are:

1) Acts calls them "disciples" even though their baptism was not valid- the Orthodox Church would call them "catechumens"- ie. disciples in the process of being taught in preparation for baptism.

2) They had been baptised "into the baptism of John"- which is, they had been immersed in water (baptised) to show repentance of sin- but this baptism does not grant remission of sin.

3) Even though they had received this baptism of John, they must be "Baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus" (i.e. recieve the Baptism of the Church- the Body of Christ). Their previous baptism was not "valid" for initiation into the Church.

4) To distinguish between the two baptisms, one is called "the baptism of John" and the other is called "Baptism in the Name of the Lord Jesus"- meaning, the Baptism which Christ instituted as opposed to the one John instituted. And which baptism did Christ institute? "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit". Matthew 28:19

5) the "Didache"- an ancient Christian text dating to Apostolic times, and which most scholars agree predates the last of the Epistles and the first of the Gospels clearly describes the baptisimal practice of the first Christians as being triple immersion in the Name of the Holy Trinity.

So, in terms of Christian baptism- what you received doesn't resemble it in any way other than the use of water.

Secondly, baptism is (among other things) the granting of the remission of sin and initiation into the Church and for the reception of the Holy Spirit (Chrisimation- i.e. the "Laying on of hands" spoken of in Acts). As far as the Orthodox Church is concerned, there is, and can only ever be "One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church"- therefore, any baptism performed outside the Church, (ie by someone who is not themself a member of the Church) is invalid for reception into the Church, even if this baptism was done by triple immersion in the Name of the Holy Trinity. The Church can, in some cases, render this baptim valid retrospectively by Chrisimating the person, but as it stands, without Chrisimation or some other form of validation by the Church, any baptism outside the Church is invalid for reception into the Orthodox Church.

Hope this helps.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2005, 09:39:10 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Truth_or_Bust
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 63



« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2005, 10:40:24 AM »

Thanks for all of the thoughtful responses.  They do help immensely.  The key point that jumped out to me is that even though the disciples mentioned in the verses with Paul had already been baptized once, it was not improper for them to be baptized again with the correct immersion.   This was my biggest concern. That one only had one shot at the act of baptism.

I have recently learned that I was named after St. Stephen because I was born on his day.

Thanks again,
ToB

Logged
Kosmas
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2005, 01:25:29 PM »

A sacrament is only valid if it is conducted by a valid bishop or a priest who is under a valid bishop. The only time some jurisdictions in the Orthodox Church accept baptisms of Other Denominations is out of concession, not out of validity, and they have to be Baptised in the name of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). Catholics and some Protestant Groups such as the Anglicans (and I think perhaps the Lutherans) are only Chrismated with Holy Myrh, the Seal of Christ. This blesses the "in-valid" Baptism which had to be made in the name of the Trinitarian God.

If you wish to be Orthodox you have to be Baptised in the name of God (not just once in the name of Christ). The Apostles were ordered to Baptise in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit by Jesus. This means that you must be Baptised in the name of the Trinitarian God, the Chrismation or Anointing with Myre (a part of Orthodox Baptism) is the seal of Jesus Christ. So with these two Sacraments we are both baptised and anointed (chrismated). Chrismation or Anointing was done in the Apostolic times without oil because of practical reasons, so the Apostles simply layed their hands on them after they were baptised.

Some Protestant groups claim that we are not Baptised in Jesus Christ's name, this is not true of the Orthodox Church. We are Baptised and Chrismated in not only Christ's name, as we chant aloud "As Many as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ- Allelouyah"x3 but as the Priest or Bishop calls on the name of God the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit completely emmersing 3 times we are also baptised in God's name.

You may wish to organise a baptism with your nearest Orthodox Priest next time you visit. By the way Allelou-Yah  means Glory or Praise be to God in Hebrew. But that's another story.

YaHWeH = "I am the one who is" or "I am the source of being"
Logged

«Ουδείς εκών κακός» Σωκράτης
Truth_or_Bust
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 63



« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2005, 04:09:16 PM »

Thanks again for the information. Exactly what I needed to understand.

So it is accurate to say that the Holy Spirit was not imparted to me during
the previous Baptism? Perhaps that's why I have been seeking so much
looking for something that is obviously missing due to incorrect proceedure
by an unqualified person.

Thanks,
ToB
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2010, 10:37:11 PM »

CONTEXT NOTE: The following posts were split off from http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,30016.0.html



As long as I can remember they have been printed at the back of Serbian Calendars but I have no idea who authored them.

From what I understand the Serbian Orthodox Church is one of the strictest and most legalistic of all the Orthodox jurisdictions. My sponsor came to Orthodoxy through the Serbian church and they wouldn't accept his Protestant baptism so he had to be re-baptized.
And rightly so. Protestant baptisms are null and void.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 07:11:28 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
deuteros
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 92



« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2010, 10:39:57 PM »

And rightly so. Protestant baptisms are null and void.

Nearly all the Orthodox literature I've read says as long as the baptism is done in the Trinitatian formula it is valid and I've never talked to any priest who has said otherwise.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2010, 10:46:58 PM »

And rightly so. Protestant baptisms are null and void.

Nearly all the Orthodox literature I've read says as long as the baptism is done in the Trinitatian formula it is valid and I've never talked to any priest who has said otherwise.
Many local Orthodox churches baptize all Protestant converts. I know mine does.
Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,934


« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2010, 11:39:40 PM »

Nearly all the Orthodox literature I've read says as long as the baptism is done in the Trinitatian formula it is valid and I've never talked to any priest who has said otherwise.

On this subject I would highly recommend the book "I Confess One Baptism" by Fr. George Metallinos.  It is available online here:

http://www.oodegr.com/english/biblia/baptisma1/perieh.htm

If a Protestant or Roman Catholic desires to enter the Church, in the Jerusalem Patriarchate they would be baptized.  I know a man who was received into the OCA by Chrismation but when he went to Jerusalem they would not allow him to receive Communion without a baptismal certificate, so he was baptized in the Jordon.  Mt. Athos will also say that all converts should be received by baptism, one recent example being the Eastern Rite Catholic Abbot and patristic scholar Archimandrite Placide (Deseille) who, together with the fathers of his monastery, were received into the Church by baptism on Mt. Athos.  Fr. Cosmas, the Apostle to Zaire and monk of Mt. Athos, when receiving Protestants and Catholics into the Church in Africa, also required that all be baptized.  In the US, the Athonite monasteries in the Greek Archdiocese will tell you the same, that converts should be baptized.  ROCOR also follows this practice.  

Baptism is a Mystery of the Church and unites a person to the Church.  A person who receives a “baptism” outside of the Church has not been united to the Church and therefore has not received a real baptism.  If that person has received the proper form of baptism, the Church may decide to receive that person by Chrismation, stating that the *form* of “baptism” initially received was a valid *form*, and reception by Chrismation then completes and fills with the grace of God what was lacking in the initial “baptism.”  A non-Orthodox baptism, however, can never be considered “valid” in the sense of being a full and complete Mystery of the Church which grants remission of sins and unites man to the Church.  We can only speak that way of the Mysteries of the one, true Church.    
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,916



« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2010, 11:46:31 PM »

If a Protestant or Roman Catholic desires to enter the Church, in the Jerusalem Patriarchate they would be baptized.  I know a man who was received into the OCA by Chrismation but when he went to Jerusalem they would not allow him to receive Communion without a baptismal certificate, so he was baptized in the Jordon.  Mt. Athos will also say that all converts should be received by baptism, one recent example being the Eastern Rite Catholic Abbot and patristic scholar Archimandrite Placide (Deseille) who, together with the fathers of his monastery, were received into the Church by baptism on Mt. Athos.  Fr. Cosmas, the Apostle to Zaire and monk of Mt. Athos, when receiving Protestants and Catholics into the Church in Africa, also required that all be baptized.  In the US, the Athonite monasteries in the Greek Archdiocese will tell you the same, that converts should be baptized.  ROCOR also follows this practice.

Irish Hermit related to me that His Grace our Serbian bishop LONGIN was a bishop in either Australia or New Zealand, I can't remember which, that he received even a Roman Catholic priest by baptism.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2010, 11:53:51 PM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #11 on: September 24, 2010, 12:06:37 AM »


Irish Hermit related to me that His Grace our Serbian bishop LONGIN was a bishop in either Australia or New Zealand, I can't remember which,

Both.  Australia and New Zealand form one diocese.

Quote

 that he received even a Roman Catholic priest by baptism.

True.
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,850



« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2010, 03:59:55 AM »

I know a man who was received into the OCA by Chrismation but when he went to Jerusalem they would not allow him to receive Communion without a baptismal certificate, so he was baptized in the Jordon.

 Huh Huh Huh

Is this the official policy of JP?
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 04:00:51 AM by Alpo » Logged

peccatorum
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: roman catholic
Jurisdiction: Brazil
Posts: 81



« Reply #13 on: September 24, 2010, 08:30:37 AM »

"Credo in unum baptisma per remissione peccatorum".
Logged

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy;
Blessed are the pure in the heart, for they shall see God".
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 24, 2010, 12:48:58 PM »

"Credo in unum baptisma per remissione peccatorum".

English, please.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,916



« Reply #15 on: September 24, 2010, 01:36:06 PM »

He said, "I believe in one baptism for the remission of sins." What this has to do with joint prayer is beyond me, since the will of the green ink has barred further discussion on the matter baptism of Christian "converts."
Logged
peccatorum
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: roman catholic
Jurisdiction: Brazil
Posts: 81



« Reply #16 on: September 24, 2010, 02:00:15 PM »

Quote
He said, "I believe in one baptism for the remission of sins." What this has to do with joint prayer is beyond me, since the will of the green ink has barred further discussion on the matter baptism of Christian "converts."
I mean I do not have to be baptized again, my baptism is valid.
May the Love of Christ be upon you.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 02:02:07 PM by peccatorum » Logged

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy;
Blessed are the pure in the heart, for they shall see God".
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,916



« Reply #17 on: September 24, 2010, 05:09:58 PM »

I mean I do not have to be baptized again, my baptism is valid.

Orthodox baptism is valid but illicit.  Wink
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #18 on: September 24, 2010, 07:19:37 PM »

Quote
He said, "I believe in one baptism for the remission of sins." What this has to do with joint prayer is beyond me, since the will of the green ink has barred further discussion on the matter baptism of Christian "converts."
I mean I do not have to be baptized again, my baptism is valid.
May the Love of Christ be upon you.
peccatorum,

As I mentioned earlier, this is the Faith Issues board, a place for discussion of issues and inquiries relating to the Orthodox Christian faith (not the Roman Catholic faith, nor one of the Protestant faiths).  Additionally, the Orthodox teaching on the validity of non-Orthodox baptisms, as we are discussing it here, is fundamentally an issue internal to the Orthodox Church.  If you want to discuss this from your point of view as a Roman Catholic, then please do so on a thread located somewhere other than on Faith Issues.  I'm sure you'll find some on the Orthodox-Catholic Discussion board or on the Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion board.

Since I have already warned you within the past 36 hours about your conduct on the Faith Issues board (see THIS POST), my next warning will be accompanied by a green dot, which will show up on your profile wherever you post.

- PeterTheAleut
Faith Issues Section Moderator
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 07:25:58 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 24, 2010, 07:22:34 PM »

And rightly so. Protestant baptisms are null and void.

Nearly all the Orthodox literature I've read says as long as the baptism is done in the Trinitatian formula it is valid and I've never talked to any priest who has said otherwise.

It's potentially misleading language. "Valid" means it had proper form and the Church can fulfill it with grace. It does not mean that it was a legitimate Sacrament.
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
Lenexa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Old Orthodox
Posts: 159


VOCATUS ATQUE NON VOCATUS, DEUS ADERIT


« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2010, 09:22:27 PM »

Quote
three years ago I studied myself out of that mess but I
am wondering was the baptism itself valid?
No.
From reading about being baptised in the name of Yahsua one time I can tell you that every Orthodox priest I've known, even one who is very open-minded on this issue would insist on chrismation for most protestants and would argue that in this case you should be baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being immersed by thrice, that is once for each person of the Trinity.
No baptism outside the Church is valid. That is simply a term that relates to whether the FORM was valid in that the Grace of the Church can be infused into it. Some argue from a strict stance that if the baptism is outside the Church it is never valid because the right faith is necessary for the form to be truly valid.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #21 on: September 24, 2010, 09:28:53 PM »

What of the time when East and West had different opinions on the baptism of heretics while we were yet one Church?  The 3rd-century dispute between Pope St. Stephen of Rome and Bishop St. Cyprian of Carthage comes to mind.  Why do we assume that St. Cyprian was right while St. Stephen was wrong?
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #22 on: September 24, 2010, 09:39:19 PM »

Why do we assume that St. Cyprian was right while St. Stephen was wrong?

Because a number of Eastern Fathers actually explicitly confirmed support for the side Saint Cyprian had taken, Saint Basil and Saint Cyril of Jerusalem among them. OTOH, I haven't heard any among them really support what Saint Stephen was trying to assert.
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
peccatorum
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: roman catholic
Jurisdiction: Brazil
Posts: 81



« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2010, 09:40:03 PM »

Well, as I said before, when I converted to Christianism, I did it through Orthodoxy (Antiochian Patriarcate, St Fanourios parish, Padre Geraldo), and even the Bishop, D. Atanasios, a very wise man, told me that I could not baptize again (because catholic tradition in brazil is too strong, usually everyone is baptized as a baby, which is my case, I was baptized in Roman Catholic Church of St Sebastian at  Shocked Paranapanema Street  Shocked (I know that it seems unpronounceable to you, but when get used with portuguese, it becomes very, very easy Grin)), he said I was already baptized, and i's heresy to be baptized again.
I'm sure you all know Fabio Leite, ask him if it's not done that way here.
As said before, all I am wrigting to you is what I see. I am strongly bonded by culture, and I don't know many things I wish you to teach me.
Ad Majorem Gloriam Dei.
Logged

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy;
Blessed are the pure in the heart, for they shall see God".
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #24 on: September 24, 2010, 09:40:36 PM »

Why do we assume that St. Cyprian was right while St. Stephen was wrong?

Because a number of Eastern Fathers actually explicitly confirmed support for the side Saint Cyprian had taken, Saint Basil and Saint Cyril of Jerusalem among them. OTOH, I haven't heard any among them really support what Saint Stephen was trying to assert.

On top of that, even today, extra ecclesium nulla salus is essentially treated as if a dogma. Saint Cyprian generated this phrase and his position on Baptism was essentially the logical conclusion of it.
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 #25 on: September 24, 2010, 09:42:33 PM »

Well, as I said before, when I converted to Christianism, I did it through Orthodoxy (Antiochian Patriarcate, St Fanourios parish, Padre Geraldo), and even the Bishop, D. Atanasios, a very wise man, told me that I could not baptize again (because catholic tradition in brazil is too strong, usually everyone is baptized as a baby, which is my case, I was baptized in Roman Catholic Church of St Sebastian at  Shocked Paranapanema Street  Shocked (I know that it seems unpronounceable to you, but when get used with portuguese, it becomes very, very easy Grin)), he said I was already baptized, and i's heresy to be baptized again.

Many lay people and clergymen have taken the economic recognition of the valid form of heterodox baptisms and reception of them by Chrismation to an illogical extreme that was not at all intended by the original arrangement.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 09:42:43 PM by deusveritasest » 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
peccatorum
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: roman catholic
Jurisdiction: Brazil
Posts: 81



« Reply #26 on: September 24, 2010, 09:46:25 PM »

Well, as I said before, when I converted to Christianism, I did it through Orthodoxy (Antiochian Patriarcate, St Fanourios parish, Padre Geraldo), and even the Bishop, D. Atanasios, a very wise man, told me that I could not baptize again (because catholic tradition in brazil is too strong, usually everyone is baptized as a baby, which is my case, I was baptized in Roman Catholic Church of St Sebastian at  Shocked Paranapanema Street  Shocked (I know that it seems unpronounceable to you, but when get used with portuguese, it becomes very, very easy Grin)), he said I was already baptized, and i's heresy to be baptized again.

Many lay people and clergymen have taken the economic recognition of the valid form of heterodox baptisms and reception of them by Chrismation to an illogical extreme that was not at all intended by the original arrangement.
No. It assumes only the Catholic or Orthodox baptism (I mean, here in Rio).
Logged

"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy;
Blessed are the pure in the heart, for they shall see God".
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 24, 2010, 09:48:13 PM »

Well, as I said before, when I converted to Christianism, I did it through Orthodoxy (Antiochian Patriarcate, St Fanourios parish, Padre Geraldo), and even the Bishop, D. Atanasios, a very wise man, told me that I could not baptize again (because catholic tradition in brazil is too strong, usually everyone is baptized as a baby, which is my case, I was baptized in Roman Catholic Church of St Sebastian at  Shocked Paranapanema Street  Shocked (I know that it seems unpronounceable to you, but when get used with portuguese, it becomes very, very easy Grin)), he said I was already baptized, and i's heresy to be baptized again.

Many lay people and clergymen have taken the economic recognition of the valid form of heterodox baptisms and reception of them by Chrismation to an illogical extreme that was not at all intended by the original arrangement.
No. It assumes only the Catholic or Orthodox baptism (I mean, here in Rio).

I'm not sure I'm understanding what you're trying to convey here.
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
Quid
Freshly converted rubiks cube ninja
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 80



« Reply #28 on: September 24, 2010, 09:51:00 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!
Logged

"Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #29 on: September 24, 2010, 09:52:16 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!

Wait, you're saying that you were only immersed once?
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
Quid
Freshly converted rubiks cube ninja
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 80



« Reply #30 on: September 24, 2010, 09:56:14 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!

Wait, you're saying that you were only immersed once?

Yes. My priest asked for a baptism certificate which I gave him and he looked over it and said everything was in order. I was immered once in the name of the father ,son, and the holy spirit.
Logged

"Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #31 on: September 24, 2010, 09:58:12 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!

Wait, you're saying that you were only immersed once?

Yes. My priest asked for a baptism certificate which I gave him and he looked over it and said everything was in order. I was immered once in the name of the father ,son, and the holy spirit.

That's a little sketchy. If I were you I would try to postpone the Chrismation and be Baptized.

But I don't know enough about this sort of thing to make too solid of a judgment.
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
Quid
Freshly converted rubiks cube ninja
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 80



« Reply #32 on: September 24, 2010, 10:04:27 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!

Wait, you're saying that you were only immersed once?

Yes. My priest asked for a baptism certificate which I gave him and he looked over it and said everything was in order. I was immered once in the name of the father ,son, and the holy spirit.

That's a little sketchy. If I were you I would try to postpone the Chrismation and be Baptized.

But I don't know enough about this sort of thing to make too solid of a judgment.

I just called my priest. He said it would be fine. Seems that custom of being submerged three times is not a real issue. But moreso that it be in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit.
Logged

"Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #33 on: September 24, 2010, 10:52:25 PM »

No baptism outside the Church is valid.
I am confused by the term "outside the Church".
But outside of which Church? There are Eastern Orthodox Churches which do not recognise each other in some sense and there is the Oriental Orthodox Church also.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #34 on: September 24, 2010, 11:03:37 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!

Wait, you're saying that you were only immersed once?

Yes. My priest asked for a baptism certificate which I gave him and he looked over it and said everything was in order. I was immered once in the name of the father ,son, and the holy spirit.

That's a little sketchy. If I were you I would try to postpone the Chrismation and be Baptized.

But I don't know enough about this sort of thing to make too solid of a judgment.
It's the bishop's judgment, not yours, to decide what needs to be done here.  Your level of knowledge means nothing here.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 11:04:03 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #35 on: September 24, 2010, 11:08:41 PM »

No baptism outside the Church is valid.
I am confused by the term "outside the Church".
But outside of which Church? There are Eastern Orthodox Churches which do not recognise each other in some sense and there is the Oriental Orthodox Church also.
Stanley,

I'm going to tell you the same thing I told another RC on this thread.  This thread is on the Faith Issues board, so please let us Orthodox discuss this from our point of view without introducing such confusion as "which Orthodox church is the real Church?".  If you wish to discuss the problems you have with the Orthodox view of heterodox baptism, please take up your concerns on the Orthodox-Catholic thread currently open for this purpose (http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28873.0.html).  Thank you.

- PeterTheAleut
Faith Issues Section Moderator
Logged
Quid
Freshly converted rubiks cube ninja
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 80



« Reply #36 on: September 24, 2010, 11:13:58 PM »

Thank you Peter.

I'm going to ask this even though I know the answer. Im just going to ask out of personal reassurance.

I should just go with what my priest says right?
Logged

"Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #37 on: September 24, 2010, 11:16:23 PM »

Thank you Peter.

I'm going to ask this even though I know the answer. Im just going to ask out of personal reassurance.

I should just go with what my priest says right?
No one on this forum has the authority to dictate to you what you are to do regarding your entrance into the Church.  Do whatever your priest tells you to do and don't worry about what you hear from any of us yahoos.
Logged
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #38 on: September 24, 2010, 11:31:19 PM »

Thank you Peter.

I'm going to ask this even though I know the answer. Im just going to ask out of personal reassurance.

I should just go with what my priest says right?

Absolutely, he is representing the Bishop. If we can accept that RC/Protestant baptisms have the proper form with no immersions at all being done... and if we acknowledge that Chrismation can effect Grace into the baptisms performed by others... I think you can take it from here. Congrats on your Baptism and Chrismation.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #39 on: September 24, 2010, 11:31:41 PM »

No baptism outside the Church is valid.
I am confused by the term "outside the Church".
But outside of which Church? There are Eastern Orthodox Churches which do not recognise each other in some sense and there is the Oriental Orthodox Church also.

Are you serious? I'm pretty sure he/she means outside the canonical Byzantine communion.
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 #40 on: September 24, 2010, 11:32:49 PM »

I should just go with what my priest says right?

So long as you trust he is being faithful to the Apostolic deposit.
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 #41 on: September 24, 2010, 11:35:15 PM »

Whoa??? Submerged three times? I was submerged once in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit. My priest said that was ok and never, ever mentioned having to be submerged three times. Is this really an issue? My Chrismation is tomorrow!

Wait, you're saying that you were only immersed once?

Yes. My priest asked for a baptism certificate which I gave him and he looked over it and said everything was in order. I was immered once in the name of the father ,son, and the holy spirit.

That's a little sketchy. If I were you I would try to postpone the Chrismation and be Baptized.

But I don't know enough about this sort of thing to make too solid of a judgment.
It's the bishop's judgment, not yours, to decide what needs to be done here.  Your level of knowledge means nothing here.

For what you are taking it to mean, no that's not really true.

It is jurisdictionally the bishop's place to be deciding how to initiate someone interested in joining his diocese.

However, the laity are very much in a position to be judging whether this decision is loyal to the Apostolic faith or not.
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
Quid
Freshly converted rubiks cube ninja
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 80



« Reply #42 on: September 24, 2010, 11:37:34 PM »

Thank you Peter.

I'm going to ask this even though I know the answer. Im just going to ask out of personal reassurance.

I should just go with what my priest says right?
No one on this forum has the authority to dictate to you what you are to do regarding your entrance into the Church.  Do whatever your priest tells you to do and don't worry about what you hear from any of us yahoos.

Sweet. I'm pretty excited about my Chrismation tomorrow and am eager to partake in my first Eucharist Sunday and reallyreallyreally didnt want another obstacle in my already prolonged conversion.  
Logged

"Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,552



WWW
« Reply #43 on: September 24, 2010, 11:50:44 PM »

As to the question of whether a nonOrthodox Baptism is valid, I believe the answer is "Yes," because the information on the debate between st Stephen and St Cyrprian on rebaptism shows that the earliest tradition handed down to them said was that heretic baptism was ok if it was trinitarian. There could have been other criteria besides just "the trinity", but the traditional Protestant and Catholic churches match the criteria.

Today, however, the Greek church in particular uses rebaptism, while the Russian and Antiochian traditions I believe use chrismation for traditional protestants.

Unlike Protestant churches, with their idea of "total depravity", the Orthodox church has more authentic teachings, but we shouldn't let their problems persuade us to err when evaluating their rites.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2010, 11:55:39 PM by rakovsky » Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #44 on: September 24, 2010, 11:52:38 PM »

The single immersion practiced by Protestants is surely deficient and possibly heretic.
The form of the sacrament require three distinct actions whether those be immersions or affusions.
Logged
Tags: baptism 
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 0.155 seconds with 71 queries.