Orthodoxinfo.com

[jckstraw72]

If the Baptism wasn't valid, then why not just rebaptize?

its economia - its laxity rather than strictness - unfortunately in many places in America economia has become the rule rather than the exception.

Why charismate with the implication that it "fixes" an invalid baptism?

well why would the baptism need to be "fixed" if it was a real baptism?

 

[Protoevangel]

are you sure you're giving a Patristically-supported answer?

Are you sure they really care?

 

[Tallguy88]

its economia - its laxity rather than strictness - unfortunately in many places in America economia has become the rule rather than the exception.

well why would the baptism need to be "fixed" if it was a real baptism?

I never claimed it needed to be. That's the view of that site and you. I'm asking for support for it or an assessment as to it's correctness.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Who is "they," Dan?

Are you sure they really care?

 

[jckstraw72]

well as far as support, it seems like the article you referenced offers a good bit of support

 

[buzuxi02]

Sacraments do not exist outside the church. The church reserves the option to utilize a correct form and make full what was lacking. The keyword being 'option'. A bishop can opt to baptise a heterodox, change his mind, then flip flop back and forth. Heterodox forms become true mysteries only upon reception into the church and not before.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Where do you get this from? It was my understanding that we know where grace exists, but we don't know where it does not exist? The Orthodox Church has varying opinions as to whether sacramental graces are conferred outside of the Holy Orthodox Church. We just don't know, right? How do you say this with certainty?

Sacraments do not exist outside the church. The church reserves the option to utilize a correct form and make full what was lacking. The keyword being 'option'. A bishop can opt to baptise a heterodox, change his mind, then flip flop back and forth. Heterodox forms become true mysteries only upon reception into the church and not before.

 

[buzuxi02]

The practise of the Church, her canons and ecclesiology suggest sacraments are of the church. The canons only allow Orthodox laity to perform an emergency baptism and even then if the person survives the bishop can opt to either chrismate him or baptise him. Unlike in the west we do not recognize sacraments performed by any other than a clergyman with apostolic succession.

In the west teven a muslim can perform an emergency baptism and in cases of matrimony the spouses are the officiants. If the practise of the church is that only Orthodox laity are effective in an emergency baptism, then the sacrament is not recognized outside Her. If it were then there would be no baptismal rite, no excorcism prayers, no cutting of hair, no service would exist. We woild just baptise our own family members in the shower in front of a witness and be done with it.

 

[Tallguy88]

[QUOTE="buzuxi02"If it were then there would be no baptismal rite, no excorcism prayers, no cutting of hair, no service would exist. We woild just baptise our own family members in the shower in front of a witness and be done with it.[/QUOTE]

Is that what Catholics do? Or even Protestants? Of course not.

 

[Tallguy88]

well as far as support, it seems like the article you referenced offers a good bit of support

The article is from a site I find suspect, so this article is suspect as well.

 

[buzuxi02]

Tall we do not recognize sacraments outside the Church, we only recognize the form. When a bishop opts to recieve a heterodox through baptism it does not mean the candidate was baptised twice. It means the the former ritual never was. The bishop does not determine or pronounce the formerl valid, eikonomia is based upon two things. First that the form is appropriate, secondly whether the former group is friendly and not actively antagonistic against Orthodoxy. The latter is a policy decision which changes with the times and places.

 

[Tallguy88]

So I am not baptized and not really a Christian and have never received Grace in my life? That's encouraging.

 

[Tallguy88]

I can't jive with this, you dig?

 

[Anhelyna]

Tallguy

This is something you really must talk about with your priest.

At this stage , when you are taking in info and trying to process it , it's very easy to get hung up on things , and these things can become too large for you to cope with .

There's no need to rush into things , it takes time to grow into Orthodoxy

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I acknowledge ONE baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

 

[truthseeker32]

Tallguy,

Think of it this way. The Orthodox Church as a whole neither affirms nor denies where God's graces are present. Thus if an Orthodox priest or bishop said you had to be rebaptized it would not necessarily be a denial that you had ever been graced by God, rather it would be a "maybe you have, but just in case lets play it safe" veiw.

This is what Abbot Tryphon told me:

Regarding the testimonies of those who have encountered God outside of Orthodoxy, I will say this. We Orthodox recognize that where ever there is truth, it is Orthodox Truth. We see Truth being Orthodox, but also see Orthodoxy as being the only place that has the fullness of Truth.

As an Orthodox Christian, I would never dare to question whether another person has experienced God. I remember a Christian-Buddhist Dialogue conference I was once participating it, where I came away feeling that two of the Buddhist monks had indeed encountered God, even though they did not believe in a personal God.

St. Paul talked about the ability of some to know God through natural law. I believe this to be true. I have many friends who are non-Orthodox, including the abbot of the local Zen Center, and I never push Orthodoxy on them. The Holy Spirit will draw whom He will draw. When the Russian monks first encountered the natives of Alaska, they never judged them as pagans, but as children of God. They did not assume their totems were idols, nor did they push their faith upon them. They shared their lives with the native peoples, and demonstrated by their love, the truth of Christ, and His Church.

To this day, the Alaskan natives who are Orthodox, will tell you their native religion is Orthodox, because they came to see Orthodoxy as the fulfillment of their religion. No other native peoples in the lower 48 would identify their native religion as Christian, even if they themselves are now Christian.

I personally have little doubt that God's graces are present in other denominations. I don't think God is so partial that He would limit his blessings to only those few who were lucky enough to know about and accept Orthodoxy during their short lives. I also have yet to meet a priest who doesn't hold this view as well.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So I am not baptized and not really a Christian and have never received Grace in my life? That's encouraging.

I think it's best that we don't know. so since we don't really know you, the only one who can determine this is your local priest, and not us. there are folks in the Church who are much closer to Christ than I am, and I was baptized while they were "only" chrismated. so I would say you should talk to the one guy who can help you, which is your priest.

this is not a judgment on you or your walk with God or how He has acted in your life, but rather it is us defering that judgment to God. the only thing I think we can say with clarity is that we know where the guarenteed fullness of His grace and truth is, so it's best for everyone to go there.

hope that helps

 

[jckstraw72]

we have not been discussing whether or not you have experienced grace outside the Church. we have been talking about Sacraments.

 

[snowpumpkin]

we have not been discussing whether or not you have experienced grace outside the Church. we have been talking about Sacraments.

Seriously? You're talking in circles.

 

[Steinbeck]

I acknowledge ONE baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

Yes. But how does one define baptism? That seems more operative to me.