Opinions on the Corrective Baptism issue?

[Not David]

There is a group of people in the Church who not only say Chrismation is an inappropriate entrance into the Church, but also claim Orthodox should get a corrective baptism if they were received by Chrismation. Any thoughts?

 

[HTacianas]

There is a group of people in the Church who not only say Chrismation is an inappropriate entrance into the Church, but also claim Orthodox should get a corrective baptism if they were received by Chrismation. Any thoughts?

That's a matter of questioning water baptism. Anyone can baptize a person in water, provided that it is performed using the trinitarian formula, but not everyone can perform chrismation. In another thread we are discussing Phillip the deacon baptizing the Samarians. Phillip did in fact baptize the Samaritans in water, but had to send for the Apostles to perform their chrismation.

In some cases there is a question as to whether a baptism has been performed using the trinitarian formula. Say a person comes from a protestant group. Most protestant groups do baptize using the trinitarian formula while others don't. Such a person can come into the Church through chrismation. But that is up to a Bishop to determine.

 

[ArmyMatt]

There is a group of people in the Church who not only say Chrismation is an inappropriate entrance into the Church, but also claim Orthodox should get a corrective baptism if they were received by Chrismation. Any thoughts?

do what your bishop says

 

[Not David]

do what your bishop says

How does the OCA receive people, Father?

 

[ArmyMatt]

How does the OCA receive people, Father?

depends on the bishop. the standing practice is chrismation if you had a prior baptism with water in a Trinitarian form. however, there are exceptions to this and it (should be) tackled case by case.

remember St John Maximovitch received Fr Seraphim Rose by chrismation.

 

[Dewi Sant]

I was baptised as an infant in the Church of England.
Now, I do not remember the baptism, but we can be pretty certain that it would have been in accordance with the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer and as such, Trinitarian in formula.

It gets a bit more tricky with churches which do not always use the Trinitarian formula, or where it has become optional.
For that reason, a conditional baptism may be requested.
There is no such thing as 'rebaptism'.

Perhaps this is done for the peace of mind of the hierarch, but I feel it may also be for the peace of mind of the catechumen.

 

[rusmeister]

I commented on FB, I think it’s worthwhile to repeat the relevant parts here, But first I would echo father Matt in saying, do what your bishop tells you to do.

I agree that there is a massive problem of converts being accepted into the Church who bring in their own ideas, own conceptions of theology and morality, and assume, wrongly, that the Church teaches what they should believe, or worse, “should teach” what they believe.

Does the issue of acceptance by chrismation play into this? Probably. Certainly, doing so seems to send a message that “some things you already believed were right” that can seem to extend beyond the bottom line of baptism to all sorts of beliefs and practices.

I myself was accepted by chrismation, and worried about it at the time. I had been baptised by both Catholics of the 1960’s and Baptists of the 1970’s (that didn’t recognize the Catholic baptism of sprinkling). My own opinion, correctable by the consensus of the Church fathers, is that God’s grace can certainly extend to bless a baptism carried out by the heterodox, which in all cases would have to have been Trinitarian, with water and in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But our Faith is not magic, and the idea of “you must do this procedure in exactly this way” seems to be exactly that, foreign to our Faith. At the same time, however, there really are widening differences between our Tradition and the more malleable (to put it lightly) traditions of the Trinitarian heterodox, that are continually falling further and further away, and it seems to me that that falling away would probably necessitate an increase in the need for formal Orthodox baptism. I speak as an ignoramus, prepared to correct anything I am mistaken on from the consensus of the fathers.

I do think that, more important than any formal conduct of a sacrament is the believer’s attitude, which HAS to be one of humility, obedience, and accepting the correction of the Church. Your bishop may be in error around something. He may even teach something that turns out to be heretical. But if we hold our hearts and minds opening to be taught by the saints, I think we are still on good ground. The problem of good catechesis seems to me to be a more burning issue. Do we really believe the same things? Above all, do we accept correction, not from Fr So-and-so of St Tikhon’s or St Vladimir’s Seminary, but from the consensus of the fathers? Do we say in our prayers, “Lord, I can’t save myself, I need You to save me!”?

 

[Justin-H.S.]

I think the Chrismation only thing was initially an economia which was supposed to be the exception, but then the exception became the rule where the overwhelming majority of receptions became Chrismation only. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

It's possible that this is only an issue in the West where the populous are heterodox (USA) and vaguely heterodox (Europe/Australia).

I imagine this isn't an issue in Japan where the majority of receptions are most likely done by Baptism+Chrismation.

 

[gzt]

There is a group of people in the Church who not only say Chrismation is an inappropriate entrance into the Church, but also claim Orthodox should get a corrective baptism if they were received by Chrismation. Any thoughts?

The idea of taking somebody who has already been received by the church according to the method appointed by their bishop, who has already been communing (perhaps for years) as an Orthodox Christian, and then baptizing them is frankly shocking to me.

 

[gzt]

depends on the bishop. the standing practice is chrismation if you had a prior baptism with water in a Trinitarian form. however, there are exceptions to this and it (should be) tackled case by case.

remember St John Maximovitch received Fr Seraphim Rose by chrismation.

And there are multiple saints who were received by chrismation.

 

[rusmeister]

The idea of taking somebody who has already been received by the church according to the method appointed by their bishop, who has already been communing (perhaps for years) as an Orthodox Christian, and then baptizing them is frankly shocking to me.

I can think of one thing that could make me support the idea: for people coming into the Church who wish to promote changes to the teachings of the Church and support groups who seek to promote active evils in society.

 

[gzt]

I think the Chrismation only thing was initially an economia which was supposed to be the exception, but then the exception became the rule where the overwhelming majority of receptions became Chrismation only. Maybe I'm wrong about that.

You might find this bit of ROCOR history interesting The Ecclesiastical Principle of oikonomia and the ROCOR under Metropolitan Anastassy - ROCOR Studies Corrects the odd idea about "economia" being expressed here.

 

[Not David]

depends on the bishop. the standing practice is chrismation if you had a prior baptism with water in a Trinitarian form. however, there are exceptions to this and it (should be) tackled case by case.

remember St John Maximovitch received Fr Seraphim Rose by chrismation.

I heard that the idea of "corrective baptism" is promoted by some monasteries. Have you heard anything about it?

 

[ArmyMatt]

And there are multiple saints who were received by chrismation.

I remember hearing that during the spat between St Stephen of Rome and St Cyprian, there were folks who came to St Cyprian asking to be baptized, since they were anointed by St Stephen. St Cyprian said there was nothing he could do because they were already receiving communion.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I heard that the idea of "corrective baptism" is promoted by some monasteries. Have you heard anything about it?

some on Athos I heard, but not too many.

 

[Not David]

some on Athos I heard, but not too many.

Ok. I am asking because I see some people using the Elders supporting Corrective Baptism as a reason to disobey a bishop.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Ok. I am asking because I see some people using the Elders supporting Corrective Baptism as a reason to disobey a bishop.

yeah, that’s not good.

 

[gzt]

This all reminds me of Fr Seraphim Rose's wise letter on running into this issue -- first, it's just wrong to do, second, these zealots really are doing harm by trying to sow divisiveness, making a church-within-the-church. No good! Fr Seraphim Rose and "Corrective Baptism" - Orthodox History

This same thing is happening now:

At times we would like to think that the whole “Fr. Panteleimon problem” in our Church is just a matter of differing emphasis which, in the end, will not be so terribly important. But the more we observe, the more we come to think that it is much more serious than that, that in fact that an “orthodox sectarianism” is being formed at the expense of our simple people. Therefore, those who are aware of all this must be “zealots according to knowledge.” The Church has survived worse temptations in the past, but we fear for our converts lest in their simplicity they be led into a sect and out of the Church.

 

[Not David]

This all reminds me of Fr Seraphim Rose's wise letter on running into this issue -- first, it's just wrong to do, second, these zealots really are doing harm by trying to sow divisiveness, making a church-within-the-church. No good! Fr Seraphim Rose and "Corrective Baptism" - Orthodox History

This same thing is happening now:

We know that bishops are not infallible but a lot of people forget monks aren't infallible either.

 

[gzt]

We know that bishops are not infallible but a lot of people forget monks aren't infallible either.

Definitely, historically a ton of heresies and schisms are born in monasteries and the bishops have had to rein them in. There's a definite push and pull here.