Baptism

[anna ~ grace]

Did you ever notice in scripture the sequence of baptism, followed by the laying of hands for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?

Acts 19


Acts 8


Hebrews 6


Note that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is through the laying of hands after baptism. That's not to say that the Holy Spirit doesn't work in others' lives - the Spirit blows where He wills - but it is the progression of baptism and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as shown in scripture.

That said, it is the chrismation - equivalent of the laying of hands - in which we receive the seal of the Holy Spirit, not baptism itself.

https://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/worship/the-sacraments/chrismation


ETA: this was a hard one for me to understand, especially coming from a Pentecostal background. After studying scripture more (and reading the church fathers), however, it started to make sense.

Thanks for this. It's kind of tough for me to wrap my head around. Is there a belief in Orthodoxy that children are somehow intuitively capable of knowing and following Christ, and that should a child die, they're basically good to go Paradise wise?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Is there a belief in Orthodoxy that children are somehow intuitively capable of knowing and following Christ, and that should a child die, they're basically good to go Paradise wise?

in a sense yes. babies are born fallen, but pure and innocent.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Did you ever notice in scripture the sequence of baptism, followed by the laying of hands for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?

Acts 19


Acts 8


Hebrews 6


Note that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is through the laying of hands after baptism. That's not to say that the Holy Spirit doesn't work in others' lives - the Spirit blows where He wills - but it is the progression of baptism and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as shown in scripture.

That said, it is the chrismation - equivalent of the laying of hands - in which we receive the seal of the Holy Spirit, not baptism itself.

https://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/worship/the-sacraments/chrismation


ETA: this was a hard one for me to understand, especially coming from a Pentecostal background. After studying scripture more (and reading the church fathers), however, it started to make sense.

I agree with what you wrote here, and myself having come from (among other things) a Pentecostal background.

I think it's important to acknowledge that the Holy Spirit works where He will, otherwise it all sounds like complete falsehood to Pentecostal ears.

But - I found that Chrismation (after my Baptism, and followed by the Eucharist, so I don't mean to say that I know which of the sacraments did what for me exactly) ... But after I was Chrismated - yes, I found things changed. My eyes were absolutely opened to things I'd been blinded to before (I became very painfully aware of a sin-infected mindset that colored my life that I had completely missed before), there were things about the faith that suddenly made sense, my heart began to change, and other things. I KNOW God did things in me before to heal me, strengthen my faith, change me. But it wasn't the fullness I received with the Sacraments.

That's why I can hardly bear to miss the Divine Liturgy on any day it is offered, and why I structure my life around that, despite it causing certain other difficulties. And I'm happy to do so. It's more than worth it. Glory to God!

 

[anna ~ grace]

in a sense yes. babies are born fallen, but pure and innocent.

So the Catholic / Latin / Western idea of Original Sin is understood a bit differently by the Orthodox?

 

[All4Christ]

So the Catholic / Latin / Western idea of Original Sin is understood a bit differently by the Orthodox?

Yes. Essentially the Eastern Orthodox Church believes we inherited the consequences of the "original sin" - first and foremost death - but not the guilt of that first sin. The current view in the Western Church relies heavily of the theological interpretation of St Augustine. The Western view also often promotes total depravity. We do not consider that to be an effect of the original sin. While we do teach that humanity is damaged by that original sin, our depravity is not total, consummate, or inherent to human nature—we retain our reason and free will (Imago Dei). Some universal consequences for humanity are physical death, disease, and difficult labor. This death and corruption of the world are results of breaking communion with God. Adam and Eve, humanity and creation are all linked together - so these consequences affect us all. The Fall also produced an inclination for us to move away from God. Original Sin is why the RCC has the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. In the Orthodox Church, however, there is no need for the IC.

To clarify the difference between our view and the Western view, we often call it Ancestral sin.

I apologize for the brevity but I am short on time this morning. This is a good article comparing our view with the Western idea.

https://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/worship/the-sacraments/chrismation

A snippet:

This doctrine [original vs Ancestral sin] has wide implications for anthropology—sin, grace, free will, baptism, and theosis. How we understand the effects of the Fall directly bears on our soteriology. The Orthodox position on original sin (“ancestral sin”) is that humanity inherited only the consequences of sin from Adam and Eve, rather than their guilt. Baptism restores God’s grace to humans so that we have the ability to overcome sin and death and finish the song of humanity.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So the Catholic / Latin / Western idea of Original Sin is understood a bit differently by the Orthodox?

Yes, for us we are born dealing with the effects of Adam's sin (corruption, death, and an inclination to sin), but we are not born guilty of any sin aside from our own. So a baby is sinless in that he did not commit any sin, but since he will still die he needs the Savior.

 

[anna ~ grace]

Just wanted to thank you guys for your answers and patience. Matt, your point about John the Baptist being filled with the Spirit in the womb is pretty cool; never would have even thought of that. Thank you guys, and have a blessed Sunday!

 

[mcarmichael]

Did you ever notice in scripture the sequence of baptism, followed by the laying of hands for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?

Note that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is through the laying of hands after baptism. That's not to say that the Holy Spirit doesn't work in others' lives - the Spirit blows where He wills - but it is the progression of baptism and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as shown in scripture.

That said, it is the chrismation - equivalent of the laying of hands - in which we receive the seal of the Holy Spirit, not baptism itself.

The Orthodox Faith - Volume II - Worship - The Sacraments - Chrismation


ETA: this was a hard one for me to understand, especially coming from a Pentecostal background. After studying scripture more (and reading the church fathers), however, it started to make sense.

It makes some sense to me, but I always think of the Ethiopian guy, who was baptized by the Apostle Philip but it seems like before Philip could lay hands on him, he was "whisked" away.

 

[ArmyMatt]

It makes some sense to me, but I always think of the Ethiopian guy, who was baptized by the Apostle Philip but it seems like before Philip could lay hands on him, he was "whisked" away.

I think the thing to take from the story of the eunuch, is that he did not understand the Scriptures simply by reading them. he had to be illumined by someone who was already in the Body of Christ to come to understanding.

 

[mcarmichael]

I think the thing to take from the story of the eunuch, is that he did not understand the Scriptures simply by reading them. he had to be illumined by someone who was already in the Body of Christ to come to understanding.

Well, you'll also notice that he didn't prophecy or speak in tongues.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Well, you'll also notice that he didn't prophecy or speak in tongues.

correct

 

[buzuxi02]

Matt, thank you for your answer! A common Baptist argument is that infants and small children don't *need* baptism, as the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to ones like them, and that consequently infant baptism does not help the infant, nor cause Christian faith. What would the Orthodox response to this be?

This is precisely why infant baptism is correct, because the Kingdom of God is opened to them they can partake of all the mysteries just like their adult Christian parents. When you are baptised you put on Christ and become heir to the Father(Gal 3.26-27). You are incorporated into his Body (1Cor 12.12-13).

And yes scripture does make at least one direct reference to infant baptism (gr. nepios is used meaning infant not child; teknon) in Galatians 3.27-4.2. So Paul did make a direct reference to a baby''s baptism in Gal 4.1

Baptists believe baptism is a ritual for the guilt ridden not realizing these mysteries are of the joy of God. Baptists view this sacrament as a need for the depraved sinner, whereas Orthodox view it as the many gifts of Grace bestowed upon us by God. It would be selfish to keep away these gifts from our children. When Christ said to his disciples do not hinder the children from coming unto me for as such is the kingdom of God, that means his mysteries are open to them, When a Baptist reads that verse they say, you see baptism isn't necessary for them they are not hindered it's us adults that need to be kept away till we are washed. Baptism is a legalistic form of rehabiliration for the guilty, No Orthodox christian views it as such, and so we call it the sacrament of illumination.

 

[buzuxi02]

Thanks for this. It's kind of tough for me to wrap my head around. Is there a belief in Orthodoxy that children are somehow intuitively capable of knowing and following Christ, and that should a child die, they're basically good to go Paradise wise?

This is clearly taught in scripture. The argument that first one needs to believe in Christ before baptism and thus children cant believe till they grow up is quite shocking coming from people who claim sola scripture. Jesus teaches that disbelief in Him at a young age can only be caused by an adult corrupting the child:
Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!
It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. (LUKE 17.1-2)

Children are naturally inclined to believe in Jesus Just as John the Baptist leaped in the womb when Mary with child greeted her kin Elizabeth. Listen to what holy scripture says

And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.(Mark 9.42)

And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18.5-6)

And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were sorely displeased,
And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise? (Matthew 21.15-16)

No child is condemned, but what has not been revealed is the nature of their treasures. Are infants who die still babies in heaven? If so, a baby is happy with resting and being fed, Christ was laid in a manger, the baby of a rich prince may lay in a golden crib but neither condition does a baby realize. If the infant is found in adult form in heaven what level of education? What life experiences does he have? What if any virtues has the babe cultivated? How can the parable of the talents in Matt 25.29 be applied to an infant who had no chance to cultivate virtues in this life? These are the questions St. Gregory of Nyssa tried to answer in his treatise Infants early death, probably not to a satisfactory level. Of course there are non-doctrinal theories and traditions, i believe a popular one is babies are under the auspices of care-taking angels, etc.

 

[ArmyMatt]

This is clearly taught in scripture. The argument that first one needs to believe in Christ before baptism and thus children cant believe till they grow up is quite shocking coming from people who claim sola scripture. Jesus teaches that disbelief in Him at a young age can only be caused by an adult corrupting the child:
Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!
It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. (LUKE 17.1-2)

Children are naturally inclined to believe in Jesus Just as John the Baptist leaped in the womb when Mary with child greeted her kin Elizabeth. Listen to what holy scripture says

And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.(Mark 9.42)

And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18.5-6)

And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were sorely displeased,
And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise? (Matthew 21.15-16)

No child is condemned, but what has not been revealed is the nature of their treasures. Are infants who die still babies in heaven? If so, a baby is happy with resting and being fed, Christ was laid in a manger, the baby of a rich prince may lay in a golden crib but neither condition does a baby realize. If the infant is found in adult form in heaven what level of education? What life experiences does he have? What if any virtues has the babe cultivated? How can the parable of the talents in Matt 25.29 be applied to an infant who had no chance to cultivate virtues in this life? These are the questions St. Gregory of Nyssa tried to answer in his treatise Infants early death, probably not to a satisfactory level. Of course there are non-doctrinal theories and traditions, i believe a popular one is babies are under the auspices of care-taking angels, etc.

and this is one of the problems with the modern West. the view that faith is an act of the brain, and not of the heart. for the Orthodox, there can be someone who mentally is not much higher than an 8 year old, but that person's soul is deeply communing with God.

 

[Monna]

baptism is the door to the Church, so that one can live the sacramental life which leads to salvation.

Does this mean that the thief on the cross beside Jesus is not a member of the Body of Christ because he was never baptized?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Does this mean that the thief on the cross beside Jesus is not a member of the Body of Christ because he was never baptized?

no, that was prior to Pentecost. so he is a member of the Body of Christ.

and this thread is over three years old...

 

[Monna]

and this thread is over three years old...

so?
I tend to look for what is already on the Forum for answers, rather than start all over again.

no, that was prior to Pentecost. so he is a member of the Body of Christ.

John 3 and 4 tell us that Jesus and his disciples were somewhere east of the Jordan river ... baptizing. So baptism by JESUS' disciples was (and with Jesus present, even if he didn't personally baptize) being performed before Pentecost.

 

[ArmyMatt]

so?
I tend to look for what is already on the Forum for answers, rather than start all over again.



John 3 and 4 tell us that Jesus and his disciples were somewhere east of the Jordan river ... baptizing. So baptism by JESUS' disciples was (and with Jesus present, even if he didn't personally baptize) being performed before Pentecost.

well, on here a lot of us find thread resurrections from years ago odd and annoying.

as for your second point, baptisms happened prior to Pentecost to be sure, but Pentecost was the birth of the Church, when the Spirit was poured out on all flesh. which means that the Wise Thief, who died before Pentecost, is still in the Body of Christ. as is John the Baptist, Symeon, Zacharias, Elizabeth, etc.

 

[buzuxi02]

so?
I tend to look for what is already on the Forum for answers, rather than start all over again.



John 3 and 4 tell us that Jesus and his disciples were somewhere east of the Jordan river ... baptizing. So baptism by JESUS' disciples was (and with Jesus present, even if he didn't personally baptize) being performed before Pentecost.

There are 2 forms of baptism. By water or by blood. Some also like to claim baptism by the holy Spirit but that was only a two time event. At pentecost in the upper room when tongues of fire came down but presumably the 120 were probably already baptised by water. The second was the Gentile pentecost, when the Holy Spirit fell upon them they were immediately baptised in water afterwards.
So the only alternative is baptism by blood when desired, and water, the repentant thief can fall under that former category (Mark 10:38-39)

 

[prodromos]

I would also point out that while baptism, followed by chrismation and Holy Communion is the established means of being joined to the Church, God is by no means limited to this. However, they would be exceptions, not the rule.