Seriously considering conversion - some questions

[FreedByte]

Back in February I posted some questions here (I was in the process of deciding on a denomination to join after leaving the RCC). Unfortunately, I came in with an attitude that I would find truth through argumentation, which was a bad attitude indeed (my username was different back then). I ended up joining a nondenominational evangelical credobaptist church, but I realize now that I may have acted too hastily. Even though I would probably confuse everyone around me by converting to EO (they would wonder why i wouldnt just revert into the RCC, cause people here see the EO as the same as the RCC besides architecture, russia, and the filoque), I think it is for the best. I have spent a lot of time reading answers to my questions by orthodox online, but I have some more that I would love an answer to :

For those who converted into the EO Church, what was it like encountering the cultural elements involved. The closest orthodox church to me I think is a member of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, so im wondering if I will feel like an outsider seeing as I am not russian. What were your experiences?

How long does the catechumen process usually last?

What does baptism do in the orthodox view? Is infant baptism ever delayed by the parents until toddler years?

What is chrismization and what is the Scriptural and early Church evidence for it?

Do the orthodox hold to the doctrine of imputed righteousness in any form?

How often do most orthodox read their Bibles? I found it to be quite lacking in the RCC.

Are the EOB and OSB the only english translations that are authorized for orthodox to read?

Does the EOC prefer the majority text? the byzantine text type?

What does the EOC do in terms of evangelism? Is open air preaching common/considered to be a Scriptural method of evangelism?

What is the orthodox view of Mary? To what extent do orthodox "venerate" her (to use RCC terms)?

Approximately what percentage of prayers do orthodox make directly to God (rather than a prayer for intercession)?

Do orthodox believe that the beast of revelation has yet to rise?

Does the EOC support separation of church and state?

Did the EOC ever execute people or use the state to do so (as the RCC and protestants alike did to anabaptists during the reformation era)?

There are probably more questions that i forgot; feel free to answer as many or as few as you wish. Thanks!

Things that I have come to agree with already:

o That penal substitution is unScriptural and illogical
o Having more "apocrypha" is good
o That statues are bad, icons are acceptable
o That the bishop of Rome is not the ruler of the church
o That confession in the presence of a minister is Scriptural and historical
o No purgatory
o No rosary
o A more historical version of the "hail mary" that doesn't hail mary
... and lots of other things

Things I take minor issue with:

o Kissing/bowing to icons (not sure how common a practice this is)

Things I still struggle with:

o infant baptism

 

[buzuxi02]

I'll answer just a few of the questions. Baptism is a vehicle of salvific grace. Its also the rite which allows entrance into the church. Charismation is the laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit. It always follows baptism in scripture. As Christianity spread out was impossible for a bishop to be every place to lay hands on the newly illuminated. So a special myhrr is consecrated by the bishops for anointing. This is the practise of every apostolic church whether EO,OO, or Assyrian

The EOB, OSB, are not authorized translations. They are simply a commentary. You can use whatever acceptable bible you prefer as long as its the generally accepted versions and not like the JW or other heretical translations.

People can read their bible as much as they want or as little as they want.

The EOC currently lives under the system that there is a separation of church and state. In traditional Orthodox countries this may be the case or it may not.

 

[FreedByte]

I'll answer just a few of the questions. Baptism is a vehicle of salvific grace. Its also the rite which allows entrance into the church. Charismation is the laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit. It always follows baptism in scripture. As Christianity spread out was impossible for a bishop to be every place to lay hands on the newly illuminated. So a special myhrr is consecrated by the bishops for anointing. This is the practise of every apostolic church whether EO,OO, or Assyrian

So would you assert that protestants who are not chrismated do not have the Holy Spirit?

The EOB, OSB, are not authorized translations. They are simply a commentary. You can use whatever acceptable bible you prefer as long as its the generally accepted versions and not like the JW or other heretical translations.

Ah okay, thanks for the info

People can read their bible as much as they want or as little as they want.

I know that, but how much is common?

The EOC currently lives under the system that there is a separation of church and state. In traditional Orthodox countries this may be the case or it may not.

It seems to me that the state is a worldly entity that could only harm the church by modifying it in its own interest. Does the EO church not have a stance on this?

 

[RosaryChaplet9]

If you ever contact a priest, ask him for those useful information pamphlets. (A 15-page small book)

Those pamphlets contain information about the differences in Orthodox doctrine and practice.

 

[buzuxi02]

So would you assert that protestants who are not chrismated do not have the Holy Spirit?

While some may differ in opinion, such protestants either don't have the Holy Spirit or it operates within them only in so far it leads them to the Body of Christ which is the Orthodox church to correct and make full what is lacking in the heterodox confession.



I know that, but how much is common?

Its, not. According to the canons of the church which lists the canonical books, clearly claim the canonical books are those authorized to be read publicly in the Church. That is the scriptures are to be listened to. Some scriptures are worthy to be read in private as they are not read publicly in Church. The reason for this is most people were illiterate and even those that could read never had access to books. The printing press is rather recent and in some countries the bible is a banned book like in Singapore. In Orthidoxy the totality and completeness of the Faith is found in its liturgical cycle. It is the very vehicle which the entire deposit of faith is passed down to the future generations unadultered.



It seems to me that the state is a worldly entity that could only harm the church by modifying it in its own interest. Does the EO church not have a stance on this?[/QUOTE]

No, Christianity has been the dominant religion of the west precisely because the monarchs adopted it as their state religion.. Since the enlightenment when separation of church and state began appearing christianity has weakened. For example in the past 3 decades most protestant churches in europe now consider most dogmas as optional such as the virgin birth. This is precisely because the state has been promoting to its citizens contrary morality. The Church is more beholden to secularism than ever before. Orthodoxy views separation of church and state as a distortion. The Church and state are to occupy the same house and work synergistically. The state is to promote policies which is conducive to living a Christian life, it is to help in making salvation easier.

 

[Chesterton]

For those who converted into the EO Church, what was it like encountering the cultural elements involved. The closest orthodox church to me I think is a member of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, so im wondering if I will feel like an outsider seeing as I am not russian. What were your experiences?

That's a lot of questions in one thread. I'll take a couple:

The cultural elements were a slight problem for me in conversion. I'm about as WASP-ish as they come. But you look at history and look at the truth and you're either intellectually and spiritually honest or you're not.

Kissing/bowing to icons (not sure how common a practice this is)

Ever seen a championship sporting event where the winning players all kiss the trophy? Do you think they actually worship the trophy?

 

[FreedByte]

While some may differ in opinion, such protestants either don't have the Holy Spirit or it operates within them only in so far it leads them to the Body of Christ which is the Orthodox church to correct and make full what is lacking in the heterodox confession.

Hmm, is this the official position of the EOC? I was under the impression that the EOC believed that "we can only know where grace is found, not where it isn't found".

Its, not. According to the canons of the church which lists the canonical books, clearly claim the canonical books are those authorized to be read publicly in the Church. That is the scriptures are to be listened to. Some scriptures are worthy to be read in private as they are not read publicly in Church. The reason for this is most people were illiterate and even those that could read never had access to books. The printing press is rather recent and in some countries the bible is a banned book like in Singapore. In Orthidoxy the totality and completeness of the Faith is found in its liturgical cycle. It is the very vehicle which the entire deposit of faith is passed down to the future generations unadultered.

Ah I see, I guess that makes sense.

No, Christianity has been the dominant religion of the west precisely because the monarchs adopted it as their state religion.. Since the enlightenment when separation of church and state began appearing christianity has weakened. For example in the past 3 decades most protestant churches in europe now consider most dogmas as optional such as the virgin birth. This is precisely because the state has been promoting to its citizens contrary morality. The Church is more beholden to secularism than ever before. Orthodoxy views separation of church and state as a distortion. The Church and state are to occupy the same house and work synergistically. The state is to promote policies which is conducive to living a Christian life, it is to help in making salvation easier.

You make good points, but I would appreciate some Scriptural support or a quote from the EOC on this matter. What do you make of the state using the Church as an excuse to commit atrocities (e.g. the Inquisition, the Crusades, the execution of Jan Hus and other reformers)? In a perfect world, wouldn't the state interfere as little as possible (e.g. Eden)?

 

[FreedByte]

The cultural elements were a slight problem for me in conversion. I'm about as WASP-ish as they come.

Not sure what you mean by waspish

But you look at history and look at the truth and you're either intellectually and spiritually honest or you're not.

Not sure what you mean here either

Ever seen a championship sporting event where the winning players all kiss the trophy? Do you think they actually worship the trophy?

I wasn't saying they were worshipping the icons, I was wondering why it is done? (Scriptural/historic support for icon kissing)

 

[Chesterton]

Not sure what you mean by waspish

Gloria.tv: The Simpsons: Catholic vs. Protestant Heaven

Not sure what you mean here either

I guess it's an American thing. We were founded by Protestant-minded political philosophers. And that's a good thing, but you have to look beyond and behind that to find the real, original truth.

I wasn't saying they were worshipping the icons, I was wondering why it is done? (Scriptural/historic support for icon kissing)

Simple and appropriate reverence.

 

[ArmyMatt]

For those who converted into the EO Church, what was it like encountering the cultural elements involved.

haha, it was an experience, but you get used to them.

The closest orthodox church to me I think is a member of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, so im wondering if I will feel like an outsider seeing as I am not russian. What were your experiences?

as an American convert, I have been to Greek, OCA, Russian, Ukrainian Churches and monasteries, and I have never not felt home. ROCOR's first possible native born convert saint, Fr Seraphim Rose, was not Russian so I imagine you will be fine there.

How long does the catechumen process usually last?

depends on the person and the priest, but usually a year-ish.

What does baptism do in the orthodox view? Is infant baptism ever delayed by the parents until toddler years?

it is when a soul is born again and their entrance into the Body of Christ. we baptize ASAP.

What is chrismization and what is the Scriptural and early Church evidence for it?

chrismation is the laying on of hands that happens after baptism (read Acts), that fills the person with the Holy Spirit.

Do the orthodox hold to the doctrine of imputed righteousness in any form?

I would say no, but I dunno enough about the belief.

How often do most orthodox read their Bibles? I found it to be quite lacking in the RCC.

daily epistle and Gospel readings, not including person readings and our services which are like 99% verbatim from the Scripture

Are the EOB and OSB the only english translations that are authorized for orthodox to read?

nope, I know many that use the RSV, KJV, and NKJV

Does the EOC prefer the majority text? the byzantine text type?

dunno, whaddya mean?

What does the EOC do in terms of evangelism? Is open air preaching common/considered to be a Scriptural method of evangelism?

that depends on the parish. some do open houses or hold talks, and some do open air preaching. my Godfather is one theWillardPreacher.com | Bringing Willard to the Web

What is the orthodox view of Mary? To what extent do orthodox "venerate" her (to use RCC terms)?

we call her the Mother of God, since she is Christ's Mother according to the flesh. so she has a unique close relationship to her Son. we venerate her in that we honor her above all of creation, but we do not believe that she was immaculately conceived, nor do we have any disputes about her death. we know that she died.

Approximately what percentage of prayers do orthodox make directly to God (rather than a prayer for intercession)?

go to a Liturgy and you will see that the most common phrase you will hear is Lord have mercy.

Do orthodox believe that the beast of revelation has yet to rise?

yes and no. every age has it's beast, false prophet, harlot, dragon, and 666. but all of those are a prototypes of the ones that will rise at the end of time.

Does the EOC support seperation of church and state?

depends on who you talk to, but Orthodoxy is decidedly (and for good reason) apolitical aside from what violates our faith.

Did the EOC ever execute people or use the state to do so (as the RCC and protestants alike did to anabaptists during the reformation era)?

yeah, we have our fair share of sinners. but at the same time, when Orthodox monarchies were around, the lines between Church and state were often more blurred than they are now. so we do have saints that ordered executions of criminals because that is how folks live in this fallen world. but execution of criminals, even for those who are for it, is never seen as good, but a necessary evil (like killing in the military or police) in this fallen world.

Kissing/bowing to icons (not sure how common a practice this is)

it's common because it is how the East shows respect. I was weirded out too but you come to understand it, so it's no big deal

infant baptism

well, this one is a biggie for some. I would say remember two things. one, in Acts when folks were baptized, it included their households which would have included any infants. and secondly, circumcision, which was a prototype of baptism, was done to infants.

 

[Knee V]

Back in February I posted some questions here (I was in the process of deciding on a denomination to join after leaving the RCC). Unfortunately, I came in with an attitude that I would find truth through argumentation, which was a bad attitude indeed (my username was different back then). I ended up joining a nondenominational evangelical credobaptist church, but I realize now that I may have acted too hastily. Even though I would probably confuse everyone around me by converting to EO (they would wonder why i wouldnt just revert into the RCC, cause people here see the EO as the same as the RCC besides architecture, russia, and the filoque), I think it is for the best. I have spent a lot of time reading answers to my questions by orthodox online, but I have some more that I would love an answer to :

For those who converted into the EO Church, what was it like encountering the cultural elements involved. The closest orthodox church to me I think is a member of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, so im wondering if I will feel like an outsider seeing as I am not russian. What were your experiences?

How long does the catechumen process usually last?

What does baptism do in the orthodox view? Is infant baptism ever delayed by the parents until toddler years?

What is chrismization and what is the Scriptural and early Church evidence for it?

Do the orthodox hold to the doctrine of imputed righteousness in any form?

How often do most orthodox read their Bibles? I found it to be quite lacking in the RCC.

Are the EOB and OSB the only english translations that are authorized for orthodox to read?

Does the EOC prefer the majority text? the byzantine text type?

What does the EOC do in terms of evangelism? Is open air preaching common/considered to be a Scriptural method of evangelism?

What is the orthodox view of Mary? To what extent do orthodox "venerate" her (to use RCC terms)?

Approximately what percentage of prayers do orthodox make directly to God (rather than a prayer for intercession)?

Do orthodox believe that the beast of revelation has yet to rise?

Does the EOC support separation of church and state?

Did the EOC ever execute people or use the state to do so (as the RCC and protestants alike did to anabaptists during the reformation era)?

There are probably more questions that i forgot; feel free to answer as many or as few as you wish. Thanks!

Things that I have come to agree with already:

o That penal substitution is unScriptural and illogical
o Having more "apocrypha" is good
o That statues are bad, icons are acceptable
o That the bishop of Rome is not the ruler of the church
o That confession in the presence of a minister is Scriptural and historical
o No purgatory
o No rosary
o A more historical version of the "hail mary" that doesn't hail mary
... and lots of other things

Things I take minor issue with:

o Kissing/bowing to icons (not sure how common a practice this is)

Things I still struggle with:

o infant baptism

Cultural: I didn't have much of a problem. Both of the parishes I have attended have been mostly native English speakers, but with a sizable population of first-generation Russians. We all mixed and got along well.

Catechumenate: It depends. For some it's a year or more, and for some it's just a couple months.

Baptism: It is the remission of sins, being united to Christ and becoming one flesh with Him and His body, and entering into His death and resurrection; not symbolically, but actually.

Some people delay baptism for their children, but they should not.

Chrismation: It is being sealed with the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is in Acts and other various parts of the New Testament.

Imputation: We view righteousness as an ontological *something*, and not as a "state". "Justification" is being made to partake of God's righteousness, which is another way of saying that we are united to and filled with Him. We aren't "legally considered" to have God; we *actually* have Him living and abiding in us. One could also say that righteous is to God as wet is to water. We are saturated with water, and so we are wet. Likewise, we are filled with God, and so we are righteous. And we are "united to God" through our baptism and chrismation. We do not limit the discussion of justification to a series of legal technicalities.

Bible reading: I don't know; I've never asked anybody. I know some people who read regularly and consistently, but I don't know for sure about anyone else. I know that I fail to read consistently.

Translations: There are several that are fine. The EOB is an original translation by Orthodox translators. The OSB, at least the New Testament, is just the NKJV with Orthodox commentary. Its Old Testament is a translation of the LXX using the NKJV as a starting point, keeping the NKJV wording where possible. Many parishes use the NKJV, RSV, or KJV. The actual translation used is not as important as hearing it proclaimed within the church's liturgical context within her cycle of services.

Majority Text: Many of us officially use a variant of the Majority Text, called the Patriarchial Text. But we do not have one bishop telling all the churches what to do, so not every bishop or synod officially uses it.

Evangelism: It varies. There are many methods. But what we highly value is living the faith as the first method of evangelism. We have to first *be* a light before we can bring people to that light.

Mary was mankind's offering to God. We gave Him the best we could possibly offer, and He then inhabited that offering and gave us Himself in the flesh (which is exactly what we do in the Eucharist). She is the "prototype" of the Church - all that she is we are called to be, and all that she is the Church is (and thus anything we say of her is true of the church as well). We venerate her more than any other saint, but no other saint is who she is, and as our mother, she is very special to us.

Prayers to God: As the Psalm says, "God is glorious in His saints." All that we see and praise in the saints is also truly the work of God in those saints. Thus our veneration of the saints is alo worship of God for what He has done in those saints. Thus all of our prayer is to God. Prayer to Him and worship of Him penetrates all things that we do.

The beast: I don't know.

Church and state: "My kingdom is not of this world." There have been times when the state has done good things for the Church, and there have been times when the state has tried to destroy the Church. We will take advantage of good opportunities to advance the Gospel, even with the state's help, but we must not over-glorify that cooperation as if it is a divine institution in and of itself.

Executions: I am sure that someone has done it before, but we absolutely do not support that. If someone wants to embrace heresy we may excommunicate or defrock them, but we want them to repent, and killing them for heresy makes that repentance impossible.

I hope I didn't miss anything.

I'm typing this on my phone, so pardon any typos from my fat-fingering.

 

[GoingByzantine]

Do Western Rite Eastern Orthodox Churches venerate icons?

 

[Knee V]

Do Western Rite Eastern Orthodox Churches venerate icons?

I have no experience in the Orthodox Western Rite, but to the best of my knowledge they use icons and not statues.

 

[buzuxi02]

Why would you struggle with infant baptism? It's clear in Corinthians that only those baptised unto Christ are members of His Body, so infants would not be hindered. And Galatians speaks on infant baptism in GAL 3.26- 4.2. Just keep in mind that the Greek work used in galatians is nepios which literally means infant, unfortunately it was translated probably intentionally into English as child, the word in the original koine is nepios not teknon.

 

[RosaryChaplet9]

Do Western Rite Eastern Orthodox Churches venerate icons?

Yes.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I wasn't saying they were worshipping the icons, I was wondering why it is done? (Scriptural/historic support for icon kissing)

well, the act of kissing I dunno, but venerating objects goes back to the OT. the Ark of the covenant had images of cherubim on the top, and it was certainly venerated as a holy object, as was all the other material and images sanctified in the Temple. and Christian iconography goes back to St Luke, and we still have some of his icons

 

[chapdaddy]

Things I still struggle with:

o infant baptism

That one is easy... baptism isn't something you do, it is something that is done TO you. The ones who don't believe in infant baptism contend that it is something you do for God as a sign of obedience yet is pragmatically pointless because they hold no sacramental view of baptism.

If, as the church has always held, baptism is a conferment of saving grace and initiation into the Kingdom of God, why would you not baptize infants?

 

[FreedByte]

haha, it was an experience, but you get used to them.

as an American convert, I have been to Greek, OCA, Russian, Ukrainian Churches and monasteries, and I have never not felt home. ROCOR's first possible native born convert saint, Fr Seraphim Rose, was not Russian so I imagine you will be fine there.

Actually I think I am mistaken, it may be under the HOCNA, which I think is in schism (or something along those lines) if I am not mistaken?

also, where did you end up?

I would say no, but I dunno enough about the belief.

See Romans 4 and my signature.

Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imputed_righteousness

I would say no, but I dunno enough about the daily epistle and Gospel readings, not including person readings and our services which are like 99% verbatim from the Scripture

I meant more along the lines of protestants are almost all encouraged by each other to read their Bibles, whereas I found almost no Bible reading in the RCC. Bible reading was associated with protestantism, and it was seen as somewhat strange to do so.

dunno, whaddya mean?

The older Alexandrian texts, which are far less universal, vs the Byzantine texts, which agree with each other much more and make up the majority, but are not as old.

that depends on the parish. some do open houses or hold talks, and some do open air preaching. my Godfather is one theWillardPreacher.com | Bringing Willard to the Web

Wow, cool!

we call her the Mother of God, since she is Christ's Mother according to the flesh. so she has a unique close relationship to her Son. we venerate her in that we honor her above all of creation, but we do not believe that she was immaculately conceived, nor do we have any disputes about her death. we know that she died.

Okay, good; also, do you call her "Queen of Heaven" as the Roman Catholics do?

go to a Liturgy and you will see that the most common phrase you will hear is Lord have mercy.

outside of liturgy and corporate prayer, though, do Orthodox generally pray more often for intercession or directly to God?

yes and no. every age has it's beast, false prophet, harlot, dragon, and 666. but all of those are a prototypes of the ones that will rise at the end of time.

depends on who you talk to, but Orthodoxy is decidedly (and for good reason) apolitical aside from what violates our faith.

My concern is especially with those places where the lines between church and state are blurred and it is causing people to leave for evangelicalism. See this.

it's common because it is how the East shows respect. I was weirded out too but you come to understand it, so it's no big deal

well, this one is a biggie for some. I would say remember two things. one, in Acts when folks were baptized, it included their households which would have included any infants. and secondly, circumcision, which was a prototype of baptism, was done to infants.

yes, I think the circumcision argument is a much better one, because the household one can be easily refuted.

 

[FreedByte]

Cultural: I didn't have much of a problem. Both of the parishes I have attended have been mostly native English speakers, but with a sizable population of first-generation Russians. We all mixed and got along well.

Baptism: It is the remission of sins, being united to Christ and becoming one flesh with Him and His body, and entering into His death and resurrection; not symbolically, but actually.

Why do you need to remit an infant's sins if the Orthodox Church doesn't believe in original sin?

Some people delay baptism for their children, but they should not.

I see.

Imputation: We view righteousness as an ontological *something*, and not as a "state". "Justification" is being made to partake of God's righteousness, which is another way of saying that we are united to and filled with Him. We aren't "legally considered" to have God; we *actually* have Him living and abiding in us. One could also say that righteous is to God as wet is to water. We are saturated with water, and so we are wet. Likewise, we are filled with God, and so we are righteous. And we are "united to God" through our baptism and chrismation. We do not limit the discussion of justification to a series of legal technicalities.

But to some extent, imputed righteousness is still present in that those who are in Christ at the final judgement will have their past sins overlooked, right? Otherwise how would Romans 4 be interpreted?

Bible reading: I don't know; I've never asked anybody. I know some people who read regularly and consistently, but I don't know for sure about anyone else. I know that I fail to read consistently.

Is there an emphasis on Bible reading as something that all should be doing? Do priests encourage reading Scripture at home? In the RCC there was basically no emphasis on it.

Translations: There are several that are fine. The EOB is an original translation by Orthodox translators. The OSB, at least the New Testament, is just the NKJV with Orthodox commentary. Its Old Testament is a translation of the LXX using the NKJV as a starting point, keeping the NKJV wording where possible. Many parishes use the NKJV, RSV, or KJV. The actual translation used is not as important as hearing it proclaimed within the church's liturgical context within her cycle of services.

Got it

Majority Text: Many of us officially use a variant of the Majority Text, called the Patriarchial Text. But we do not have one bishop telling all the churches what to do, so not every bishop or synod officially uses it.

Ah I see, how does it vary from the Majority Text, and how does it vary from the TR?

Evangelism: It varies. There are many methods. But what we highly value is living the faith as the first method of evangelism. We have to first *be* a light before we can bring people to that light.

True but open air preaching seems quite Biblical.

Mary was mankind's offering to God. We gave Him the best we could possibly offer, and He then inhabited that offering and gave us Himself in the flesh (which is exactly what we do in the Eucharist). She is the "prototype" of the Church - all that she is we are called to be, and all that she is the Church is (and thus anything we say of her is true of the church as well). We venerate her more than any other saint, but no other saint is who she is, and as our mother, she is very special to us.

"all that she is we are called to be" >> isn't this something that you could say about Christ (except with "he")? Mary wasn't literally sinless, right? she was only relatively pure compared to others, right?

Church and state: "My kingdom is not of this world." There have been times when the state has done good things for the Church, and there have been times when the state has tried to destroy the Church. We will take advantage of good opportunities to advance the Gospel, even with the state's help, but we must not over-glorify that cooperation as if it is a divine institution in and of itself.

It seems to me that the state is the antithesis of some aspects of the Gospel, since the Kingdom of God will not involve secular rulers, but I digress.

Executions: I am sure that someone has done it before, but we absolutely do not support that. If someone wants to embrace heresy we may excommunicate or defrock them, but we want them to repent, and killing them for heresy makes that repentance impossible.

Agreed

 

[FreedByte]

Why would you struggle with infant baptism?

Because I was baptized in the RCC but was unrepentant until much later, which seemed wrong to me.