Are converts from the Coptic Orthodox churchs re-baptized?

[Kevin12]

I know that with Mormons, if they convert to Catholicism the Church’s policy is the re-baptize them because what Mormons mean by “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit” in reference to who the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are, is to far from the Church’s understanding; whereas Orthodox or Protestants would not need to be re-baptized, because their understanding is close enough to ours that it means the same thing.

However, I know that the Coptic Orthodox have different understanding of the hypostatic union than either Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestants, i.e. they believe Jesus was two persons with two natures, one human and one divine, rather than one person with two natures.

I’ve tried to look it up, and it actually seems that Coptics do demand re-baptism from what you might call Chalcedonian Christians, but this often causes problems and tension, as Catholics and Copts as Christians living in an environment that is extremely hostile to Christianity in general will often end up celebrating in each other’s churches if their isn’t a Catholic or Coptic church they can safely attend. So since the tension seems to be coming from the other direction, it sounds like we would not in fact re-baptize a Coptic convert. But I don’t really have any evidence of that, since all searches I do only talk about the Catholic-to-Coptic issue.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Coptic Orthodox not only have valid baptism they also have a valid Eucharist so no they would not have to be rebaptized

 

[Kevin12]

Coptic Orthodox not only have valid baptism they also have a valid Eucharist so no they would not have to be rebaptized

Do you have a source?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

The Catholic Church certainly accepts the validity of Coptic Orthodox baptisms. I am almost certain that the Catholic Church recognizes the validity of the Coptic bishops in apostolic succession, meaning that all seven of their Sacraments are valid, from the Catholic point of view. I can find no Catholic document in a quick search which states that, however.

 

[Kevin12]

The Catholic Church certainly accepts the validity of Coptic Orthodox baptisms. I am almost certain that the Catholic Church recognizes the validity of the Coptic bishops in apostolic succession, meaning that all seven of their Sacraments are valid, from the Catholic point of view. I can find no Catholic document in a quick search which states that, however.

Yes, it seems likely they do, but I’d like something to back that up if it’s out there.

 

[Alex_H]

Despite certain differences in terminology that had caused misunderstandings and even deep-seated doctrinal disagreements, the qualified Authorities of the Catholic Church and the Churches known as Pre-Chalcedonian were able to declare their full communion in faith in Jesus Christ, who is perfect in his divinity and in his humanity.

The above-mentioned Christological agreements have put an end, if not to all the contentious theological disputes between the Catholic Church and the Ancient Churches of the East, at least to those with the most fundamental, doctrinal difficulty: “so much so that we have been able to profess together the faith which we have in common”, as Pope John Paul II was able to affirm.3

EWTN

Peace!

 

[RyanBlack]

However, I know that the Coptic Orthodox have different understanding of the hypostatic union than either Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestants, i.e. they believe Jesus was two persons with two natures, one human and one divine, rather than one person with two natures.

This is not at all the case. You are confusing the christology of the Coptic Orthodox with Nestorianism, which they actually firmly oppose. The Coptic Orthodox, as is the case with all of the Oriental Orthodox, subscribe to what is often called miaphysitism, which is associated with the statement of St. Cyril of Alexandria μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένη, or “one nature of the Word of God Incarnate.”

 

[Kevin12]

EWTN

Peace!

Yup, that pretty much clears it up. Though I wonder why it seems there are still issues with re-baptism in the other direction when it would seem these agreements would take care of that.

 

[Kevin12]

This is not at all the case. You are confusing the christology of the Coptic Orthodox with Nestorianism, which they actually firmly oppose. The Coptic Orthodox, as is the case with all of the Oriental Orthodox, subscribe to what is often called miaphysitism, which is associated with the statement of St. Cyril of Alexandria μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένη, or “one nature of the Word of God Incarnate.”

Oh yeah, my bad.

To be perfectly honest, while I’m sure these issues are all very important, I somewhat question why, on such a complicated metaphysical matter of the Incarnation, more lattitude could have been given for differences of opinion—within reason, of course. I sure some here will say that defining the incarnation as one person, two natures is in fact incredibly important and looking at it any other way would change our view of Christianity on a fundamental level but, well, I have a hard time seeing it.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Yup, that pretty much clears it up. Though I wonder why it seems there are still issues with re-baptism in the other direction when it would seem these agreements would take care of that.

There is an internal debate within the Coptic Orthodox Church regarding the baptism of Chalcedonians. The Historical-Traditional practice has been to receive via confession and profession of faith. At some times in history Chrismation has been done. Out of an overabundance of caution in regard to preserving the Sacrament, today, anyone baptized outside the Oriental Orthodox Communion is baptized but individual bishops have lessened this standard

 

[twf]

Yup, that pretty much clears it up. Though I wonder why it seems there are still issues with re-baptism in the other direction when it would seem these agreements would take care of that.

The Orientals, like the Eastern Orthodox, have a different understanding of the sacraments than we do. Outside of the Church (that is, outside of the visible Eastern or Oriental Orthodox communions- respectively, it’s very fuzzy.

 

[Peter_J]

I’ve tried to look it up, and it actually seems that Coptics do demand re-baptism from what you might call Chalcedonian Christians,

I think that would depend on a number of factors, not the least of which is where someone is converting from. If he/she was Eastern Orthodox, I doubt that he-she would be rebaptized. On the other hand, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, etc. are shall we say “more heterodox”, from their pov.

 

[Nelka]

The Catholic Church certainly accepts the validity of Coptic Orthodox baptisms. I am almost certain that the Catholic Church recognizes the validity of the Coptic bishops in apostolic succession, meaning that all seven of their Sacraments are valid, from the Catholic point of view. I can find no Catholic document in a quick search which states that, however.

That’s interesting.

 

[Kevin12]

I think that would depend on a number of factors, not the least of which is where someone is converting from. If he/she was Eastern Orthodox, I doubt that he-she would be rebaptized. On the other hand, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, etc. are shall we say “more heterodox”, from their pov.

I don’t know how that would work out. All the Churches you mention accept the two natures, one person premise, including the Orthodox.

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

The Catholic Church certainly accepts the validity of Coptic Orthodox baptisms. I am almost certain that the Catholic Church recognizes the validity of the Coptic bishops in apostolic succession, meaning that all seven of their Sacraments are valid, from the Catholic point of view. I can find no Catholic document in a quick search which states that, however.

Here’s a list of valid/invalid baptisms by denomination.

archbalt.org/evangelization/worship/rcia/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&PageID=45377

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Do you have a source?

I would encourage you to be acquainted with this document:
DECREE ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCHES OF THE EASTERN RITE
ORIENTALIUM ECCLESIARUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

in which you will read:

25. If any separated Eastern Christian should, under the guidance of the grace of the Holy Spirit, join himself to the unity of Catholics, no more should be required of him than what a bare profession of the Catholic faith demands. Eastern clerics, seeing that a valid priesthood is preserved among them, are permitted to exercise the Orders they possess on joining the unity of the Catholic Church, in accordance with the regulations established by the competent authority.

 

[SyroMalankara]

I think that would depend on a number of factors, not the least of which is where someone is converting from. If he/she was Eastern Orthodox, I doubt that he-she would be rebaptized. On the other hand, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, etc. are shall we say “more heterodox”, from their pov.

From my Coptic Orthodox sources, the official view is that the baptism of EO and RCs are the same - they are today both received as Chalcedonians via baptism and chrismation. However, historically, both were received by confession and profession of faith. Armenian Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox and Indian Orthodox receive EO/RCs without baptism.

 

[Peter_J]

I don’t know how that would work out. All the Churches you mention accept the two natures, one person premise, including the Orthodox.

Certainly, but that’s not the only area of theology.

If a Southern Baptist says “one person, two natures”, that doesn’t make him a Calvinist!

 

[PJM]

I know that with Mormons, if they convert to Catholicism the Church’s policy is the re-baptize them because what Mormons mean by “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit” in reference to who the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are, is to far from the Church’s understanding; whereas Orthodox or Protestants would not need to be re-baptized, because their understanding is close enough to ours that it means the same thing.

However, I know that the Coptic Orthodox have different understanding of the hypostatic union than either Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestants, i.e. they believe Jesus was two persons with two natures, one human and one divine, rather than one person with two natures.

I’ve tried to look it up, and it actually seems that Coptics do demand re-baptism from what you might call Chalcedonian Christians, but this often causes problems and tension, as Catholics and Copts as Christians living in an environment that is extremely hostile to Christianity in general will often end up celebrating in each other’s churches if their isn’t a Catholic or Coptic church they can safely attend. So since the tension seems to be coming from the other direction, it sounds like we would not in fact re-baptize a Coptic convert. But I don’t really have any evidence of that, since all searches I do only talk about the Catholic-to-Coptic issue.

ANY & ALL truly Christian Baptisms are accepted by the RCC

Mt. 28:19-20
“Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

John 3:5
Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

So the THREE Conditions of a truly Christian Baptism are

1 Belief in the Blessed Trinity

1. Baptism with Water [poured or indunction both valid]

3 In the Name of the Father & the Son & and the Holy Spirit:thumbsup:

 

[Don_Ruggero]

1. Baptism with Water [poured or **indunction

both valid]

What do you mean by the English word “indunction?” I have never encountered it and can find no definition for it.

There are three methods of valid baptism: infusion, aspersion, and immersion. Aspersion would be illicit if performed by a Catholic minister of baptism but it is favoured in some reformed ecclesial communities.