Catholic/Orthodox unity

[MariaG]

The reason many Catholics get rattled up about this is because it goes straight into the validity of their own baptism (mine included). We, as Catholics, believe that the Sacrament (Mystery) of Baptism is only conferred once. If we have to be re-baptized in order to join the Eastern Orthodox Church, then we are pretty much admitting that there is at least a possibility that our Catholic baptism was not valid. That is troublesome (and understandably so) to some Catholics (again, me included).

…

Actually, with all due respect, if we talk about future unity between our Churches then whether our Catholic baptism is considered valid or not is everyone’s business. Furthermore, it is not a matter of converts to Orthodoxy not being “ready”. The Eastern Orthodox Church itself does not have all the answers on this regard. That is why some jurisdictions re-baptize and other chrismate. And yet others receive their Catholic converts into the Orthodox Church by confession and communion. We, in the Roman Catholic Church, receive Orthodox converts by a profession of faith since we believe all Orthodox mysteries (i.e. sacraments) to be valid. This is not the case with other churches such as the Anglican. When Anglican priests, for example, convert to Catholicism they are not re-baptized, but receive all other sacraments including Holy Orders (if accepted into the Catholic clergy) since we do not believe them to be valid.

And to get directly back to the topic of this thread, no, I do not see a lot of hope in reunification of East and West.

If one can not even say that they think someone is a fellow Christian with a valid baptism without question, then one clearly is not going to reunite with them anytime soon.

 

[MariaG]

Just because you believe without a doubt that Roman Catholic Baptism is valid beyond a shadow of a doubt does not mean we think so. Just as Anglicans believing beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have Holy Orders doesn’t mean they do.

In fact I have observed that Catholics tend to look at Orthodox the same way Anglicans look at Catholics, and further Catholics look on Anglicans the same way Orthodox look on Catholics. You may think we are equals before God, but we do not share this belief, and your trying to superimpose itself on us with the canons of local councils, the canons of which your own church ignores, does not make a worthwhile argument.

Catholics don’t call Anglicans the “second lung”.

Catholics completely respect and believe Orthodox are Christians. That respect is not reciprocated.

And this is where those of us who have

no interest at all in converting gets all sparked up and offended

get upset. Not because someone is choosing to get baptized again, but because by requiring a Catholic to be baptized to become Orthodox, the Orthodox are declaring the Catholic was not a Christian in the first place.

It is as hurtful as the fundamentalist Christians who no longer pray with me because I know belong to the “whore of Babylon” and “walked away from Christ into Satan’s arms”. Actually, it is worse. Way Worse.

No matter how nicely one wants to put it, by making Catholics be baptized in order to become Orthodox, the Orthodox who do so, are saying that Catholics are not Christians.

Divisive, hurtful…I would put a icon crying because that is what I am doing now, through this whole thread, as I am doing now, but those icons are too cute to express the deep emotion I am feeling as tears run down my face and sobs are stuck in my throat.

 

[josie_L]

Catholics don’t call Anglicans the “second lung”.

Catholics completely respect and believe Orthodox are Christians. That respect is not reciprocated.

And this is where those of us who have get upset. Not because someone is choosing to get baptized again, but because by requiring a Catholic to be baptized to become Orthodox, the Orthodox are declaring the Catholic was not a Christian in the first place.

It is as hurtful as the fundamentalist Christians who no longer pray with me because I know belong to the “whore of Babylon” and “walked away from Christ into Satan’s arms”. Actually, it is worse. Way Worse.

No matter how nicely one wants to put it, by making Catholics be baptized in order to become Orthodox, the Orthodox who do so, are saying that Catholics are not Christians.

Divisive, hurtful…I would put a icon crying because that is what I am doing now, through this whole thread, as I am doing now, but those icons are too cute to express the deep emotion I am feeling as tears run down my face and sobs are stuck in my throat.

Maria, don’t cry but pray, God will work things out in the end (always have hope). God bless you.

 

[Madaglan]

Originally posted by Josie L:

They didn’t “believe” in rebaptism but essentially they were practicing rebaptism by stating all heretics should be baptized when entering the Church even though they were validly baptized in the Trinitarian form in their own churches. This is why St. Cyprian got into trouble with Pope St. Stephen because he was going against the (sacred) traditions of the Church by making no exceptions with respect to baptizing converts coming into the Church (St. Cyprian was working under the assumption that if they were not baptized by the Church then their baptisms were not valid).

Josie L, I know what you and Pope Stephen think about their baptism. I was pointing out that they were following a tradition they had received, and that it is attested to in Tertuallian (of North Africa). The most ancient churches in Asia Minor also had the tradition. While Pope Stephen saw it as an “innovation,” St. Cyprian did not see it as such, and even refers to the decisions of the ancient churches of Asia Minor that confirm his understanding.

But St. Cyprian believed that all converts needed to be baptized by the Church, no exceptions.

Correct. St. Cyprian does not believe that sacramental grace functions outside the Church and amongst those who distort the truth.

They may believe in one baptism but that is not what all Orthodox communities are practicing as evidenced by the fact that Roman Catholics are being baptized (conditional or no) into Orthodoxy.

Roman Catholics see it as rebaptism, but Orthodox do not.

 

[MariaG]

Maria, don’t cry but pray, God will work things out in the end (always have hope). God bless you.

I can’t not cry. But I will pray.

Thank you.

 

[josie_L]

Josie L, I know what you and Pope Stephen think about their baptism. I was pointing out that they were following a tradition they had received, and that it is attested to in Tertuallian (of North Africa). The most ancient churches in Asia Minor also had the tradition. While Pope Stephen saw it as an “innovation,” St. Cyprian did not see it as such, and even refers to the decisions of the ancient churches of Asia Minor that confirm his understanding.

St. Cyprian was wrong (I don’t believe they were following sacred tradition so much as the opinions of a man, i.e., Tertullian who had fallen into error and those who had followed suit) .

Correct. St. Cyprian does not believe that sacramental grace functions outside the Church and amongst those who distort the truth.

St. Cyprian was wrong (with respect to baptism outside the Church).

Roman Catholics see it as rebaptism, but Orthodox do not.

And the Orthodox (who believe this way) are wrong because they follow St. Cyprian’s view even though it was repudiated later on by the very same churches which once embraced it (Pope St. Stephen’s view prevailed not St. Cyprian’s).

 

[Harpazo]

Sadly amusing that someone is offended and deeply hurt that those we consider so close that they are the other lung of Christianity won’t accept the baptism from our Church?

Okay, be sadly amused while I continue to be deeply hurt.

Thanks brother.

How do you think the Anglicans feel when the Roman Catholic Church told them their orders were invalid? How do you think the average Anglican who goes to a RC Mass feels when he is told he cannot receive communion because he is a heretic? How do you think the average Anglican feels when he is told he cannot confess to a Catholic priest and his confessions to an Anglican priest have no merit?

We mourn deeply that we cannot share communion with Rome, but we pray and hope for the day when Rome will return to Orthodoxy. This is the Orthodox view and I know you disagree, but this is how we believe and how we see it.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[josie_L]

How do you think the Anglicans feel when the Roman Catholic Church told them their orders were invalid? How do you think the average Anglican who goes to a RC Mass feels when he is told he cannot receive communion because he is a heretic? How do you think the average Anglican feels when he is told he cannot confess to a Catholic priest and his confessions to an Anglican priest have no merit?

We do not deny that they are Christian for goodness sake, furthermore, we do not vascillate (if it is said to be invalid then it is said uniformly by all in the CC), i.e., some in the Orthodox community accept RC baptism while others don’t. You expect to me believe this is how the true Church of Christ would function, give me a break!!

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

How do you think the Anglicans feel when the Roman Catholic Church told them their orders were invalid? How do you think the average Anglican who goes to a RC Mass feels when he is told he cannot receive communion because he is a heretic? How do you think the average Anglican feels when he is told he cannot confess to a Catholic priest and his confessions to an Anglican priest have no merit?

We mourn deeply that we cannot share communion with Rome, but we pray and hope for the day when Rome will return to Orthodoxy. This is the Orthodox view and I know you disagree, but this is how we believe and how we see it.

In Christ,
Andrew

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[Harpazo]

We do not deny that they are Christian for goodness sake, furthermore, we do not vascillate (if it is said to be invalid then it is said uniformly by all in the CC), i.e., some in the Orthodox community accept RC baptism while others don’t. You expect to me believe this is how the true Church of Christ would function, give me a break!!

Who said anything about Orthodox not seeing Catholics as Christians? I’ve yet to meet one. Actually, no Orthodox Church accepts heterodox baptism. There are some bishops who allow for the Chrism to “complete anything lacking in their baptism.” You may have heard this called economia. Bishops are allowed to bind and loose after all.

We beleive in “One Lord, one faith, and one baptism” but if it is a different faith, it is a different baptism. Many who convert to Holy Orthodoxy are baptized so as to remove all doubt. This is how the Orthodox Church has always operated. I’m sorry if you don’t agree, but that is the way it is.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[Nine_Two]

While I can understand the Orthodox position regarding the validity of non-Orthodox baptisms (and the possible need for re-baptism if such non-Orthodox baptisms were indeed invalid), the truth is that not every Orthodox Autocephalous Church re-baptizes converts from Catholicism. Given the fact that most Catholic baptisms are not ordinarily performed by immersion, at least those Orthodox jurisdictions receiving former Catholic converts through chrismation are implicitly accepting the validity of Catholic baptisms by pouring. If they did not accept Catholic baptisms, then they would not be able to receive these converts through chrismation since a valid baptism is a requirement for all other sacraments/mysteries in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

Since Jesus Christ himself required his disciples to be baptized (cf. Mt 28:19-20), economia cannot be used to “avoid” this most sacred mystery. The bottom line is that while I, as a Catholic, cannot tell Orthodox what to believe, receiving Catholics through chrismation is an implicit acknowledgement of the validity of their baptism. No one can be crismated or even received into the Church without a valid baptism.

Actually I do agree with the point that Catholic baptisms are most likely valid (that’s personal opinion not Church teaching), I simply have issues with the way Josie presents the argument (Trinitarian formula good enough, we must abide by a local Western council). Notwithstanding that, the purpose of Economia is not to take the place of baptism, but to make up for any shortcomings in a previous baptism, which is why most Bishops will authorize it for most people who have been baptised in the trinitarian formula. Also most of the people who I have ever come across who were Baptised upon entering the Orthodox Church, even though they had previously been given a trinitarian formula baptism, were given the choice between a whole new baptism and being received by economia and chrismation. I’ve yet to hear of a Catholic convert being forced into it as a prerequisite for joining.

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

Who said anything about Orthodox not seeing Catholics as Christians? I’ve yet to meet one. Actually, no Orthodox Church accepts heterodox baptism. There are some bishops who allow for the Chrism to “complete anything lacking in their baptism.” You may have heard this called economia. Bishops are allowed to bind and loose after all.

We beleive in “One Lord, one faith, and one baptism” but if it is a different faith, it is a different baptism. Many who convert to Holy Orthodoxy are baptized so as to remove all doubt. This is how the Orthodox Church has always operated. I’m sorry if you don’t agree, but that is the way it is.

In Christ,
Andrew

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::

 

[Nine_Two]

Catholics don’t call Anglicans the “second lung”.

Catholics completely respect and believe Orthodox are Christians. That respect is not reciprocated.

There is a poll in the Eastern Catholics forum asking about how reunion would have to come about. The outcome as of this morning (I haven’t looked back at the thread since) does not show this “respect” among Catholics.
Further, that’s not how the world works. Just because you respect someone does not obligate them to respect you. As I stated in my example with Anglicans, they respect Catholics but you the Catholic Church does not return that respect.
With that in mind I would like to state that I do respect the Roman Catholic Church personally, however the lack of respect I hold toward most of the Eastern Churches is what causes me great pause in dealing with the Latin Church.

And this is where those of us who have get upset. Not because someone is choosing to get baptized again, but because by requiring a Catholic to be baptized to become Orthodox, the Orthodox are declaring the Catholic was not a Christian in the first place.

In much the same way you declare a Baptist not a Christian when you make them get rebaptized, but somewhat less.
The truth of the matter is we will not abandon our beliefs and practices for the sake of not causing offense any more than you will.

It is as hurtful as the fundamentalist Christians who no longer pray with me because I know belong to the “whore of Babylon” and “walked away from Christ into Satan’s arms”. Actually, it is worse. Way Worse.

You’d rather be told you follow the Antichrist by a street preacher than be ignored? That’s very interesting.

No matter how nicely one wants to put it, by making Catholics be baptized in order to become Orthodox, the Orthodox who do so, are saying that Catholics are not Christians.

Actually it’s more of a “No Comment”.

Divisive, hurtful…I would put a icon crying because that is what I am doing now, through this whole thread, as I am doing now, but those icons are too cute to express the deep emotion I am feeling as tears run down my face and sobs are stuck in my throat.

I am truly sorry you feel that way, but I have heard protestants say similar things over not being accepted in Communion by Catholics, and to be quite honest that is one of the few things that makes me believe unity may someday be possible, you won’t compromise for the sake of not causing offense, an issue we’ve had in ecumenical discussions with a certain other church.

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

**I am personally saddened quite often by the habit of many participants in this forum of “disrespect” towards other traditions and beliefs - which are not held in common.

I, however, do NOT interpret legitimate points of difference or disagreement as “disrespect” - I see it as legitimate “disagreement” only.

It only starts to become “disrespectful” when points of real difference are denied, when they are judged to be irrelevant or when they are simply not accepted as fact.

I guess, all Christians can look forward to the time when Christ returns, and establishes (we Orthodox believe He will re-establish) One United Holy Apostolic Church with Himself at the head of it, and as sole arbiter on all matters of His Faith.**

 

[Hesychios]

Sadly amusing that someone is offended and deeply hurt that those we consider so close that they are the other lung of Christianity won’t accept the baptism from our Church?

You are selectively reading my post.

I find it sadly amusing because I used to share your attitude, and I said so right there in that post. In fact, I was not only hurt, but outraged and publicly railed against it. I could not imagine how a Catholic could agree to suffer the indignity of even being re-Chrismated, let alone baptized.

However, I know better now.

When I decided to become Orthodox my past became like a shadow behind me. I was willing to accept whatever my bishop decided was best. So baptism was certainly acceptable from that time forward, I just could not bear to wait to be Orthodox, but wait I must until I was considered ready…

Okay, be sadly amused while I continue to be deeply hurt.

Actually, you should not be hurt, it’s just how things are.

The Orthodox churches will usually receive Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists and Latin Catholics with the same love and respect.

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

You are selectively reading my post.

I find it sadly amusing because I used to share your attitude, and I said so right there in that post.

However, I know better now.

Actually, you should not be hurt, it’s just how things are.

The Orthodox churches will usually receive Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists and Latin Catholics with the same love and respect.

True.

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:

 

[spn82756]

There is a poll in the Eastern Catholics forum asking about how reunion would have to come about. The outcome as of this morning (I haven’t looked back at the thread since) does not show this “respect” among Catholics.
Further, that’s not how the world works. Just because you respect someone does not obligate them to respect you. As I stated in my example with Anglicans, they respect Catholics but you the Catholic Church does not return that respect.
With that in mind I would like to state that I do respect the Roman Catholic Church personally, however the lack of respect I hold toward most of the Eastern Churches is what causes me great pause in dealing with the Latin Church.

In much the same way you declare a Baptist not a Christian when you make them get rebaptized, but somewhat less.
The truth of the matter is we will not abandon our beliefs and practices for the sake of not causing offense any more than you will.

You’d rather be told you follow the Antichrist by a street preacher than be ignored? That’s very interesting.

Actually it’s more of a “No Comment”.

I am truly sorry you feel that way, but I have heard protestants say similar things over not being accepted in Communion by Catholics, and to be quite honest that is one of the few things that makes me believe unity may someday be possible, you won’t compromise for the sake of not causing offense, an issue we’ve had in ecumenical discussions with a certain other church.

I will make a comment and leave. The Catholic Church recognizes baptism in all Christian denominations (not momons and jw’s because they are not Christian). By immersion or pouring. To distinguish between the two carries no weight. In the name of the Father…the Son…and the Holy Spirit. To be baptized is to be baptized if the words of the Gospel are used.

 

[Deconi]

I will make a comment and leave. The Catholic Church recognizes baptism in all Christian denominations (not momons and jw’s because they are not Christian). By immersion or pouring. To distinguish between the two carries no weight. In the name of the Father…the Son…and the Holy Spirit. To be baptized is to be baptized if the words of the Gospel are used.

This is as it was, is, and, to be.

Scritptures and Sacred Tradition both attest to this truth.

To question the FACTS of the baptism (format) of a Christian is an authentic enquiry.

To question the VALIDITY of that format is another!

If within an organic entity, some accept and some reject the validity of the same format, then you have to ask, are you truly One!?
Answer: Apparently not.

If within an organic entity you accept the validity of Baptism, but not Holy Orders, then you need to understand that the two Sacraments are entirely different matters!

It appears from some above that if East were to reunite with the West, they are willing to reject their own faith. Thankfully, in the West at least, the decision is not reliant on a popularity poll.

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

This is as it was, is, and, to be.

Scritptures and Sacred Tradition both attest to this truth.

To question the FACTS of the baptism (format) of a Christian is an authentic enquiry.

To question the VALIDITY of that format is another!

If within an organic entity, some accept and some reject the validity of the same format, then you have to ask, are you truly One!?
Answer: Apparently not.

If within an organic entity you accept the validity of Baptism, but not Holy Orders, then you need to understand that the two Sacraments are entirely different matters!

It appears from some above that if East were to reunite with the West, they are willing to reject their own faith. Thankfully, in the West at least, the decision is not reliant on a popularity poll.

**Neither is that of the East reliant upon a popularity poll.

We hope and pray that reunification occurs according to what was accepted in the early undivided Church.

It is the west that unilaterally divided the Church - so the onus is upon you and your Bishopric to seek reunification with the whole.

Your history is our history - we are NOT protestant…**

 

[Deconi]

**Neither is that of the East reliant upon a popularity poll.

We hope and pray that reunification occurs according to what was accepted in the early undivided Church.

It is the west that unilaterally divided the Church - so the onus is upon you and your Bishopric to seek reunification with the whole.

Your history is our history - we are NOT protestant…**

Anytime you rely on a Council for a decision you are implicitly asking for a poll.

We hope for reunification. Period! Our history is the same. I go so far as to testify that we are One.

With your last statement you seem to have a knack of differentiating yourself from the fold.