H
Hesychios
Guest
That is quite right.I always thought “living water” referred to moving, fresh water, eg. a river, lake, etc.?
- Status
H
Hesychios
Guest
I think what you are suggesting here is syncretistic indifferentism.
A
Analyticalpoet
Guest
No what I am is suggesting is this: Once that proper explination of a belief is given, the other side should not continue to insist that the contrary is what is believed.
The Catholic Church does not believe that Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son in the strict sense, but rather that the Spirt Proceeds from the Father and the Son in the manner already explained–THROUGH. Yet, it is still contended by many Orthodox that the Former and not the Latter is the case.
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PCCUFILQ.HTM
this is a reference to the teaching on the Filioque.
H
Hesychios
Guest
If you mean through, then say through, don’t say AND … and take it out of the Creed.
J
John_oxios
Guest
Nope Biblically it was water from a well which bubled up and flowed,I always thought “living water” referred to moving, fresh water, eg. a river, lake, etc.?
David Guzik Commentary Blue letter Bible.org
b. Living water: In ancient times, they called spring water living water because it seemed “alive” as it bubbled up from the ground. At first glance, it might seem that Jesus tells this woman about a nearby active spring. But Jesus makes a play on words with the phrase “living water,” because He means the spiritual water that quenches our spiritual thirst and gives life.
Jeromes Biblical Commentary:
John 4:10-12,
“… Jesus assertion that He is a “Gift of God” and source of “living water” leads to the first christological insight of the passage- Jesus is greater then Jacob. John 8:53 has the Jews repeating the same question in connection with Abraham. Gen 33:19, 48:22 speak of Jacob giving Sechem to Joseph. Later legends about the patriarch Jacob associated him with a” traveling well" (Pirqe .R El 35). Lack of a cup would be no problem, since jacob was also associated with a miracle in which the water would bubble up to the top of the well and continuously overflow *Tg. Yer. 1 Num 21: 17-18, 23:31 * Tg. Neof. Gen 28:10. Targumic traditions also show that Num 21: 16-20had been interpreted so that the place name “Mattanah” was read in terms of its root ntn, “gift,” combined with the promise in Num 21:16c, " I (= God) will give them living water." Jesus’ comment, that he is the “gift of God,” may echo this tradition. The crucified/ exalted Jesus become the source of Living Water, the Spirit Jhn 7:37-39; 19: 34
Jhn 4: 13-15 "…permanent possession of “living water” within a Jewish symbolic system could either refer to the purifying of God’s Spirit in the righteous community (e.g. 1QS 4:21), "like purifying waters He will sprinkle upon him the Spirit of truth, a connection implied in JHn 3:5. Or to God the “fountain of living waters” (Jer 2:13), from which worshipers drink (psalm 36: 8); … or to Wisdom, who says of herself, “He who drinks of me will thirst for more” (Sirach 24;33- 29), Jesus’ saying may even be a deliberate reversal of Wisdoms claim.
Or The “Living Waters” of The Holy Spirit, giving new life to humanity:
“For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon your descendants, and my blessing on your offspring. They shall spring up like grass amid waters, like willows by flowing streams.” (Isaiah 44:3-4 RSV)
As for full immersion 3x, I give you scripture:
Jhn 13:9 Simon Peter said to him, "Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head!"
Jhn 13:10 Jesus said to him, "He who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but he is clean all over; and you are clean, but not every one of you.
God bless,
John
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello Heysychios,
The RCC believes that the Spirit proceeds from Father and the Son out of the love they both have. Like a husband and wife, and out of their love brings forth a child/ children.
will get the RC Catechism later.
The Eastern Church has a point:
Scripture says:
Jhn 15:26 But when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me;
However
Scripture also states :
Jhn 20:21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.”
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
Remember Jesus doesn’t credit himself but credits all things from the Father, but he breathes on the apostles and gives them the Holy Spirit.
Jerome Biblical commentary:
JHn 20: 22- 23, "…THere the Spirit is one expression of Divine indwelling (Jhn 14:17) and flows from the exalted Jesus as a source of eternal life (Jhn 7:39)…
If you read the history of the Creed the Eastern Church agreed to its present wording but later on took exception to the word
God bless,
john
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello
Syncretism is a mixing of religions ideas so that neither one remains… that’s not really possible between the eastern Rite and the western rite.
syn·cre·tism:
Reconciliation or fusion of differing systems of belief, as in philosophy or religion, especially when success is partial or the result is heterogeneous.
Again the Eastern rite is against philosophical explanations of God’s mysteries, however they’ll fight tooth and nail over the Fillioque.
Filioque
Fil`i*o"que, n. (Eccl. Hist.) The Latin for, “and from the Son,” equivalent to et filio, inserted by the third council of Toledo (a. d. 589) in the clause qui ex Patre procedit (who proceedeth from the Father) of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed (a. d. 381), which makes a creed state that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father. Hence, the doctrine itself (not admitted by the Eastern Church).
www.newadvent.org/cathen/11049a.htm
Dogmatic meaning of filioque
The dogma of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son as one Principle is directly opposed to the error that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not from the Son. Neither dogma nor error created much difficulty during the course of the first four centuries. Macedonius and his followers, the so-called Pneumatomachi, were condemned by the local Council of Alexandria (362) and by Pope St. Damasus (378) for teaching that the Holy Ghost derives His origin from the Son alone, by creation. If the creed used by the Nestorians, which was composed probably by Theodore of Mopsuestia, and the expressions of Theodoret directed against the ninth anathema by Cyril of Alexandria, deny that the Holy Ghost derives His existence from or through the Son, they probably intend to deny only the creation of the Holy Ghost by or through the Son, inculcating at the same time His Procession from both Father and Son. At any rate, if the double Procession of the Holy Ghost was discussed at all in those earlier times, the controversy was restricted to the East and was of short duration.
The first undoubted denial of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost we find in the seventh century among the heretics of Constantinople when St. Martin I (649-655), in his synodal writing against the Monothelites, employed the expression “Filioque”. Nothing is known about the further development of this controversy; it does not seem to have assumed any serious proportions, as the question was not connected with the characteristic teaching of the Monothelites.
In the Western church the first controversy concerning the double Procession of the Holy Ghost was conducted with the envoys of the Emperor Constantine Copronymus, in the Synod of Gentilly near Paris, held in the time of Pepin (767). The synodal Acts and other information do not seem to exist. At the beginning of nineth century, John, a Greek monk of the monastery of St. Sabas, charged the monks of Mt. Olivet with heresy, they had inserted the Filioque into the Creed. In the second half the same century, Photius, the successor of the unjustly deposed Ignatius, Patriarch of Constantinople (858), denied the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son, and opposed the insertion of the Filioque into the Constantinopolitan creed. The same position was maintained towards the end of the tenth century by the Patriarchs Sisinnius and Sergius, and about the middle of the eleventh century by the Patriarch Michael Caerularius, who renewed and completed the Greek schism.
The rejection of the Filioque, or the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and Son, and the denial of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff constitute even today the principal errors of the Greek church. While outside the Church doubt as to the double Procession of the Holy Ghost grew into open denial, inside the Church the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to be a dogma of faith in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Second council of Lyons (1274), and the Council of Florence (1438-1445). Thus the Church proposed in a clear and authoritative form the teaching of Sacred Scripture and tradition on the Procession of the Third Person of the Holy Trinity…
Use URL for rest of the Article
God bless,
John
H
Hesychios
Guest
What you are describing is an artesian well, which is a natural spring. It moves ‘on it’s own’. It also continues to flow beyond the point of exit, into streams and pools.
This is not a typical man made well that requires a bucket to draw with, but a natural spring.
The point here is this is naturally flowing water, running water, not stagnant nor trapped in cisterns or jars. And the subject was to be immersed in it.
This is the preferred method.
Pouring should not be the norm. I think that occasionally pouring would make sense, but it is very clear that immersion was common in the west until fairly recent times, the great baptisteries in European cities attest to this, there is no reason why the church couldn’t return to that as the common practice, it is part of the authentic practice of the western church which can be revived.
View attachment 8316
The baptistry in Volterra, Italy
A
Aramis
Guest
The local latin parish in Eagle River baptises by full immersion in a baptistry in the nave.
H
Hesychios
Guest
I think that is good, but Alaska of all places seems to be the one place where pouring would be understandable.
Of course in this day and age church buildings aren’t so drafty.
One of the local Latin parishes in this area (I am back in the States now) also has the big immersion baptismal font, it certainly is a move in the right direction. I still think that they don’t immerse infants though (which would be the majority of occasions).
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_k5gPI5ffNJI/RcJDX_UMKjI/AAAAAAAAACU/SmMxQQl2_Sw/s400/baptism.jpg http://www.3saints.com/images/baptism.jpg
http://www.stpeterssurryhills.org.au/1_cropped.JPG
A
Analyticalpoet
Guest
This is exactly what I mean by being obstinant on theological misunderstandings. NO it should not be removed from the creed! It means what it means, as already explained. This inflexibility on behalf of certain Orthodox is what so frustrating. The Catholic Church has already apologized for past agression, has already returned several holy relics to the Orthodox, has provided sound explination of it’s teachings, etc… and yet this! Orthodox cry foul for the Latinization of the Church, but who is doing what to whom now in the name of reunification?! The Latin Rite is the Latin Rite, it is the same expression of the Apostolic Faith!
How does this whole thing tie in with the thread…? Uniate Churches serve as an example as how unity with the Orthodox might work; that is that the East will retain their liturgical rites and the likes. The questions would be the role of the Bishop of Rome, the nature of the church, What would be the Role of the four other Sees: Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, and Alexandria? What would Moscow say to this and how would the Hierarchy of the Church work? etc… Those are very valid questions to be asked, and which are being adressed by the appropriate people.
J
John_oxios
Guest
.
Heysios,
I love the part where you say you Think! The Church ought to do. Would you tell the Greek Patriarch what you think he ought to do??
You show pictures instead of refernces? The Baptismal font had eight sides, why? 8 is the number of new beginnings, it is symbolic of the Childs new life in Christ @ Baptism. Do ya really think the amount of water used or not used can nullify the Word of God?
Give me some reference as to the Roman Catholic Church just recently (supposedly) changed from full immersion to sprinkled… Because they have discussed it at several councils prior to the schism.
Will pick up the references for this
God Bless,
John
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hi analytical Poet,
Code:
I guess the real question is is Baptism of God? Or of men?
Can any Man negate the Word of God? The Church was empowered By Jesus through the Father to Bind and loose.. it seems the west choose sprinkling as was done since Apostolic times and the East Choose immersion, Now does anyone know if John the Baptist actually immersed anyone? Or he may have done both depending on the time of year, dry season had to be a time of Sprinkling because the Jordan would be knew high and rainy season a time for immersion.according to this the type of baptizer doesn’t matter, only the spoken formula!
Authoritative statement of doctrine
At the outset we think it advisable to give two documents which express clearly the mind of the Church on the subject of baptism. They are valuable, also, as containing a summary of the main points to be considered in the treatment of this important matter. Baptism is defined positively in the one and negatively in the other.
The positive document: “The Decree for the Armenians” Approx. 1439 a.d.
“The Decree for the Armenians”, in the Bull “Exultate Deo” of Pope Eugene IV, is often referred to as a decree of the Council of Florence. While it is not necessary to hold this decree to be a dogmatic definition of the matter and form and minister of the sacraments, it is undoubtedly a practical instruction, emanating from the Holy See, and as such, has full authenticity in a canonical sense. That is, it is authoritative. The decree speaks thus of Baptism:
Holy Baptism holds the first place among the sacraments, because it is the door of the spiritual life; for by it we are made members of Christ and incorporated with the Church. And since through the first man death entered into all, unless we be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, we can not enter into the kingdom of Heaven, as Truth Himself has told us. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water; and it is indifferent whether it be cold or hot. The form is: I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. We do not, however, deny that the words: Let this servant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; or: This person is baptized by my hands in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, constitute true baptism; because since the principal cause from which baptism has its efficacy is the Holy Trinity, and the instrumental cause is the minister who confers the sacrament exteriorly, then if the act exercised by the minister be expressed, together with the invocation of the Holy Trinity, the sacrament is perfected. The minister of this sacrament is the priest, to whom it belongs to baptize, by reason of his office. In case of necessity, however, not only a priest or deacon, but even a layman or woman, nay, even a pagan or heretic can baptize, provided he observes the form used by the Church, and intends to perform what the Church performs. The effect of this sacrament is the remission of all sin, original and actual; likewise of all punishment which is due for sin. As a consequence, no satisfaction for past sins is enjoined upon those who are baptized; and if they die before they commit any sin, they attain immediately to the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God.
God bless,
John
S
sidbrown
Guest
Suppose you were a Lutheran. Put yourself in their shoes. Would you then say as a Lutheran that the RCC was being obstinant on theological misunderstandings when it comes to the Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation?
Suppose you were an Anglican. Put yourslef in the shoes of an Anglican. Would you say that the RCC is being obstinant on theological misunderstandings when it comes to the validity of their orders?
S
sidbrown
Guest
I am not sure that immersion would work all that well in the RCC simce I read that a baby drowned during baptism when an RCC priest attempted the baptism by triple immersion.
J
John_oxios
Guest
Sid,
again gossip!!! Show me the proof! News article! anything but propaganda!
againwe we be held respnsible for every word we utter, and the Bible is full of warnings against false witness.
Let’s keep it real, ever hear of Water Babies?? They can barely crawl but when placed in a pool instinctively hold their breath underwater. It takes several minutes being held under water to drown, and do you think any parent would stand by and watch as their child as their child was held under water??? Its a dunking not a submerging! Even the RCC Priests are aware of that
Again a little proof, to your erroneous stories. You just add injury to insult.
God bless,
John
J
John_oxios
Guest
Hello Hesychios,
Preferred method to whom? Cannot the Roman Catholic Church have its preferences? Eastern Church prefers Icons over Statues, are either one of us wrong? The Bible says, Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God; consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith.
(Hbr 13:7).
But doesn’t say how to keep them in remembrance, Culture and Tradition is what prevailed. After Council meetings.
Now doesn’t a Baptismal font symbolic of as you say an Artesian well?
Today Church’s prefer to use Baptismal Fonts we fill by hand, however in the Past they were connected to the plumbing and filled from beneath and the water flowed up.
I suppose you’ll object to that even though you brought it up.
By the way neither method pouring over the head, or immersion is incorrect in the RCC.
Symbolism to a Jew and the Ancient Church is reality distilled, that means it is really happening, physically, metaphorically, spiritually.
Remember Jesus empowered to Peter and the apostles that what is bond on Earth is bound in Heaven.
God bless,
John
S
sidbrown
Guest
See: “Death of girl at Baptism ruled homicide”
“Sade Victoria Omotola died September 20 while on life support at Children’s Hospital, where had been since blood began streaming from her nose and her face turned blue during her baptism at Imani Temple, a parish church that had broken away from the Catholic Church. Father August Griffin had immersed the baby’s head three times into a baptismal font.”
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=2346
H
Hesychios
Guest
I suppose one would have to be instructed as to the proper way to do such a thing.
H
Hesychios
Guest
Actually they better serve as an example of what not to do, something like a warning.
- Status