Validly Baptised Christian on RCIA told that he needed a Conditional Baptism

  • Thread starter Thread starter dcbrit2003
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheWarriorMonk said:
I like knowing about all the “oddball” cases, simply because such examples do wonders in helping increasing the understanding of subject at hand.

I find it extraordinarily odd that they would not accept the DVD. Personally I would be showing up at the Bishop’s office demanding they accept it as evidence or give a reason why they refuse to accept it. But that’s me; I don’t expect others to do as I do.
Click to expand...
Well, they haven’t refused to accept it. I just think that they maybe haven’t taken it on board that I have it as it was mentioned in passing in the original phone conversation.

Mark
 
dcbrit2003 said:
Well, they haven’t refused to accept it. I just think that they maybe haven’t taken it on board that I have it as it was mentioned in passing in the original phone conversation.

Mark
Click to expand...
If you want to make it easy, send a copy of the DVD certified mail to the appropriate person and note that it is essential evidence in your case.
 
The worst thing that can happen is they ignore it. The best thing that can happen is it stops this process in its tracks and they declare your baptism valid.

Better film your confirmation when that occurs, just in case. 😉

j/k

Best of luck!
 
dcbrit2003 said:
Well, they haven’t refused to accept it. I just think that they maybe haven’t taken it on board that I have it as it was mentioned in passing in the original phone conversation.

Mark
Click to expand...
What’s the name of the pastor that did the Community Church “baptism” and what did he say when doing what actions?
 
SyroMalankara said:
What’s the name of the pastor that did the Community Church “baptism” and what did he say when doing what actions?
Click to expand...
Hi, I cannot give you his name without asking his permission first and I don’t see the point in any case as the name of the Elder has obviously no relevance to wether my Baptism is valid or not.

You can find out what he said and what actions he took in the first post which started this thread.

Mark
 
dcbrit2003 said:
In conscience, the only option open to me was to refuse because I knew I had been Baptised by full immersion in water ( the correct matter ), using the correct words “In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” ( the form ) and with the intention that I become fully a member of Christ’s Body ( i.e. The Church ).
Click to expand...
Except if it was a Mormon, JW, Unitarian, Universalist, Oneness Baptist, Oneness Pentecostal, and other groups - the words, intent and matter are altogether lacking. So what denomination, sect, group, does your previous sect affiliate with and what is the performing pastor’s theological background?
 
SyroMalankara said:
Except if it was a Mormon, JW, Unitarian, Universalist, Oneness Baptist, Oneness Pentecostal, and other groups - the words, intent and matter are altogether lacking. So what denomination, sect, group, does your previous sect affiliate with and what is the performing pastor’s theological background?
Click to expand...
Correct, and as I have said the Community Church’s doctrinal framework falls entirely within the Protestant Evagelical outlook.

You will find out tomorrow which Protestant Church network it is loosely affiliated with tomorrow when I post here the letter I have just this moment posted to the Bishop
 
dcbrit2003 said:
Correct, and as I have said the Community Church’s doctrinal framework falls entirely within the Protestant Evagelical outlook.

You will find out tomorrow which Protestant Church network it is loosely affiliated with tomorrow when I post here the letter I have just this moment posted to the Bishop
Click to expand...
You have said dcbrit, but there’s no objective criteria for the rest of us to see this. It would be prudent to show the sect’s link to beliefs/faith.
 
I’ve been following this thread since the start.

And I’ve come down to asking myself what would I do if my priest came to be and said that there was some question about the validity of my Baptism.

And honestly?

I would walk over to the font and tell him, “Let’s get it done.” 🤷

I just don’t get why this is such a big deal.
 
The chancery/Bishop will judge the case in terms of validity and any need for a conditional baptism for the good and salvation of the person involved.

Tis of course a very serious matter -due to the importance of baptism - the reality of what baptism is. If it is determined that a conditional baptism is to be done -that prudent doubt remains - then such is the course to take.
 
Update:

I have just returned from posting my Next Day Guaranteed Delivery letters to the Bishop and Chancellor. I will post both letters, with names and any identifying information removed, with the exception of the name of the collection of Churches that the Community Church is apostolic-ally affiliated to ( I have already mentioned that they are members of the Evangelical Alliance ). The letter to the Bishop will be posted tomorrow evening and the letter to the Chancellor will be posted on Friday.

I think it’s only right that they have an opportunity to actually read the letters addressed to them before anyone else
 
Bookcat said:
The chancery/Bishop will judge the case in terms of validity and any need for a conditional baptism for the good and salvation of the person involved.

Tis of course a very serious matter -due to the importance of baptism - the reality of what baptism is. If it is determined that a conditional baptism is to be done -that prudent doubt remains - then such is the course to take.
Click to expand...
indeed, but a sufficiently serious, substantive doubt needs to be shown after an investigation first

At this present time, I know of no such doubt that any reasonable person could have

Mark
 
maryjk said:
I’ve been following this thread since the start.

And I’ve come down to asking myself what would I do if my priest came to be and said that there was some question about the validity of my Baptism.

And honestly?

I would walk over to the font and tell him, “Let’s get it done.” 🤷

I just don’t get why this is such a big deal.
Click to expand...
Simple: Some of us take our sacraments seriously. If anyone questioned any of my sacraments, I would respond by saying “Prove it.” And in this particular case, it does not appear that a valid reason for the doubt has been provided (very poor procedure, IMHO, especially for someone wanting to convert).

A priest just “can’t get it done” because their may be a question of validity is at hand. The appropriate procedures must be followed (whatever that may be, depending on the sacrament, the circumstances, etc.).
 
If it were me, I would just accept the conditional Baptism and move on. But I can appreciate that you want a proper investigation. Hopefully it will prove to be a learning experience for all and make things go more smoothly for the next guy in your position. :o
 
dcbrit2003 said:
Ok, here you are en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelicalism
Click to expand...
I didn’t mean for this post to go on so long, but please bear with me.

Evangelicalism is a pretty wide umbrella. Many Evangelical sects do not ascribe to each item in the Deposit of Faith, even regarding Baptism. For example, one local Community Church (Fundamentalist Independent) “sells” Baptism with an OSAS bent, in that Baptism is only a symbol of the conversion of heart and a ritual akin to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I’m not saying that your particular Church is that way, but it cannot be any wonder why the Church would need to delve further “just to make sure.”

Let me make a military analogy: if a new soldier was accessed into my unit, I’d still have to check his 201, er, personnel file to make sure he’s been trained in squad weapons (and has kept his training current). I can’t go by his word alone, I need to look at his “official” qualifications. If his old unit didn’t keep adequate records of range training, it’s my job to get him to the range again – no matter how many times he’d been in the last to the range the year before he came to my unit. The soldier can show me a video from within 30 days and of course I’d call his old RNCO, but I’d still need the paperwork.

I’ll speculate that because your old denomination hadn’t been listed “officially” as being “approved” in compatible theology with the Church’s, is why there is an investigation. As I said,“Evangelical” is a very wide umbrella term adopted by those sects who do not share the same tenets of faith (as yours does).

The fact that you were only nine days shy of Reception makes a huge difference in that you wrote you’d decide whether or not to enter based on the reply you received. I’m shocked by this. A Catholic forms his conscience to that of the Church, not rye other way around.

The fact that you weren’t “officially” Catholic yet matters less because within two weeks you’d have promised to try to form your conscience as Catholics do. You believed you were ready to do this, and the Church did, too.

Say that your old denomination isn’t recognized by the Church and it was insisted you’d need a conditional Baptism. Tell me you’d still say “no?” Then if you’re not willing to submit to the Church’s authority, you weren’t ready to enter nine days after you were notified that there was an issue. If you’re willing to be part of it, go whole hog: get the conditional baptism and STILL push the issue why you’d have to have done that.

Take for example a last longish analogy of an cold-footed fiance (bear with me here). Nine days before the wedding, your intended doesn’t “call it off,” but says, “I’m not sure, I didn’t consult with my parents.”

Would you, in your disappointment and hurt, still say, “Take all the time you need, Dear,” or would you stomp around and say, “You promised me! That’s not fair!”

In the meantime, her parents want to talk to your parents, because they’ve already spoken to you. They want to assure themselves that you know what you’re in for, not so much their daughter. They want to know how YOU were raised, and assure themselves that you were raised with the same values as their daughter.

Would you hold it against them for wanting to meet your family and not taking your word for it? Or would you be humble and patient enough to let them fully get to know your family before they allowed you to marry their daughter?

Of course, all analogies fall short. But the Church has been waiting for YOU. Come home ASAP, please!
 
Joe_5859 said:
If it were me, I would just accept the conditional Baptism and move on. But I can appreciate that you want a proper investigation. Hopefully it will prove to be a learning experience for all and make things go more smoothly for the next guy in your position. :o
Click to expand...
Exactly, well said
 
Miserissima said:
I didn’t mean for this post to go on so long, but please bear with me.

Evangelicalism is a pretty wide umbrella. Many Evangelical sects do not ascribe to each item in the Deposit of Faith, even regarding Baptism. For example, one local Community Church (Fundamentalist Independent) “sells” Baptism with an OSAS bent, in that Baptism is only a symbol of the conversion of heart and a ritual akin to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I’m not saying that your particular Church is that way, but it cannot be any wonder why the Church would need to delve further “just to make sure.”

Let me make a military analogy: if a new soldier was accessed into my unit, I’d still have to check his 201, er, personnel file to make sure he’s been trained in squad weapons (and has kept his training current). I can’t go by his word alone, I need to look at his “official” qualifications. If his old unit didn’t keep adequate records of range training, it’s my job to get him to the range again – no matter how many times he’d been in the last to the range the year before he came to my unit. The soldier can show me a video from within 30 days and of course I’d call his old RNCO, but I’d still need the paperwork.

I’ll speculate that because your old denomination hadn’t been listed “officially” as being “approved” in compatible theology with the Church’s, is why there is an investigation. As I said,“Evangelical” is a very wide umbrella term adopted by those sects who do not share the same tenets of faith (as yours does).

The fact that you were only nine days shy of Reception makes a huge difference in that you wrote you’d decide whether or not to enter based on the reply you received. I’m shocked by this. A Catholic forms his conscience to that of the Church, not rye other way around.

The fact that you weren’t “officially” Catholic yet matters less because within two weeks you’d have promised to try to form your conscience as Catholics do. You believed you were ready to do this, and the Church did, too.

Say that your old denomination isn’t recognized by the Church and it was insisted you’d need a conditional Baptism. Tell me you’d still say “no?” Then if you’re not willing to submit to the Church’s authority, you weren’t ready to enter nine days after you were notified that there was an issue. If you’re willing to be part of it, go whole hog: get the conditional baptism and STILL push the issue why you’d have to have done that.

Take for example a last longish analogy of an cold-footed fiance (bear with me here). Nine days before the wedding, your intended doesn’t “call it off,” but says, “I’m not sure, I didn’t consult with my parents.”

Would you, in your disappointment and hurt, still say, “Take all the time you need, Dear,” or would you stomp around and say, “You promised me! That’s not fair!”

In the meantime, her parents want to talk to your parents, because they’ve already spoken to you. They want to assure themselves that you know what you’re in for, not so much their daughter. They want to know how YOU were raised, and assure themselves that you were raised with the same values as their daughter.

Would you hold it against them for wanting to meet your family and not taking your word for it? Or would you be humble and patient enough to let them fully get to know your family before they allowed you to marry their daughter?

Of course, all analogies fall short. But the Church has been waiting for YOU. Come home ASAP, please!
Click to expand...
Miserissima, thank you for your very well thought out post. Just to talk about conscience a bit. I would argue that my conscience is formed more or less to what the Catholic Church believes ( I have some misgivings about the Marian shrines,etc and veneration of Mary - to me, she is the model disciple ). Certainly on all the issues on RCIA I agreed with everything, and found it spiritually enriching.

However, ALL Catholics are bound by Canon Law, and given the evidence here I do not believe that Canon Law has been followed correctly and as in the words of my RCIA Course leaders, I am entitled to ask for a proper investigation . This is now happening and I fully support it.

Also, regarding Evangelical differences, yes, I take your point. When I first became a Christian I asked the Lead Elder at the time what the Community Church’s position was with regards the Christianity it practiced and he summed it up pretty nicely in saying that it was “Orthodox” and I don’t mean like Greek Orthodox or whatever :), he meant essentially your bog standard Protestant belief system with no frills added 🙂

Mark
 
dcbrit2003 said:
indeed, but a sufficiently serious, substantive doubt needs to be shown after an investigation first

At this present time, I know of no such doubt that any reasonable person could have

Mark
Click to expand...
Will be a judgment for the Cancery/Bishop to make. But yes an investigation is something to be done.

Tis very important that one is validly baptized. Tis the foundation and font of Christian life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top