Appeal of the First Heirarch of the ROAC to ROCOR(L)

[canonical]

And again, just because there are canons that allow for the use of economy, does not mean that to baptise all converts is 're-baptising' them. They never were baptised to begin with.

***Interesting comment. The church does teach that in an emergency situation anyone can baptize that that it can be done by pouring of water if no dunking is possible, it can be done with cold water if no warm water is available, and that it can be done with "air" (blowing on the individual) if no water is available. From my rwesearch, the key is the proper wording used in the baptism...more so than how the water is used. this is not to say that Thrice Holy Dunking isn't preferred (indeed, my OCA priest took an adult to be baptised in the Greek parish because we have no walk-in pool), but economy is still valid.

I would agree with you that churches that do not use the proper wording do not have a valid baptism.

BTW, did you see My Big Fat Greek Wedding? Now THAT was some adult baptism! I guarantee you that my sponsor was not like her (my wife would not have stood for it)!!!

Al

[Daniel]

***Interesting comment. The church does teach that in an emergency situation anyone can baptize that that it can be done by pouring of water if no dunking is possible, it can be done with cold water if no warm water is available, and that it can be done with "air" (blowing on the individual) if no water is available. From my rwesearch, the key is the proper wording used in the baptism...more so than how the water is used. this is not to say that Thrice Holy Dunking isn't preferred (indeed, my OCA priest took an adult to be baptised in the Greek parish because we have no walk-in pool), but economy is still valid.

Pouring, Sprinkling, and other such things, or only exceptions to the rule. Christ said to baptize (immerse, dunk, dip, etc) in the name of the Father (once), and of the Son (twice), and the Holy Spirit (thrice).

[CGW]

What I want to know is why we have a bunch of laymen here presuming to dispute with their bishops. How Orthodox is that?

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

I for one don't have any disputes with my Bishop; but if by this comment you mean that I had a difference of faith with my previous OCA and GOA so-called bishops, then yes, I did, and it was very Orthodox.

[Грешник]

What I want to know is how a non-Orthodox even has the right belief to claim to know what Orthodoxy is on the first place!

Juvenaly

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Juvenaly,

I am taking your question fractiously. Indeed, if they don't know or cannot know what Orthodoxy is before they are even themselves Orthodox, then by what justification do they have to say, "I want to be Orthodox?"

It is because people know what their faith is that also tells them to not only disagree, but to later separate themselves from the bishop if they are not preaching the correct faith.

[CGW]

What I want to know is how a non-Orthodox even has the right belief to claim to know what Orthodoxy is on the first place!

Well, um, you yourself are, by your own standards, non-Orthodox. And those who move from Orthodox church to Orthodox church are also in the same boat. This whole thing is predicated on those who are not yet in the right faith being able to distinguish correctly among the various competitors. If one has to be in the right church to pass judgement on all the others, mere judgement is clearly not sufficient and arguments about who is baptizing properly or who is an ecumenist or whatever are all a waste of time.