Arial Baptism?

[romiosini]

Has anyone heard of the Arial baptism? The baptism when a baby is fortold to die, and the parent or the godfather (if he's chosen) raisen the baby up 3 times in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But then if it does survive, the baby can be baptised officially without being said 3 times in the name of the Trinity. Has anyone heard of that?

[George Australia]

Has anyone heard of the Arial baptism? The baptism when a baby is fortold to die, and the parent or the godfather (if he's chosen) raisen the baby up 3 times in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But then if it does survive, the baby can be baptised officially without being said 3 times in the name of the Trinity. Has anyone heard of that?

Dear in Christ Romiosini,
Yes, arial baptism is an accepted practice, and can be performed by any Orthodox Christian in case of emergency. One of the contemporary Fathers (I can't recall which one right now) was visited by a couple and their newborn child. The Elder held the child and asked the parents what they intended to name the child. He then appeared to play with the infant by raising him three times then handed him back to his parents. He then said to the parents: "You are young, you will have more children". A disciple who witnessed this later asked why the Elder had surrupticiously performed an arial baptism on the infant, and the Elder replied that it was shown to him that it was not God's will that the child would live.
I'm not sure how arial baptism is 'regularized' if the child does live, I will have to ask someone.
George

[Mor Ephrem]

Personal opinion: if "aero-baptism" is legitimate, so is the way RC's baptise.

[George Australia]

Personal opinion: if "aero-baptism" is legitimate, so is the way RC's baptise.

Dear in Christ, Mor Ephrem,
Firstly,aerobaptism requires that the one performing the aerobaptism is themselves a baptised Orthodox Christian, and secondly, the intention of aerobaptism must be to baptise the infant into the Orthodox Church. Neither of these two criteria are met in RC baptism.

George

[Mor Ephrem]

Neither of these two criteria are met in RC baptism.

And neither of these was what I was trying to address; forgive me for my lack of clarity.

Many traditionalist EO critics of RC baptism will cite, among other things, lack of improper form (triple immersion) to an extent which makes infusion (the RC method of choice) look invalid. If something like aero-baptism, which lacks even the water with which to baptise, can be considered legit, why is something like RC baptism looked upon with such disdain that many traditionalists cannot but feel that RC's ought to be "re-baptised" and not simply received by economy (e.g., Chrismation)? Romiosini's post, if accurate, makes it clear that aero-baptism, should the person baptised in this manner live after all, is THE baptism of that person. Why?

And what is the basis for permitting aero-baptism? I would think that, in such an emergency situation, "baptism of desire" would be sufficient? Where does baptism without water come from?

[George Australia]

Dear in Christ Mor Ephem,
Thanks for clarifying what you meant. Firstly, let me say that my own opinion is that the reception by Baptism and the reception by Chrisimation of RC converts are the same thing. Reception by Chrisimation makes valid a baptism which was not valid for initiation into the Orthodox Church.
Secondly, baptism by immersion and emersion should be the standard practice, as taught to us by the Apostles. Baptism by aspersion and aerobaptism are permitted only when the situation demands it (eg where there is a clear danger of immenent death, or when there is a lack of sufficient water). Baptism by immersion and emersion symbolizes the candidate's union with the Death and Resurrection of Christ- they enter a watery grave and are raised from it. I've often thought that emersion resembles the birth of an infant after the breaking of it's mother's waters- the "Second Birth" as the Gospel puts it. If Baptism by immersion and emmersion symbolises this, then baptism by aspersion is a symbol of a symbol. And aerobaptism is therefore a symbol of a symbol of a symbol.
In the RC confession, the current standard practice is baptism by aspersion- they no longer follow the Apostolic injunction that the standard practice should be baptism by immersion- this is why so much confusion exists in the Orthodox Church as to how they should be recieved if they convert. Those who say the RC form of baptism is incorrect are reacting against those who say that the form (ie, the standard practice of aspertion) is acceptable. In my opinion, both sides of the argument make good points, however what is often forgotten is that even if the RC standard practice were baptism by immersion, it would still not be valid- and the person could either receive Orthodox Baptism and Chrisimation, or simply Chrisimation if they converted- the former aknowledges the invalidity of the original baptism by 'akrevia' (exactness), and the latter aknowledges the invalidity of the original baptism by 'economia' (dispensation)

Where does baptism without water come from?

I would say that ultimately, this comes from Christ. In the same way that the Chrisimation of converts who received a previously invalid baptism comes from the Church's 'economia' or dispensation, so the aerobaptism of infants in danger of death comes from the economia of the Church. And the Church's economia comes from Christ Who said: "What you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven, and what you loose on Earth will be loosed in Heaven."
Ultimately, what you or I or even a particular local synod within the Church think is true is nowhere near as important as what the Church has believed "always and everywhere".
George

[Liudmilla]

Mor Ephrem:

There are times when it is expediant and necessary for arial baptisms. My brother-in-law works as a nurse in a neo-natal critial care ward. Often the babies he cares for have no one. Their mothers are drug addicts and so on. My brother-in-law is often the only solace and love that these children have in their last moments. As an Orthodox Christian he cannot send them to their deaths without baptism. So he carries Holy Water in his case and baptises these poor souls before they die. For those who are very ill, but may make it ...he places an icon of the Guardian Angel in their cribs. There have been many a parent who have been grateful for this act of kindness.

Tell me is that child baptised or is the act a futile and foolish one on the part of an Orthodox Christian?

I don't think so.....

Milla