The OCA

[Nevski]

Nevski,

You said:

...your (mistaken) notion that the "OCA recognizes Latin baptism." When such poor logic is appended...

and

1) What evidence have you that the OCA "recognizes Latin baptism?;"

I would very much like to show you what it will take to convince you of the truth. I feel a person honest with himself will give it fair consideration.

So what is reasonable evidence for such a strong accusation of ecclesiastical heresy?

How about some official OCA document that says, in essence, that the OCA recognizes heterodox baptism?

[Chrysostomos]

This website might be of assistance in regards to heterodox baptism.

http://www.ocados.org/dawn/rebaptism.htm

With humble bow,

Reader Chrysostomos

[尼古拉前执事]

How about some official OCA document that says, in essence, that the OCA recognizes heterodox baptism?

Would this suffice?

http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... .php?t=616

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Nevski,

After those sites please consider the following...

http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/documen ... erican.htm

This document was the product of three years of work between the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation set up, sanctioned, and accepted by the synod of bishops of the OCA and by the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of America. Since its publication, this document has been officially supported by the OCA offices in correspondenc.

Besides stating “our churches do in fact find the same essential content of faith present in each other" ("Response to the Balamand Statement," n. 9), it says quite explicitly, “We are therefore moved to declare that we also recognize each other's baptism as one and the same. This recognition has obvious ecclesiological consequences.” (section B, subsection 4.)

I pray you will consider this for your benefit and the salvation of your soul. These are difficult roads to travel but not beyond our ability.

(thank you Nicholas, I was afraid I would have to go digging for that thread )

I have to go, my wife is abandoning the kids with me, we will see who ends up running the house. To arms!

[Daniel]

Unfortunately, the members of SCOBA have taken economy to a ridiculous extreme. Twice I was denied baptism by the Ukrainian metropolitan Constantine. Why? Because apparently my Methodist 'baptism(read: a few droplets of water poured over my forehead)' was good enough.

[Nevski]

How about some official OCA document that says, in essence, that the OCA recognizes heterodox baptism?

Would this suffice?

http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... .php?t=616

Yes, I remember that thread. And upon perusing it, I am struck, first of all, that early on we have OOD up to his usual shenanigans. You stated that you thought Fr. John Matusiak's answer ambiguous, to which OOD responds in effect, "Well, what do you expect?: he communes Latins!"

Pitiful.

I think as well that the thread actually gives the lie to the notion that the OCA accepts the "validity" of heterodox sacraments. Peter Hatala's contributions to the thread should be read carefully, if one really wants to understand the OCA's position. Is there currently a range of opinion in the OCA on the matter? Well, I think that is possibly so, but who should be surprised by this? There are ranges of opinions on a number of subjects to be found among the Fathers as well. These are difficult subjects. But at the end of the day, I don't think that anyone can make a sound case that the OCA officially holds that the sacraments of the heterodox are "valid." That is much too simplistic a notion.

[Daniel]

Here's a link the OCA's Question and Answers.