Official OCA position

[Nevski]

OOD,

You know for sure that Fr. John has communed Roman Catholics?

Of course he doesn't.

[尼古拉前执事]

OOD,

You know for sure that Fr. John has communed Roman Catholics?

Of course he doesn't.

Please, no one answering for one another. OOD is quite capable of telling us why he said this.

[Daniel]

I promised that I would write to OCA communications department as to what there official position on Latin Baptism was. It is more than fairly ambiguous, to say the least. Basicly it was something to the effect that we don't know how much grace is in an RC baptism (only that it is imperfect) and that an Orthodox Chrisimation perfects it. He did not say though latin baptisms are graceless, the implication was that they were some sort of semi-gracefilled.

If it is at all possible (and not unappropiate), would you be able to post the responce?

Daniel

[Julianna]

OCA's saying heretics have grace and God's grace can be imperfect? :shock:

[Justin Kissel]

All,

• I read in a conversion story one time a convert claim that they had been given the eucharist before they were Orthodox (I remember because I thought at the time that it sounded very "Catholic" to me: they were trying to bring the person into Orthodoxy using the sacrament as a tool, so to speak). I don't recall what jurisdiction the convert claimed this happened in.

• I read on some site (probably Orthodoxinfo) that there was an ecumenical meeting in northern europe in which the eucharist was given out to anyone who came forward, without any examination of what faith background they came from. The implication, if I remember properly, was that they didn't say anything about it being only for Orthodox Christians, either.

• None of this is proof, though; or even very strong evidence for that matter. Certainly there is enough evidence to see that world Orthodoxy "prays with heretics" (even Bishop Kallistos admited that in his last revision of The Orthodox Church, and he is hardly someone with a traditionalist bias). If someone has actually seen[/B] Catholics being communed (as I've seen monophysites being communed) please give some more information as to when and under what circumstances.

• What the joint statement said (in the other thread) seem like the (il)logical conclusion to me of the Baptismal/Christmative theology held by the groups participating in the Orthodox-Catholic dialogue. We traditionalists would, of course, say that there is nothing in Roman Catholic baptisms, and that even if someone is not baptized when they become Orthodox, that the Christmation "fills in what wasn't there" (ie. there was nothing there, no grace). The theology of these fellows, though, has been for some time, that Chrismation "fills in whatever is lacking" (ie. there is some grace, chrismation fills in the rest).

• It was through historical "scholarly" research that these fellows arrived at this understanding, I think. And now it is through historical "scholarly" research that they are going further down the path. It is expected, by me at least, that whoever signed the joint-statement recognizing RC baptisms would speak in vague terms even after they signed. Until, that is, the next meeting, in which they will again affirm what has been said in the past (e.g., just like they affirmed Balamand). With each new statement they shock us to a greater extent, but speak vaguely in between statements so as not to frighten the flock too much.

• I don't know if it was Fr. John Matusiak who spoke to you or not. I can only say that at one point in my life Fr. John had some tough words for me, and they kept me from embracing Orthodoxy from a very distorted perspective. At that time, at least, he helped to set this Orthodox Christian on the straight and narrow path.

• I was thinking last night, we traditionalists (mis)use history the same way that world Orthodoxy does, the difference being that we use it to articulate and defend different (sometimes contradictory) positions. A couple priests once told some of us on a very nice little yahoo list that no one should read the Rudder, The Philokalia, etc. until they had been Orthodox a very long time (e.g., purified to a great degree). The one Priest was 50 and said he wouldn't even consider reading the Philokalia since he wasn't ready for it. I think there is great wisdom in these words.

• I do not say any of the things that I do about Catholics lightly. Most of my family on my Father's side is Catholic, and the best man I've ever known, my Grand Father, was a life-long Catholic. My Grand Father was like a Father to me (actually, he legally adopted me when I was a teenager, and wrote me into his will, so that's more than just sentiment), and I loved him very much. I myself was baptized Catholic (in the same Church my Grand Father attended, which he built his house right next door too--though I think he built his house before they built the Church ). If and when I say things about the Catholics, about their baptism or their grace, I say these things with a very personal connection to the situation. I don't think this causes me to "favor" the Catholics or "take it easy" on them, I think it helps me to look at them as people, and not simply make pronouncements on them and dismiss them out of hand as "the heretics who fell away" (I'm not saying that anyone here does that).

[Justin Kissel]

- It was through historical "scholarly" research that these fellows arrived at this understanding, I think. And now it is through historical "scholarly" research that they are going further down the path. It is expected, by me at least, that whoever signed the joint-statement recognizing RC baptisms would speak in vague terms even after they signed. Until, that is, the next meeting, in which they will again affirm what has been said in the past (e.g., just like they affirmed Balamand). With each new statement they shock us to a greater extent, but speak vaguely in between statements so as not to frighten the flock too much.

I just wanted to say that I'm sorry, now, for having posted this. This was a speculation based on 1) what I've seen happening in certain world Orthodox groups, and 2) what I've seen certain Ecumenists say would be their method for bringing about unity with non-Orthodox bodies. I had no justification (ie. no evidence) in linking the two.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

A now, very close friend of mine, who is now in Russia, witnessed "Fr." John Matusiak communing Latins at a school "Fr." John taught at.

It shocked him so much that it caused him to leave the OCA.

I for one would not repeat something as ugly and discrediting as this about anyone if I was not absolutley certain it was true.

I am going to email my friend in Russia and have him describe the details of what he saw. He doesn't get email everyday like us, sometimes only once a week, but as soon as I get a response, I will post them here.

============

Nektarios,

I would very much appreciate it if you posted the response you got from "Fr." John - if you care to. I also appreciate your honesty in your original post, these are life and death issues.

============

Peter Hatala,

None of your posts were related to the issue of whether or not the OCA recognizes heretic "baptisms" - which I believe has been adequetly demonstrated by the joint statement and the OCA's response; not to mention my experience in the OCA which is probably not worth anything to anyone here.

=============

All, the original issue was 1) does the OCA recognize Grace in heretic baptisms, and 2) does this fall under the ROCORS anathema, which would put them in commune with if there were a unity with the MP?

1) "We are therefore moved to declare that we also recognize each other's baptism as one and the same. " [Baptism and "Sacramental Economy", An Agreed Statement of The North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation, St. Vladimir's Orthodox Seminary, Crestwood, New York, June 3, 1999]

2) "who do not distinguish the priesthood and mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation." [The Russian Church Abroad's Anathema on Ecumenism]

2a) "We order that a bishop or presbyter that recognized the baptism or sacrifice of heretics be defrocked. For "what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?" (2 Cor. 6:15)." [Apostolic Canon 46 ]

2b) "If a bishop or presbyter baptize anew anyone that has had a true baptism, or fail to baptize someone that had been polluted by the impious, let him be defrocked, on the grounds that he is mocking the cross and death of the Lord, and fails to distinguish priests from false priests." [[Apostolic Canon 47]

2c) "If a bishop or presbyter conduct an initiation [i.e. baptism] and perform not three immersions, but one immersion—that administered into the Lord's death—let him be anathema." [Apostolic Canon 50 ]