www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology protestant baptism

Well, Fr. Kimel, if more higher ups think like you do, than EO/RCC communion in our lifetime is possible.

kmaaj, one further thought. This thread reminded me of something I read by Fr Richard Neuhaus:


This may be a Catholic way of speaking of the matter, but I think that the Orthodox would agree. Faith is ecclesial. Faith in Christ and faith in the Church cannot be divorced, because Christ is always united to his Body. Is it possible that your pastor is inviting you to expand your faith in Christ to include faith in his Church?

Welcome, kmaaj-


I appreciate your trust in bringing this to the Forum and appreciate the appropriate respect with which members have responded.

I only recently learned that there are some Orthodox who don't accept a Trinitarian baptism other than their own. It was a shock, and it caused me to think about my own assumptions, rooted in the Catholic belief in the "dignity of Baptism" whenever done in the Trinitarian form and with water. I always think such opportunities to think more deeply about my assumptions are a good, though uncomfortable, thing.

Eight months along as a catechumen I think it is healthy you have questions/doubts. A couple months ago I was in conversation with an Orthodox priest and one of his parishioners and one of them said the longer one is in the catechumenate the better chance they have of the person remaining faithful after reception, that some places have only several months of instruction and it's a real problem.

I agree. I work in the RCIA in my Latin Church parish, the process for baptized and unbaptized to become Catholics. I'm very glad we have a year round catechumenate now which includes months of "Inquiry" before one even enters the catechumenate. It takes time for the naive glow of one's first enthusiasm to dim and the reality of what one is heading toward to really begin to sink in. Issues of authority are big ones in the Church, wherever we are members. Some folks are quite docile coming in because they're in a euphoria about the Church. Once in and when the dust begins to settle they are battling with elements of the Church they don't "accept". Our struggles with authority never end, but better to do more of this as a catechumen or candidate than to gloss over it.

And this priest will be your spiritual father going forward so you need to know that that relationship will be one that does indeed lead you on your journey of Theosis.

I so appreciated Fr Alvin Kimel's description of his discomfort with facing that the orders by which he'd long functioned as an Anglican priest were invalid in the eyes of the Catholic church he was entering. It's a very poignant and instructive example.

You have my prayers.

I had a very long talk with a boyhood friend who is a Catholic deacon, and he stressed exactly as ltt has said, the "dignity of baptism", my friend told me the Catholic Church will always try very hard to recognize that in those previously baptized.

The way Fr. Kimel has put it reflects my own struggle; are my motives selfish? Or is there good reason, like discernment, that I am so strongly opposed to this? I have to admit there are other factors contributing to the strife, inside and outside of the parish.

Good responses from all, thanks.

Kmaaj, in the absence of written confirmation stating the date of your baptism and the form of the baptism (what words were spoken? how was the sacrament administered?), I imagine that it is likely that a Latin Catholic priest would require you to be at least conditionally baptized, in accordance with Canon 869. If the Name of the the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was not explicitly invoked (what was or is the practice of the Disciples of Christ? is there a mandated baptismal ritual?), then you would be baptized absolutely. When it comes to baptism, there must be no doubt that it has been properly administered.

Do not expect a Catholic priest to simply accept your memory of an event that occurred when you were eight years old. For the Catholic Church, this is not a matter of spiritual discernment into your soul: it is a question of determining whether in fact an authentic sacramental action was objectively performed according to the command of Christ and the prescriptions of Holy Church.

When I entered into the Episcopal Church, I was asked to provide written confirmation of my baptism; but the Methodist Church in which I was baptized as an infant could not find a record of my baptism. The Episcopal parish priest required that I be conditionally baptized before I could be confirmed and begin receiving the Holy Eucharist.

I have just received a note from an Antiochian priest who confirmed that official policy of the Antiochian Archdiocese in North America is to receive by chrismation all Protestants who have been baptized with water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Ask your priest to speak to his bishop about this matter.

I also suggest that IF you believe that God is calling you into the Orthodox Church that you submit to the judgment of the bishop, regardless of outcome. Such submission would be good for your soul, I suspect. Ultimately private judgment must be crucified.

In the Diocese my Latin church is in either a written statement from the parish where one was baptized or a written statement from an eye witness is accepted.

It is a tricky thing since for Catholic and Orthodox all the other sacraments are only valid if one's baptism was. For a time churches on the list of those which traditionally baptize in the Trinitarian form were instead baptizing in the name of “Creator, Sustainer, Redeemer”. For those baptisms subsequent marriages, and ordinations were invalid. Not something anyone wants happening.


As there always will be. Such is life. You have to determine are any of these really "deal breakers"?

Again, perhaps there are Catholic and Orthodox faithful who don't have "issues" with authority. I'm not one and I don't know anyone who is. At the same time I understand the nature of authority of the Church and embrace it fully, even when squirming with discomfort at times. You need to know this is how life is in our churches and continue in prayer to discern the answers to the questions you pose. When we move forward out of love for Christ and by His grace we do move closer to Him sometimes in uncomfortable ways.

It's always possible your priest is a guy with some weird stuff going on. But it's much more likely the struggles you are having are a healthy and natural part of this very big transformation you are seeking. Thanks be to God for this journey you are on. Thank Him for all the questions you have. Learning how you will live with them is learning how to live the journey under His mercy.

I wish that I could state that the time of using an "alternative" forumula for Baptism has passed, but unfortunately it has not. Within the United Church of Christ, Prebyterian Church USA, and United Methodist Church political correctness and a radical feminist desire to remove any vestige of "patriarchal" language for God runs rampant.

Those promoting such an agenda have little concern for the effect that this has in essentially placing the believer who receives invalid Baptism outside the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

Don't be too hard.
Never lissen about the "baptism of desire"? The explicit desire to receive the baptism (together with repentance for their sins) assures the salvation to who were not able to receive through the sacrament (for example the cathecumens) (CCC 1259)
This doesnot mean that the baptism is not necessary. A propter baptism is absolutly necessary.
But in the case the protestant baptism is not given under the Trinitarian forum, and you are unknown of this fact, the others followings sacraments can be anyway valid. God is not "too much" legalistic.

Certainly God is merciful in spite of our bad form when folk are innocently involved in error due to bad catechesis etc., of which there has been plenty over time.

But the Catholic Church has stated such "baptisms" are invalid [catholic.org] and that the sacraments that follow are also.

And as Thomas the Seeker rightly says such "baptisms" are still practiced in various quarters. (For a time they were done so within some orders in the Catholic Church as well, according to my Canon Law teacher whose order used that form for a while with unfortunate consequences.)

Antv, I'm afraid that your reference to baptism by desire is irrelevant. We are not talking about whether it is possible to be saved without Holy Baptism. As you rightly note, the Catholic Church does in fact teach that salvation is possible apart from baptism.

The only question before us is whether a sacramental action has in fact occurred, and the only way one can determine that is to examine what was done and judge whether what was done fulfills the dominical mandate. If, for example, the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit was not invoked with the pouring of water, then a true sacrament did not occur, despite the intentions of either the baptizer or the baptizand. This doesn't mean that God was not involved in such an act--we cannot know one way or another--it simply means that a sacrament of the Church did not historically occur.

Are protestant baptismsvalid? With such introductions as I baptize you in the Name of the Creator, the Redeemer and the Sanctifier, are we so sure those we are receiving into communion with the Catholic Church are in essence really baptized.

I currently follow the practice of conditionally baptizing them.
Stephanos I

I'm familiar from the Catholic perspective that if one does not believe in the sacrament then it isn't valid. The example of this would be in marriage. Marriages are declared null (a decree of nullity "annulment") when it is found that one of the parties was not sincere in their vows, did not hold to the basic promises of marriage at the time they made their vow. In that case the Church says there was never a sacramental marriage.

I'm not insisting you are called to this baptism. I have no way of knowing what Christ is calling you to. I do share with Fr Kimel that you are called to seriously reflect on this and it does seem you are indeed earnestly wrestling with it. At some point if you continue to pray, seek help here and elsewhere and to work with your priest you will have your answer.

You may need to just put this on the back burner for a while and continue with being an active participant in your parish, continuing with your catechesis and growing in your life as an Orthodox Christian.

Regarding alternate baptismal namings, the CDF ruled that such baptisms are invalid and anyone baptized into an alternative naming needed to be re-baptized absolutely: Validity of Baptism [vatican.va]. This question several years ago in Australia, where priests at one parish were baptizing individuals in the name of "creator, liberator and sustainer [catholicnewsagency.com]." The bishop put a stop to the practice.

Anecdote: Two faithful parents presented their child to be baptized by their Lutheran pastor. To their surprise, the pastor baptized their child into the name of the Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier. They mulled over this for several days and became increasingly anxious. Eventually they sought the counsel of the pastor of a neighboring Lutheran congregation. "Our pastor baptized our son into the name of the 'Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier," they explained. "Will our child be damned?" "No," the minister replied, "but your pastor most certainly will be."

With all the electronic gizmos and gadgets we have today, too bad nobody has yet invented the "validometer" - a device which when waved in the direction of a person whose baptism is doubtfully valid unfailingly indicates if the baptism was or was not valid. (green light = "valid"; red light = "invalid".