That is very interesting. You know Father I have unfortunately started to see some interesting rites of Baptism amongst the Orthodox especially the Copts. In some Orthodox baptisms I have seen in some instances immersion up to the head and only "full immersion" on the third. I have also seen immersion up to the head only and on the third immersion water is taking from baptismal water and poured on head of child. I have also seen horizontal baptisms where only a cross sectional half of the child's body is immersed while he or she is face up. Are these ammendments done for the safety of the child? I have never heard of a baptismal drowning. I believe it should be FULL TRIPLE IMMERSION as the Apostles mentioned in the Didascalia. Although these differences may me minor, something as serious as baptism should be done properly. The British Orthodox Church baptizes triple full immersion correct? Pray for me
When my son was baptised we used the font of the local Anglican Church where we had been made most welcome to pray and occasionally hold liturgies, and we know the priest there very well, he is a family friend.
He has a large font which was deep enough for my son to be fully immersed. If it had not been then we would have bought something that was large enough for a full immersion.
Generally speaking I would expect the only normal exceptions in my own practice to be in the case of an infant or person close to death, or in some situation where there was absolutely no availability of enough water (a case that is unlikely here in the UK). If, God willing, my community grows and is able to provide a larger building then the baptistry will have a font large enough for both adult and infant baptism by immersion.
I guess I take the view that if you are going to do something then you might as well do it as best you can. And for me that means seeking to obey the liturgical instructions of my own bishop and not introducing variations simply to suit myself.
No, I don't think so. There has never been an absolute rule about the form of baptism, but there is a matter of what is best and what is in obedience to one's bishop and Tradition. The question should rather be why is the priest - especially in our tradition - not immersing the infant completely.
In the Didache we find the following instruction from the Apostolic period:
7:1 But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize. 7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize {in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit} in living (running) water. 7:3 But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water; 7:4 and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm. 7:5 But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. 7:6 But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able; 7:7 and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before.
So the form is not absolute, and I would not personally want to disadvantage the infant because of the actions of the priest. But the priest should perhaps be asked why he has not used the preferred form when he could. Few of us are in a drought where there is not enough water to baptise a child by immersion. If we were then a baptism by pouring would be acceptable as far as I can see.
I know a Catholic community that even Re-baptise other catholics. They insist that baptism has to be done in a special way, with the priest's gesture's done in a certain way; and if the priest didnt do these gestures when you were baptised - then you're not qualified. lol...
Anyway - I have another question: Is it OK to give your 10ths to the Catholic Church if its for a good cause?
With regards to the baptism topic, Are baptisms only allowed in fonts that have been consecrated with the holy myron? I believe the font in my church has not consecrated and we have done many many baptisms. If they are allowed in fonts that are not consecrated than why is it a necessity to consecrate baptismal fonts in most church consecrations. I am pretty sure I have seen in many missionary areas baptisms in large pots, fonts, and even in some bath tubs. Does it matter where the baptism takes place and if its consecrated? I take it its ok as your son was baptized in the Anglican baptismal font which is not an Orthodox consecrated structure. Love to hear your opinion Father.
I watched the christening video and that is exactly what i was talking about .They don't use just small water to sprinkle but a lot of water to drench the baby very well .The Eotc also stresses that the babys' hair be shaved before baptism .
[quote author=meghalo05 link=topic=8035.msg103641#msg103641 date=1243803245] With regards to the baptism topic, Are baptisms only allowed in fonts that have been consecrated with the holy myron? I believe the font in my church has not consecrated and we have done many many baptisms. If they are allowed in fonts that are not consecrated than why is it a necessity to consecrate baptismal fonts in most church consecrations. I am pretty sure I have seen in many missionary areas baptisms in large pots, fonts, and even in some bath tubs. Does it matter where the baptism takes place and if its consecrated? I take it its ok as your son was baptized in the Anglican baptismal font which is not an Orthodox consecrated structure. Love to hear your opinion Father.
Christ is Risen!
it's not the font that is consecrated normally but the water. before the actual prayer of baptism, there is the prayer of the consecration of the water and after the prayer of baptism there is the prayer of dismissing the water.
I think you misunderstood my comment and question. Every baptism the water is obviously consecrated, but are baptisms only allowed to be done in fonts which they themselves are consecrated with the holy myron. Can a baptism be done in a font that is not consecrated with the Holy Myron? I know the water is consecrated but is it required that the font is consecrated. A one time consecration. For example, I have seen/heard of baptisms carried out in big pots and in some cases a mini swimming pool/ bath. Father, would love to hear your answer.
I think you misunderstood my comment and question. Every baptism the water is obviously consecrated, but are baptisms only allowed to be done in fonts which they themselves are consecrated with the holy myron. Can a baptism be done in a font that is not consecrated with the Holy Myron? I know the water is consecrated but is it required that the font is consecrated. A one time consecration. For example, I have seen/heard of baptisms carried out in big pots and in some cases a mini swimming pool/ bath. Father, would love to hear your answer.
Christ is Risen!
think about it. water is consecrated. the water is within the font/pool/bath, then the pool is consecrated. also technically both are consecrated when prayed on (i would need to go back to the prayer to confirm). because the priest would never consecrate the water and then place in the font. instead, he consecrates the water when it is in the font.
Meghalo, no the font does not need to be consecrated for a baptism to occur (Minagir, he's asking about when the Pope/Bishops actually anoint the font itself with the oil). My church does not have an actual tub for baptisms but just a movable font since we are just a small and new church; Pope Shenouda told us he cannot consecrate that font because once it is consecrated, it cannot be moved at all, but we are allowed to baptize babies in them, and once we buy the tub we will get it consecrated.
As people have said, there is a difference between the consecration of a permanent Church building including a permanent font, and the use of more temporary and provisional facilities.
When congregations have to use a borrowed Church hall or a chapel then it is not possible to consecrate the building and altar. In the same way a temporary or borrowed font is sanctified in the use of it by the prayers of the consecration of the waters, but in a permanent building would be properly consecrated in themselves.
Comments
Christ is Risen!
He has a large font which was deep enough for my son to be fully immersed. If it had not been then we would have bought something that was large enough for a full immersion.
Generally speaking I would expect the only normal exceptions in my own practice to be in the case of an infant or person close to death, or in some situation where there was absolutely no availability of enough water (a case that is unlikely here in the UK). If, God willing, my community grows and is able to provide a larger building then the baptistry will have a font large enough for both adult and infant baptism by immersion.
I guess I take the view that if you are going to do something then you might as well do it as best you can. And for me that means seeking to obey the liturgical instructions of my own bishop and not introducing variations simply to suit myself.
Father Peter
In the Didache we find the following instruction from the Apostolic period:
7:1 But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize.
7:2 Having first recited all these things, baptize {in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit} in living (running) water.
7:3 But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water;
7:4 and if thou art not able in cold, then in warm.
7:5 But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:6 But before the baptism let him that baptizeth and him that is baptized fast, and any others also who are able;
7:7 and thou shalt order him that is baptized to fast a day or two before.
So the form is not absolute, and I would not personally want to disadvantage the infant because of the actions of the priest. But the priest should perhaps be asked why he has not used the preferred form when he could. Few of us are in a drought where there is not enough water to baptise a child by immersion. If we were then a baptism by pouring would be acceptable as far as I can see.
Father Peter
I know a Catholic community that even Re-baptise other catholics. They insist that baptism has to be done in a special way, with the priest's gesture's done in a certain way; and if the priest didnt do these gestures when you were baptised - then you're not qualified. lol...
Anyway - I have another question: Is it OK to give your 10ths to the Catholic Church if its for a good cause?
Christ is Risen!
With regards to the baptism topic, Are baptisms only allowed in fonts that have been consecrated with the holy myron? I believe the font in my church has not consecrated and we have done many many baptisms. If they are allowed in fonts that are not consecrated than why is it a necessity to consecrate baptismal fonts in most church consecrations. I am pretty sure I have seen in many missionary areas baptisms in large pots, fonts, and even in some bath tubs. Does it matter where the baptism takes place and if its consecrated? I take it its ok as your son was baptized in the Anglican baptismal font which is not an Orthodox consecrated structure. Love to hear your opinion Father.
Christ is Risen!
it's not the font that is consecrated normally but the water. before the actual prayer of baptism, there is the prayer of the consecration of the water and after the prayer of baptism there is the prayer of dismissing the water.
I think you misunderstood my comment and question. Every baptism the water is obviously consecrated, but are baptisms only allowed to be done in fonts which they themselves are consecrated with the holy myron. Can a baptism be done in a font that is not consecrated with the Holy Myron? I know the water is consecrated but is it required that the font is consecrated. A one time consecration. For example, I have seen/heard of baptisms carried out in big pots and in some cases a mini swimming pool/ bath. Father, would love to hear your answer.
Christ is Risen!
Minagir,
I think you misunderstood my comment and question. Every baptism the water is obviously consecrated, but are baptisms only allowed to be done in fonts which they themselves are consecrated with the holy myron. Can a baptism be done in a font that is not consecrated with the Holy Myron? I know the water is consecrated but is it required that the font is consecrated. A one time consecration. For example, I have seen/heard of baptisms carried out in big pots and in some cases a mini swimming pool/ bath. Father, would love to hear your answer.
Christ is Risen!
think about it. water is consecrated. the water is within the font/pool/bath, then the pool is consecrated. also technically both are consecrated when prayed on (i would need to go back to the prayer to confirm). because the priest would never consecrate the water and then place in the font. instead, he consecrates the water when it is in the font.
When congregations have to use a borrowed Church hall or a chapel then it is not possible to consecrate the building and altar. In the same way a temporary or borrowed font is sanctified in the use of it by the prayers of the consecration of the waters, but in a permanent building would be properly consecrated in themselves.
Father Peter