|
|
|
Question 18.
Τα
μυστήρια της Δυτικής Εκκλησίας θεωρούνται από την Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία ως μη
έγκυρα, εξαιρουμένου του Βαπτίσματος. Σε περιπτώσεις επιστρεφόντων, η
είσοδος στην Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία γίνεται μόνο δια του μύρου. Που όμως
έγκειται η διαφορά μεταξύ των μυστηρίων; Η θεία χάρη ή θα επενεργεί επί
όλων ή δεν θα τελειώνει κανένα.
Translation of Question.
The Sacraments of
the Western Churches are seen by the Orthodox Church as non valid except
that of baptism. In the case where people return to the Orthodox Church,
they are received only though the Mystery of Holy Chrism. But on what does
the difference between the sacraments rest? Either Divine Grace acts on
all or does not accomplish any.
Answer to Question 18.
Dear Constantine,
Greetings in Christ.
There seems to be some confusion on the subject of the Baptism from
western churches and how people are received into the Orthodox Church. Not
all Orthodox Churches receive converts from the Roman Catholic Church or
the Church of England only through the mystery of Holy Chrism. If am not
mistaken, the Monasteries of Mount Athos and the Russian Church insists
that all converts must be Baptized. The truth is that if we accept their
previous baptism, even though it was a baptism in the Holy Trinity, it
means that we accept their priesthood which means we accept their church
which means we accept their heresy. The argument that their priesthood has
apostolic succession is not a reason for us to accept any of their
sacraments. Arius and Nestoras and many others were of the Orthodox
priesthood yet the Church condemned them as heretics when they taught
something other than that which the Church held as the truth. After the
Great Schism, the Roman Catholic Church was originally considered as a
schismatic church, but as time passed they added dogmas that are in
complete conflict with the teaching of the Orthodox Church. One such dogma
is the dogma of the “Immaculate Conception”, which says that Mary was born
without original sin. This is ludicrous and blasphemous because then Mary
would no longer belong to the human race and in fact would be God
incarnate. Joachim would not have been her father and Anna, her mother,
would have been the Mother of God. God himself would not have needed to
become man to save us, because if Mary was born outside of original sin,
she would have been a perfect human being, thus not needing to be saved
and we could all find salvation through her. You see then that from a
schismatic church, the Roman Catholic Church became a heretic church. The
Church of England which is a schismatic church from a schismatic church
has not only done away with the authority of Holy Tradition, but has also
of recent years made a mockery of their own priesthood by allowing the
ordinations of women. The Orthodox Church should not accept any of the
sacraments of these churches not even their baptism and in theory at least
she doesn’t. This “Economy” (if we can call it this) of receiving
westerners into the Orthodox Church only through the Mystery of Holy
Chrism is what I personally call “church
politics” and
“church diplomacy.”
It seems to have come into affect from the time the Greek Orthodox Church
first opened Churches in England and other Western Countries. In England
for example they needed the approval of the Church of England to have an
Orthodox Church in their country. Orthodox Bishops were not allowed to
take a name of a See that was already allocated to an English Bishop, thus
the Orthodox Archbishop could not use the name of London and call himself
the Archbishop of London which resulted in the Orthodox Bishops taking
names from Asia Minor like Thyatira. Being in new countries which were
considered to be Christian, they had to be diplomatic with the “natives”.
They couldn’t just come straight out and say we consider you heretics. So
the “Economy” of accepting their baptism was created to help the
establishment of the Church in a strange land. Of course I might have it
wrong but my “church politics” theory is supported by the Euchologion. Do
you remember your question on why the Church performs oaths in her
services which are also included in her Liturgical books. We saw that the
service was only found in the small euchologion and not in the Great
Euchologion which is the official Euchologion of the Church. We have the
same thing also with the service of receiving someone into the Church with
Holy Chrism. The service is not found in the Great Euchologion and
therefore its addition to the small euchologion is something new. The
Church did not need such a service while in her own country. It was taken
for granted that all people entering the Church must be baptized. The need
came later with the Diaspora and Mixed marriages. As an English speaking
priest, one of my duties is to give catechism instructions to English
speaking people who want to be Orthodox. Among these there are many who
come from the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England. As it is
also by duty to baptize them after catechism, I make it known to them from
the start that I will not receive them unless they are re-baptized. In 15
years of being a priest I have baptized many adults but have never
performed only the service of Holy Chrism. Today, the establishment of the
Orthodox Church in Western societies and the freedom of religion, releases
us from “church politics and church diplomacy.” and so we can do away with
the “Chrism Only”. Many Priests today understand that proper reception
into the Orthodox faith must and can only be though baptism, but until the
Holy Synods who make the decisions take a stand and insist on rebaptism,
“Chrism Only” will continue to appeal to those who don’t understand the
difference. To these priests, it is also appealing because the service of
Holy Chrism is very easy and can be accomplished in less than 5 minutes
whereas baptism requires at least 45 minutes.
|
|
|
