Posted on 11/28/2006 1:19:28 PM PST by NYer
Washington DC, Nov. 28, 2006 (CNA) - According to a press release from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Catholic and Reformed churches have recently made “significant” progress toward mutual understanding, signing a document that recognizes their common baptism.
The Reformed-Catholic Consultation met at Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, Georgia, Oct. 8-10. News of the signing was issued on Nov. 22.
“Roman Catholics and representatives of Reformed bodies say clearly to each other, to the larger world, and, - perhaps most importantly - to local parishes and ecclesially divided families - that we embrace each other as pilgrims who share a common baptism in Jesus Christ,” said Richard Mouw of Fuller Theological Seminary.
“The current dialogue between members of the Reformed tradition and the Roman Catholic tradition is a conversation on what we believe about Baptism and how we celebrate this sacrament liturgically. Our discussions clarify where we are one and where we differ, so that we may find the road to closer unity in our common apostolic Christian faith,” commented Bishop Patrick Cooney of Gaylord, Mich.
Most of the conversation centered on a 50-page report on sacramentality in the two churches, called “Mutual Recognition.”
“Already signaled in ‘Lumen Gentium’ (1964), the validity of Christian baptism creates the necessary precondition for the possibility of ecumenism since it establishes an ecclesial reality of real, though imperfect, communion. Any diminishment of that unity puts the ecumenical movement toward fully visible communion at serious risk,” a press statement said.
Participants agreed to a trajectory through October 2007 to conclude work on baptism. In view of the request from the Vatican, plans were also set in motion to begin a study of the relationship of baptism to the Eucharist, and the role of both sacraments in shaping the churches and drawing them toward fuller communion.
The dialogue was established in 1965, and is currently sponsored by the U.S. bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, the Reformed Church in America, the Christian Reformed Church, the Presbyterian Church USA, and the United Church of Christ. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America sends an observer.
The Reformed don't baptise for the remission of sins, and their errant understanding of baptism should be accounted for.
There's a reason why Protestants were formerly conditionally Baptised.
The Reformed don't baptise for the remission of sins, and their errant understanding of baptism should be accounted for. They don't have the Church's intention for baptism.
There's a reason why Protestants were formerly conditionally Baptised.
Sheesh. That reads like a "who's who" list of heretical and apostate denominations. So the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is going to "recognize a common baptism" with these clowns? That says far more about the Catholics, than it does of Reformed Protestants....
Actually, though, we already recognized the validity of the baptisms of anyone who baptizes in the name of the Trinity.
Catholics still consider baptism a holy sacrament, right? If that's still the case, then you would consider our baptisms to be invalid. That's what you told me before, re the validity of Presbyterian sacraments...
Well, Alex, since, e.g., Prebyterians reject apostolic succession, reject the idea of the priesthood per se, and reject transubstantiation or anything close to it, there's really not much chance of a Presbyterian Eucharist being a valid Catholic sacrament. Sacramental validity requires a valid minister, valid matter ..., valid "form" (the words that are said, and valid intent (the intent to do what the Catholic church does). Unless your Presbyterian minister is a former Catholic or Orthodox (or perhaps Anglican) priest, he's not a validly ordained minister. He probably doesn't have a valid intent, either.
My husband, a former Presbyterian, was not rebaptized when he entered the Catholic Church.
Just my two cents.
the Reformed Church in America, the Christian Reformed Church, the Presbyterian Church USA, and the United Church of Christ. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America sends an observer
Telling company the CRC is keeping, alas.
Baptism doesn't require Holy Orders, so the "valid minister" of baptism is anyone at all. (A Catholic layman qualifies. A Presbyterian minister qualifies. In fact, there's a medieval council somewhere that decreed that anyone, "even a Jew" (their words) can validly baptize.)
The valid form requires the invocation of the Trinity ("Father, Son, and Holy Spirit", not "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier" or drivel like that). Most conservative Protestants qualify there, too.
Valid matter involves water. There's been some questions raised about Protestants who baptize by sprinkling, but pouring and immersion are certainly okay. (Catholics do both.)
The intent can be a problem, but theologians generally agree that "intent" means "the intent to 'do what the Church does,' that is, to baptize in the name of the Trinity".
Protestant Eucharists, confirmations, ordinations, etc. are not recognized as valid because they require a valid minister. Protestant marriages are valid unless one or the other party is a Catholic marrying without a dispensation.
Are the US Bishops doing this? The US Bishops have zero authority over this, and if they allow it you can bet that the Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith will eventually have to deal with this issue. The Congregation has already clearly identified the qualifications for a valid baptism as being:
I. Matter -the baptism must be done with water
II. Form - the baptism must use a formula invoking the
trinity. (Something like "I baptize you in the name of
the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.")
III. Disposition of the Recipient- The recipient must be
have the intention willingly receive what the Catholic
Church intends the Sacrament to impart. (If I remember correctly the recipient must also accept the Trinity for the baptism to be valid)
IV. Intention of the minister-must be what the church
intends (which would include remission of sins, and
uniting the recipient with Christ etc.)
Thanks Campion. I was Baptized by full immersion in a little Baptist church in Utah. I was asked before becoming a Roman Catholic how I was Baptized. I do know that some Pentecostals (minority) do not Baptize using the Trinitarian formula as they believe the Trinity to be Pagan, those who follow the teachings of William Branham are an example.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.