That is like saying we are both human, but one of us is less human. This flies in the face of particular Churches being "true Churches."
It appears that at least some Orthodox generally reject as valid the baptisms performed by non-Orthodox. This is in contradistinction to the Catholic Church, which generally accepts non-Catholic baptism as valid (with certain exceptions to the rule).
Any baptism that does not conform to the requirement of triple immersion (whether by dunking or pouring over the entire body starting with the head) and the Triune "formula" is not proper Baptism practiced by the Church of the 1st millennium. If there is any doubt, based on lack of record or based on known practices of non-Orthodox Christians (including Latin or Latinized Catholics, but not Eastern Churches in communion with Rome), and out of the concern for the convert's soul, it is incumbent on the receiving bishop to subject the convert to proper baptism or chrismation or both.
I am not surprised that your Church accepts the baptisms of non-Catholics given that your own Church doe snot perform baptisms in the spirit of the meaning of the word baptizo which is to say immersion. I am surprised that you find Orthodox reluctance surprising,
First, we are always being lectured about how the Orthodox PEOPLE are the true guardians of Orthodox faith, so that doesn't fly on the level of first principles.
The people are the guardians of the Orthodox faith. No one individual is. The Orthodox do not give any one individual, save Christ, the sole credit for anything. Orthodox bishops count only in the Synod and the People of God (the "laity") count as a group. Eastern Churches are conciliar the way the apostles were, with no one individual lording over a groups of others.
We have our Pelosis, you have your Sarbanes. We have our Kennedys, you have your Stephanopolouses. We also have our Bishop Tobins, Archbishop Burkes, and a host of other episcopal voices who have at least spoken publicly to rebuke the heresies of individual Catholic politicians ...and apparently, you have some bishops, too, who have done something similar, although I am entirely unaware of such widely-proclaimed public pronouncements.
I have already indicated to you that I find that reprehensible and reject such ethnic chauvinism. I have personally been unaware of either one of these individual's (as I am not Greek). It is a shame that the Greek Church of America can be so hypocritical as to honor open abortionists while preaching anti-abortionist beliefs. It is hypocrisy beyond excuse and a shame that needs to be publicly condemned by Greeks, Orthodox across the board, and Catholics. Shame on the GOC of America!!!
Ontology. Nice analogy regarding “more human” or “less human,” but I don't accept it as applicable.
I can only tell you what the Catholic Church teaches. The Catholic Church teaches that the true Church, the fullness of the Church, subsists in the Catholic Church, and that the Catholic Church is ontologically the one Church, complete and lacking nothing.
The Catholic Church does not believe that there is some invisible true Church of which the Catholic Church is merely one part, one more denomination. Whether you find the claim true, false, insulting, or whatever, the belief of the Catholic Church is that it is the one Church.
We do not believe that this is the case with the Orthodox Churches. We believe that they are in schism from the true Church.
The Polish National Catholic Church is an apostolic Church in the United States that has, as far as I know, continuing apostolic succession, validity of holy orders and sacraments, etc. They are in schism from the Catholic Church, but they have valid bishops, etc. Yet, we do not consider them to be the true Church. They might be a true particular Church, but ontologically, they lack much (although the Catholic Church doesn't believe that the Orthodox Churches lack much at all).
Regarding baptism, I have heard of some Orthodox re-baptising Catholics. Others don't. Thus, it appears to vary from one group to another what is considered a “valid” baptism.
Needless to say, the Catholic Church believes that all Her baptisms are valid. And we believe that all Orthodox baptisms are also valid. I have never, ever heard of any Orthodox ever being [re-]baptised when received into full communion in the Catholic Church.
As well, we Catholics seem to be somewhat more uniform in determining validity than the Orthodox.
“The people are the guardians of the Orthodox faith. No one individual is. The Orthodox do not give any one individual, save Christ, the sole credit for anything.”
If the attitudes of hostility and exclusion, of condescension and contempt were limited to a single Orthodox poster, I would credit what you say. But they are not.
“I have already indicated to you that I find that reprehensible and reject such ethnic chauvinism...”
It was YOU who excoriated CATHOLICS for our failure to counter the heresies of folks like Ms. Pelosi as reason why the ORTHODOX might not want to accomplish reunion with the CATHOLICS.
But as we can see from your own admissions, many of the Orthodox hierarchy are as guilty, and perhaps more guilty than the Catholic hierarchy in this regard.
I will note that the hierarchs of the Catholic Church have become more vocal about this sort of thing. In the past, the hierarchs have condemned positions like, “Well, personally I'm against abortion, but I believe that it should nonetheless be legally permitted,” but have said nothing about individual Catholic politicians who were pro-abortion.
Now, although only a few hierarchs have actually disciplined any individual Catholic politicians (and it is heartening that this is actually happening to any degree at all, as it has been missing for most of the past 35 years that the United States has been degraded by legal abortion on demand), many hierarchs are now speaking out publicly when individual Catholic pro-abortion politicians try to dress up their murderousness as legitimately Catholic. As well, it was heartening to see nearly a hundred of our hierarchs denounce Fr. Jenkins for inviting the anti-Christ Obama to receive high honors at Notre Dame this past spring.
It isn't enough, to my mind, but it's much more than I remember in my lifetime.
In any event, you initially stated that Catholic hierarchical failure to publicly confront Catholic heretics like Ms. Pelosi was reason to give the Orthodox pause in thinking about reunion with us.
But at least in recent years, that assertion falls flat when one considers that her heresies (and those of other prominent Catholic politicians by other Catholic hierarchs) were publicly condemned by her own archbishop, by the archbishop of the jurisdiction where she serves in Congress, and by many other Catholic hierarchs.
This is in contradistinction to at least some large parts of the Orthodox communion and how they deal with their own public heretics in public office.
Perhaps we CATHOLICS should be wary of you latitudinarian ORTHODOX when thinking about reunion (my tongue is at least partly in my cheek).
But all of this is really not relevant to the question at hand, which is caucus labeling.
There are many things wrong with the moderation of the Religion Forum, some of them intrinsically evil.
But the method of caucus labeling isn't one of them.
Although we are close, we aren't one. We do not each believe about the other’s Church what we believe about our own. It's appropriate for there to be mixed caucuses, and it's appropriate for their to be exclusive caucuses. The one-word monikers used by the Religion Moderator are short, effective, widely-understood terms that describe each of our communions, and serve the purpose for which they exist.
sitetest