Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mangoe@mimsy.umd.edu (Charley Wingate) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Validity of Baptism (Was Re: In Communion with Rome?) Message-ID: Date: 29 Oct 90 07:21:24 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Lines: 31 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu Michael I. Bushnell writes: >Charley Wingate seemed to make reference to a "chain of baptisms" leading >back through the ages, by which we all descend from the Roman church. >Leaving aside Christian groups in India and the middle east which have never >been associated with Rome, This came up in the context of protestant churches, whose connection with the eastern chrurches on a sacramental level has been essentially non-existent. For the protestant churches, the chain of baptisms does pass through the (hated) medieval RC church. >[...] he forgets that a large number of churches, including both his own >Episcopalian and the Roman church accept baptisms as valid even if performed >by the unbaptized. That's not true. Under "Emergency Baptism", p. 313 BCP 1979, it says that "any baptized person may administer baptism according to the following form." The Episcopal Church formula here is (a) one candidate, not already baptized, (b) one minister, baptized, (c) intent to baptize, (d) water, and (e) the words "I baptize you...". -- C. Wingate + "Our God to whom we turn when weary with illusion, + Whose stars serenely burn above this world's confusion, mangoe@cs.umd.edu + Thine is the mighty plan, the steadfast order sure mimsy!mangoe + In which the world began, endures, and shall endure."