Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!sun-barr!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: cathy@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Cathy Johnston) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: pagan baptism? theory and practice Message-ID: Date: 6 Nov 90 03:11:20 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Department of Computer Science Lines: 58 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article mls@sfsup.att.com (Mike Siemon) writes: > > [various references on RC allowence of non-Christians to validly > administer baptism] > >One reason this whole thread is so silly, however, is that Rome does >NOT "really" accept baptisms even by Protestants, let alone by pagans. >If the "intent" in Protestant baptisms is questionable, how can it >even be seriously suggested that a pagan intends what the Church does? > >The suspicions about Protestant baptism express themselves (usually) >in *conditionally* baptizing converts to Catholicism, not in "absolute" >baptism, normally -- so at least there is a formal acknowledgment that >the former baptism *may* have been OK (but in view of the theory above >that admission amounts to *very* little!) Let me cite the Catholic >Encyclopedias. First, the New C.E. What then follows are a couple of quotes from the C.E. (various versions) that don't match my experience with the rite in recent times. The current rite for adult converts (called the RCIA, or Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults) is *quite* clear about separating the Sacraments being conferred. It has to be -- the Easter Vigil has so much going on that it would be completely overwhelming otherwise. The direction in the RCIA text is that Christians are *not* to be rebaptised. (Anybody got a better reference than that? Mine is on a moving van somewhere in the eastern third of the US. :-) ) At the vigil, there are four groups of Catachumens included in the rite: a) "candidates for Baptism, Communion and Confirmation" (non-Christians) b) "candidates for Communion and Confirmation" (non-Catholic Christians) c) "candidates for Confirmation" (adult Catholic confirmands) d) "candidates for Baptism" (infants) The way the Vigil service is set up is that after the homily, groups a) and d) are baptized, and then groups a), b) and c) are confirmed. At Communion time, the Catachumens receive Communion first, often with their sponsors. All this gets pretty wild, especially with a coupl'a' dozen Catachumens, but the explanations of who is who are all part of the rite itself. The distinctions are all there, and "conditional rebaptism" is *not* part of the default rite in the book. (I guess what I'm arguing here is that the misselette-in-the-pew is a better indicator of Catholic practice than the Catholic Encyclopedia.) Like I said, all my references are on a moving van, so anybody with access to the RCIA text might want to look it up there. Also, I'd be interested in hearing from anybody with experience of Catholics not accepting the baptisms of Protestant converts. (What diocese was it?) cathy :-) -- Cathy Fasano cathy@gargoyle.uchicago.edu cathy@gargoyle.uchicago.bitnet "The Church and the World are jammed to the rafters these days with people willing to get involved, get their hands dirty, take risks, make sacrifices, hurl themselves at spears, lead the advance, inspire, illuminate, encourage, organize and manage great affairs. I find most such folks insufferable, even if they are my brothers and sisters in Christ. Where are the people willing to sit on the sidelines and find fault?" -- Michael O. Garvey