 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > Oily Ecclesiology | Forum Quick Jump
|
|  One Love Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003 Total Posts : 13888 | Posted 12/30/2009 2:20 PM (GMT -6) |   | | Chrismation
The Sanctification of the Holy Chrism Pavlos Menesoglou
During the early centuries of Christianity, a firm tradition existed in the Church in which the Holy Chrism was sanctified only by the bishops of the Church and not by the presbyters (priests). At that time, there were no distinctions among bishops, that is among bishops of dioceses and metropolitanate bishops of greater church districts. As the years passed, however, the common right of all bishops was eventually transferred to the bishops of churches with greater status, that is, to the Patriarchs, and finally to the Ecumenical Patriarch, who today is able to transmit this right to the heads of local Orthodox churches. In other words, even though each bishop has the right to sanctify the Holy Chrism by his status as bishop, he is not permitted by canon law to do so. It appears that there are three reasons that restrict the right of sanctifying the Holy Chrism to the Ecumenical Patriarch. These reasons include: a) the scarcity of the materials and the difficulty for each bishop to prepare the Holy Chrism, b) the constant increase of dependence of the diocese on the head of the greater church and district, and c) the special position that the Ecumenical Patriarchate received through the centuries in relation to the other patriarchates of the East and that expresses the spiritual bond between the Church of Constantinople and the local churches of the people who received the Christian faith from its missionaries.
In reality, this exclusive right to sanctify the Holy Chrism of the Ecumenical Patriarchate does not mean that local churches are dependent and subordinate to Constantinople. This act of receiving the Holy Chrism from the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a tangible and visible sign of the amity and bond of local churches, patriarchates, and autocephalous churches with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.† It is a necessary sign, not a sign of superiority of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Orthodox Church, but an existing visible sign of unity among the cluster of local Orthodox churches. Nevertheless, in the Orthodox Church, the Holy Chrism, in addition to being sanctified in the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is sanctified in the contemporary patriarchates of Moscow, Belgrade, and Bucharest.
As was stated earlier, Holy Chrism is used mainly in the celebration of the sacrament of Chrismation, which takes place immediately following the sacrament of Baptism. It is, however, a separate, distinct sacrament from Baptism. According to Orthodox Church readings, through the administration of the sacrament of Chrismation, the baptized receive gifts (charismata) that are transmitted to them by the Holy Spirit.† Such gifts also help the baptized live a life in Christ, which they enter through baptism, and equip them in their struggle against sin and the attacks of evil.† Through the seal of Chrismation, the baptized attain "mature manhood, to the measure of the fullness of Christ." (Ephesians 4:13 R.S.V.)
The Holy Chrism is also used to chrismate the heterodox (non‑Orthodox) joining the Church, and to chrismate those fallen away from the Orthodox Faith and who are returning to the Orthodox Church.† In addition, it is also used to consecrate holy churches, altar tables, objects, and utensils, and for other sacred ceremonial circumstances. In past centuries, it was also used to anoint the Orthodox kings during their crowning.
Post Edited (One Love) : 12/30/2009 2:02:00 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
  |  One Love Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003 Total Posts : 13888 | Posted 12/30/2009 3:07 PM (GMT -6) |   | | Ok. Here's my thing. I can see how this whole thing "unifies" things symbolically, I suppose. Everyone gets the same Chrism. But if the Chrism is supposed to be essentially physical symbol of the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" for the believer (distinct from but tied to baptism with water), then why can't we just SAY that and do things accordingly?
The essentials of baptism/chrismation as I'm seeing it:
Trinitarian formula (Father, Son, and Spirit; believer dipped in each name) Water (immersion or pouring) Celebrant(s) (Baptizer as Person of Faith and Instrument of the Holy Spirit) Oil (recognition of Holy Spirit baptism and sealing)
Personally, I think partaking in the Eucharist in community right afterwards makes good sense.
Post Edited (One Love) : 12/30/2009 2:37:01 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
 |  One Love Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003 Total Posts : 13888 | Posted 12/30/2009 3:21 PM (GMT -6) |   | | As far as the issue of "baptismal regeneration", one could just say that the grace of spiritual renewal in Christ is effectively mediated (though not ultimately grounded) in baptism through faith. It's not JUST a symbol of an inner working, but it's also not some magic talisman for salvation either.
Now, I would toss memorialism (ala Zwingli) out da friggin window altogether. Yep.
Post Edited (One Love) : 12/30/2009 2:53:09 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
 |  One Love Registered Member

Date Joined Jan 2003 Total Posts : 13888 | Posted 12/30/2009 4:00 PM (GMT -6) |   | WHC's position...
Baptism and Communion – Baptism and communion are two ordinances the Lord has given the Church. The only form of baptism we practice is believer’s baptism by immersion. (Baptism: Acts 2:38-41; Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 8:26-40; 10:47; 18:8; Romans 6:3-4. Communion: Acts 2:42-46; 1 Corinthians 11:23-29)
I can get with believer's baptism to an extent. If a person can't conceptualize and express "I believe in Jesus Christ" and mean it, how can said person be baptized in his name by FAITH? (Anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." ) At the same time, I wouldn't take this to mean that there was NO divine grace mediated through baptism itself.
Believer's baptism is one of several distinctive doctrines associated closely with the Baptist and Anabaptist (literally, rebaptizer) traditions, and their theological relatives. Among these are the members of the American Restoration Movement. All churches associated with Pentecostalism also practice believer's baptism.
In Holiness, many Baptist, and some other churches, a ritual known as Dedication or Infant Dedication supplements or replaces infant baptism. However, unlike baptism, the rite is centered upon the parents, who dedicate the child to God and vow to raise him/her in a God-fearing home. Although Dedication often occurs at the same age as infant baptism, it is not considered a replacement for baptism nor is it considered salvific for the child. (OL's Note: WHC does Infant Dedication)
Post Edited (One Love) : 12/30/2009 3:15:52 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 10:59 AM (GMT -6) There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads. In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3 dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|