The Church Around The World-or "Autocephalous" Isn't A Type Of Milk

No, you probably won't be asked to pick up a gallon of autocephalous milk, but you may be able to be a part of an autocephalous Church. It helps me to see where the Church physically exists, how it is organized and how all the 14 equal, independent and self-governing Churches work in communion and unity with one another across the earth. Communion and unity do not mean an absence of human conflict born of flesh or selfish endeavor. I like what my Priest, Father Stephen Rogers told me when I first met with him. As we sat in his office in a separate building, he pointed in the direction of the Temple and said, "Remember Nathan, there are people over there." That has been true of the Church from day one. It amazes me the narrowness of some who always use the examples of the human element of the faith as fodder to discredit the relevance of the historic governance in the body of Christ. The Orthodox church is well aware of issues facing it and speak to these issues often. For instance there is not yet a North American Autocephalous Church. The Orthodox Church in this hemisphere is represented by several Churches in the East, such as the Greek, the Russian, the Antiochian. All are still the same Orthodox Church but governed by individual entities which carry with them their own cultural flavors. I am delighted however, when I visit a local Orthodox Church with cultural elements different from mine, that I feel at home because the shape, ethos, and worship experience is familiar. As you look at the graph here realize that the Patriarch of each of these Churches follow a continuous succession of Partriarchs extending back to the conception of the Church. The Orthodox Church is the original Church and has preserved the faith of the Apostles. It is unchanging and in this way has prevented in every century and culture the propensity to "change with the times". While "change" may be a good word to some religious cultures, "change" is equal to heresy in the Orthodox faith. While other religious cultures are given to the newest movements or doctrines, you can be assured that when you enter the Orthodox faith, you are receiving the original doctrines of the faith of our fathers without mixture.

Where Jesus "Blew It"- The Incarnation and the Body of Christ

The title to this article may be an exercise in semantic misunderstandings. Before you judge me too harshly please consider:

"In the evening of the same day, the first day of the week, the doors were closed in the room where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews. Jesus came and stood among them. He said to them, 'Peace be with you,' and, after saying this, he showed them his hands and his side. The disciples were filled with joy at seeing the Lord, and he said to them again, Peace be with you.

'As the Father sent me so I am sending you.'

After saying this he BREATHED on them and said:

'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone's sins, they are forgiven; if you retain anyone sins, they are retained.'

So, Jesus blew it. He blew His Holy Spirit onto the Disciples. Why? He had already said He was sending the Comforter and, indeed, the Holy Spirit did come later at Pentecost. So, why did he blow it here prior to that? See what He said prior to blowing it, "As the Father sent me so send I you." To understand why He blew it, we must understand how and why the Father sent him. In this way we will understand how and why he sent the Disciples.

The Purpose

'Look, there is the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world. John 1:29

As Christ showed up for his baptism, an event that would launch his physical ministry on earth, John states as the purpose for Christ being sent, to "take away the sins of the world." Sin is what separates humanity from God and Christ was to take it away. Christ told the Disciples that just as God sent him so now He sends them...to take away the sins of the world.

The Preparation

There was an event of ratification at the launching of Christ's ministry.

'I saw the Spirit come down ON him like a dove from heaven and rest on him.' John 1:32-33

Christ blew ON the Disciples in John 20. Of course, the breath is the actual Spirit. As he breathed ON them, something demonstrably happened to them. Just as when the Spirit came ON Christ at his baptism, something demonstrably happened to Him. In another account of Christ's baptism Matthew recalls the voice of God,

'This is my son, the beloved: my favor rests ON him.' Matt. 3:16

"In Jewish literature a voice from heaven is a means of showing the God-given authority of a teacher.' (Page 1613 30-N note-New Jerusalem Bible) So, "as the Father has sent me, so I send you" established the Disciples in their role and mission with the provision of the Spirit resting on them. In this instance and in that room, it is the voice of Christ as fully God who bestows authority on the Disciples.

The failure to understand the incarnation of Christ and the results of that incarnation on the Body of Christ causes some to miss what happened in that room in John 20. Now Christ brings the Disciples into his dual identity. The Disciples are natural flesh yet, now they are provided with the super-natural nature of Christ. In this way His incarnation remains effective on earth as He goes back to the Father. In this way the Disciples, as a group, become Christ on earth or the "Body of Christ." The Disciples are to take away the sins of the world through the presence of the Spirit ON them as they proclaim this good news. They have become The Church and that Church is the place where the sins of men are taken away.

The Personification

"If you forgive anyone' s sins they are forgiven, If you retain anyone's sins they are retained." Yes, men are given the authority to forgive sins, but not just in their humanity is this done. Rather, man can do this because in his humanity, he has taken on the Spirit nature of Christ and become His Body. Humans make up the body of Christ. Christ decided it so. We are flesh and yet move within the supernatural. The gulf between Heaven and earth is suspended and we, as His Body, live in both just as he did-Fully God and fully man. Now, lest you misunderstand, we are not "Gods" as some assert. Christ was fully God yet was referred to as the Son of God. We are Sons of God also, joint heirs with Christ. The sons of God are gathered as ONE, as the Body of Christ, not as individuals as the Evangelical Protestant Ethos asserts. Herein lies the promise of power as we move and live in and through the Corporate Body He established. It is the Body of Christ that is given the attributes of Christ. It is the Church. Apostle Paul illustrates this union relating it to a husband and wife, "

"...and that is the way Christ treats the Church, because we are parts of his Body. This is why man leaves his father and his mother and becomes attached to his wife, and the two BECOME ONE FLESH. This mystery has great significance, but I am applying it to Christ and the Church."

So in the southern colloquial, "you" are not the Church, "you all" are the Church and that Church is united in flesh and Spirit. That means there is a tangible and there is a spiritual. The spiritual is seen when Christ blows it in John 20, but so is the tangible, because the result of Him blowing it is the creation of an authoritative, spirit empowered, physical entity. The physical part of the Church is the reason the Disciples had to replace Judas. "...Let another take his episcopacy." The Disciples were 12 in number. Do you recall seeing that number elsewhere? There were also 12 tribes of Israel. So the Trinity was in the midst of the Old Covenant and now in the midst of the New Covenant. It is within the those covenants that we "live and move and and have our being." It is in that physical structure that the Church exists and individuals are kept in the faith through the governance of their souls. The Old Covenant had Priests and the New Covenant has Priests, those who guard the souls of God's people and hold men accountable to God's standard of righteousness. So, from early on the Church has strived to maintain the "faith of the Apostles" because they were the authoritative initiators and presenters of all that Christ taught. If you will look at the revelation of John you will see the names of the original 12 etched with the original 12 tribes in the gates of the heavenly Jerusalem.

The Perpetuation

Ah, but did Christ really blow it, or was he short winded? He really should have thought further ahead, blown it a little harder. If only he had know that the Disciples were to die martyr's deaths. Such a tragedy. The Purpose was great, the Preparation was powerful, and the Personification was unprecedented but, after just a few hopeful years, the Disciples were dead and gone and the Church was dissolved. THE END...or was it...

"So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it." (Matthew 16:18)

So much energy has been spent discussing the words "Peter" and "rock" that we often overlook the most relevant word in this scripture-COMMUNITY. The word here is qahal (hebrew) or ekklesia (greek) which means "an assembly called together." Each and every time this word is used it has as it's meaning an actual physical group with specific characteristics. It is never an ethereal, undefined, ungathered, disconnected group of people whose only connection on earth is an intangible spiritual philosophy or belief. This community is the community of the end times and is to "have its beginning here on earth in the form of an organized society whose leader he now appoints." (page 1637 16g note New Jerusalem Bible)

So the Disciples spread out taking the gospel into all the world. The Community established local communities all in harmony and communion with one another. After a while there was a local community in Jerusalem where it all started, then Antioch, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Rome. These were the five sees of the community or the five original Churches established by the Disciples. Now, if Jesus hadn't really blown it, it all would have stopped as each Disciple died off. But what happened? The Church continued in continuity and unity and does so to this day. It is called the Orthodox Church whose Bishops still guard our souls and still preserve the Faith of our Fathers. All because Jesus blew it.

The Mother of God?

CONVERSATION WITH A PROTESTANT

ORTHO: Theotokos is greek for " Mother of God".

PROTEST: I have a problem with calling her "Mother of God".

ORTHO: Then, who was she the mother of?

PROTEST: She gave birth to Jesus.

ORTHO: And giving birth makes you a...

PROTEST: Mother.

OTHRO: Then Mary was the mother of...

PROTEST: Jesus.

ORTHO: And Jesus is...

PROTEST: God.

ORTHO: Then Mary is the Mother of God.

PROTEST: I have a problem with calling her that.

ORTHO: Apparently.

In my Protestant years which included being raised in a Baptist Pastor's home and a BA in Religion from a Baptist University all I knew about Mary, the mother of Jesus, was what I saw in the pages of the Gospels. I also never heard a sermon about the Mother of our Lord although she was mentioned at Christmas time. Even referring to her as "the Mother of our Lord" was frowned upon even though the phrase is directly from scripture. The fear, it seems in the Protestant world, is that Mary might be given due belonging only to God. It is this mindset that allows for inaccurate accusations toward the Orthodox faith concerning Mary. Three things have helped me gain a balanced perspective concerning this matter. One, is that there is a difference between "venerating" and "worshiping." You do not worship the photo of your Mother that may hang on your wall, but you do venerate it.

Venerate: to regard with reverential respect or admiring deference.

So, if the Archangel can say Mary is Blessed and that all men shall call her so, then I can and should venerate her as the whole church has done for 2000 years. She was and is the greatest example of holiness and servitude to God and was the first to receive the Christ for who he was and in quite a demonstrative way.

Secondly, I had to be honest about this question: "Where is Mary right now?" She isn't dead. She is in heaven. Is she lost in some corner somewhere because she is "just another person and no more important than any other" as some have suggested or is she with her son worshiping around the throne? If she is there with Jesus, can I ask her to pray for me? It has always been common of the church to ask the saints, the "great cloud of witnesses", to pray for us and this includes the Mother of God. Most Protestants believe there are some measures of crowns or rewards in heaven. Wouldn't Mary receive a special place or reward, or focus? The church has always held this to be true.

Thirdly, I like how my priest Father Steven Rogers put it: "We don't get to God through Mary, he came to us through her." It is in this way that she is the "mediator." Christ became incarnate by choosing a purified and holy human vessel.

Let's see how the Early Church Father's referred to Mary:

Irenaeus
"The Virgin Mary, being obedient to his word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God" (Against Heresies, 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus
"[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, his advent by the spotless and God-bearing (theotokos) Mary in the way of birth and growth, and the manner of his life and conversation with men, and his manifestation by baptism, and the new birth that was to be to all men, and the regeneration by the laver [of baptism]" (Discourse on the End of the World 1 [A.D. 217]).

Gregory the Wonderworker
"For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary, the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David" (Four Homilies 1 [A.D. 262]).

"It is our duty to present to God, like sacrifices, all the festivals and hymnal celebrations; and first of all, [the feast of] the Annunciation to the holy Mother of God, to wit, the salutation made to her by the angel, ‘Hail, full of grace!’" (ibid., 2).

Peter of Alexandria
"They came to the church of the most blessed Mother of God, and ever-virgin Mary, which, as we began to say, he had constructed in the western quarter, in a suburb, for a cemetery of the martyrs" (The Genuine Acts of Peter of Alexandria [A.D. 305]).

"We acknowledge the resurrection of the dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the firstling; he bore a body not in appearance but in truth derived from Mary the Mother of God" (Letter to All Non-Egyptian Bishops 12 [A.D. 324]).

Methodius
"While the old man [Simeon] was thus exultant, and rejoicing with exceeding great and holy joy, that which had before been spoken of in a figure by the prophet Isaiah, the holy Mother of God now manifestly fulfilled" (Oration on Simeon and Anna 7 [A.D. 305]).

"Hail to you forever, you virgin Mother of God, our unceasing joy, for unto you do I again return. . . . Hail, you fount of the Son’s love for man. . . . Wherefore, we pray you, the most excellent among women, who boast in the confidence of your maternal honors, that you would unceasingly keep us in remembrance. O holy Mother of God, remember us, I say, who make our boast in you, and who in august hymns celebrate your memory, which will ever live, and never fade away" (ibid., 14).

Cyril of Jerusalem
"The Father bears witness from heaven to his Son. The Holy Spirit bears witness, coming down bodily in the form of a dove. The archangel Gabriel bears witness, bringing the good tidings to Mary. The Virgin Mother of God bears witness" (Catechetical Lectures 10:19 [A.D. 350]).

Ephraim the Syrian
"Though still a virgin she carried a child in her womb, and the handmaid and work of his wisdom became the Mother of God" (Songs of Praise 1:20 [A.D. 351]).

Athanasius
"The Word begotten of the Father from on high, inexpressibly, inexplicably, incomprehensibly, and eternally, is he that is born in time here below of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God" (The Incarnation of the Word of God 8 [A.D. 365]).

Epiphanius of Salamis
"Being perfect at the side of the Father and incarnate among us, not in appearance but in truth, he [the Son] reshaped man to perfection in himself from Mary the Mother of God through the Holy Spirit" (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).

Ambrose of Milan
"The first thing which kindles ardor in learning is the greatness of the teacher. What is greater than the Mother of God? What more glorious than she whom Glory Itself chose?" (The Virgins 2:2[7] [A.D. 377]).

Gregory of Nazianz
"If anyone does not agree that holy Mary is Mother of God, he is at odds with the Godhead" (Letter to Cledonius the Priest 101 [A.D. 382]).

Jerome
"As to how a virgin became the Mother of God, he [Rufinus] has full knowledge; as to how he himself was born, he knows nothing" (Against Rufinus 2:10 [A.D. 401]).

"Do not marvel at the novelty of the thing, if a Virgin gives birth to God" (Commentaries on Isaiah 3:7:15 [A.D. 409]).

Theodore of Mopsuestia
"When, therefore, they ask, ‘Is Mary mother of man or Mother of God?’ we answer, ‘Both!’ The one by the very nature of what was done and the other by relation" (The Incarnation 15 [A.D. 405]).

Cyril of Alexandria
"I have been amazed that some are utterly in doubt as to whether or not the holy Virgin is able to be called the Mother of God. For if our Lord Jesus Christ is God, how should the holy Virgin who bore him not be the Mother of God?" (Letter to the Monks of Egypt 1 [A.D. 427]).

"This expression, however, ‘the Word was made flesh’ [John 1:14], can mean nothing else but that he partook of flesh and blood like to us; he made our body his own, and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himself flesh remaining what he was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin ‘the Mother of God,’ not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word, being personally united, is said to be born according to the flesh" (First Letter to Nestorius [A.D. 430]).

"And since the holy Virgin corporeally brought forth God made one with flesh according to nature, for this reason we also call her Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh" (Third Letter to Nestorius [A.D. 430]).

"If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the holy Virgin is the Mother of God, inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [John 1:14]: let him be anathema" (ibid.).

John Cassian
"Now, you heretic, you say (whoever you are who deny that God was born of the Virgin), that Mary, the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, cannot be called the Mother of God, but the Mother only of Christ and not of God—for no one, you say, gives birth to one older than herself. And concerning this utterly stupid argument . . . let us prove by divine testimonies both that Christ is God and that Mary is the Mother of God" (On the Incarnation of Christ Against Nestorius 2:2 [A.D. 429]).

"You cannot then help admitting that the grace comes from God. It is God, then, who has given it. But it has been given by our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ is God. But if he is God, as he certainly is, then she who bore God is the Mother of God" (ibid., 2:5).


Council of Ephesus
"We confess, then, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man, of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his Godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in Godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, we confess the holy Virgin to be the Mother of God because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her" (Formula of Union [A.D. 431]).

Okay. So maybe she is the Mother of God.

The Journey of a Hobbit Priest

Father Denzil Roland, my former priest in the Charismatic Episcopal Church, once told me he thought he might be a contented man just to live in the hills and raise chickens. He being "the most unlikely of men to serve as a priest", as he puts it. I have always lovingly referred to him as a "sawed-off hobbit of a priest". His short stature and robust build, his burley beard and personable demeanor, his cultural speech interlaced with an occational "I seen it" and "I done it", causes some, at first glance, to miss the powerhouse of a man he is. His power comes not from his keen mind, uncanny literary retention, masterful ability as a wordsmith, relentless pursuit of truth and holiness, but from his unwavering heart of servanthood. Christ said the servant is the greatest of all. That being true, I deem it an honor to have served at the altar with one such as he.

Father Denny, as he is most often called, celebrated his 10th year in the Charismatic Episcopal Church July 1, 2006. On that day, at his own request, he was released from his Holy Orders as a priest in the CEC to pursue Holy Orders with the Antiochian Orthodox Church. Little did I know or even dream possible that when we, two years ago, asked him to release us from his pastorate in the CEC Church so that we might become Orthodox, he too would soon step over into the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church which is the Orthodox Church.

I am humbled and amazed at the work of God in the life of Father Denny. I am especially expectant for the Bishop of the Orthodox Diocese in which we serve, to know Father Denzil Roland as I have known him. The Church has been blessed this year by his entrance into the undivided faith of our fathers. I long for the day when I attend Father Denny's Chrismation service and am able to utter the words, "Welcome home Father. You have reached the destination and now the real Journey To Orthodoxy begins."

(Pictured above is Father Denny with my Daughter April and her Husband Greg on their wedding day. Father Denny administered the sacrament of Holy Matrimony.)

What Heaven Looks Like!

The more accurate title would be "What Heaven on Earth Looks Like". I don't know a better way to illustrate the title than to share with you this picture of my granddaughter, Lily. Why the reference to heaven? The obvious reference is the state of angelic ecstasy any of us feel when we look upon or embrace a child that we love, be it as parent, grandparent, aunt, or uncle. I have found the Kingdom of God becoming more tangible to me as I watch such innocent heavenly beings participate in the Orthodox Liturgy week after week. I watch with a heart of worship as parents or grandparents carry a child or lead them by the hand to light a candle and pray, or as the child is lifted up so they can kiss and venerate the icon of Mary or of Christ. The power of Heaven is most displayed and the Kingdom of God is closest it seems, when a three year old boy pauses before the the altar and bows as he crosses himself or a little hand reaches out to touch the hem of the priest's garment as he passes or a beautiful little girl opens her mouth and willingly receives the body and blood of our Lord in the Eucharist. Some parents of young children, who are making the Journey to Orthodoxy, are surprised or even disappointed that the Orthodox Church for the most part do not have nurseries for all ages during the Liturgy. The Protestant ethos has taught them a culture of segregation or separation. These parents have become accustomed to dropping the kids off in their nursery or Sunday school class and leaving them in someone else's care during the church service. The ethos of the Orthodox faith is one of community and family. The Liturgy is vital for everyone. Entire families, young and old, are present most of the time sitting together as a unit. I have watched with amazement the blending of the reverence and holiness of the Liturgy amidst the occasional noise from a baby or the typical toddler's banter followed by a mother's "shhh." In an Orthodox Liturgy this is all normal. The family is together as is the whole family of God in that Liturgical service of worship, all around the thrown of God with the saints of all the ages. That's What Heaven on Earth Looks Like because that's What Heaven Looks Like. My wife Cynthia and I understand the stress of caring for young children, having had five of our own. We understand the need for time to ourselves. We too, were also accustomed to the "break" that the one or two hours in church without the kids gave us to recharge our own spiritual batteries. It can be a challenge to adjust to the Orthodox way of inclusion, but think about it. We are converts to the faith. Because we include our children and not seclude them, they will grow up in the faith. They will be "Cradle Orthodox" and so will your grandchildren. Please pardon me if I envy you this time in your life. I wish we had found the one true faith when our children were young. Oh, for the opportunity you have! As distracted and stressed out you might be at times during the Liturgy, your children will grow. They will settle in. They will take on the true spirit of worship and so will you, for what better worship can you offer to the Holy Trinity than to present your children to Him week after week? Don't let the challenge of transitioning to being an Orthodox Parent keep you from the Church and the eternal benefits that await you and your entire family.

"Freedom In Worship" or Is Orthodoxy Charismatic?

Before becoming Orthodox I spent six years in the Charismatic Episcopal Church (CEC). Much like the predominately convert Antiochian Orthodox Church of which I am now a part, the CEC consisted of Protestant Evangelicals who felt a strong pull back toward the roots of the historic faith. But even though they had dialogues with the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese, the founders of the CEC decided not to become Orthodox. Rather, they decided to form their own separate communion so they could have the "freedom" to remain "Charismatic" in doctrine and practice. During my time as a faithful CEC member I visited a Greek Orthodox Church with my CEC priest to hear an Orthodox convert speak. The main thing that intrigued us was the fact that this particular speaker was a former pastor of a Vineyard Church and thus a "Charismatic" as we understood the term. I had a desire to know what would motivate such a man, who believed in the gifts of tongues, healing, prophecy and the like and was involved in the entire Charismatic ethos, to switch to a "dead" liturgical church that didn't believe in the power of God or the "freedom" of the Holy Spirit. My actual question came out more like, "Having been a Charismatic, what part do the gifts of the Spirit play in the Orthodox Church.?" He answered, "I have found that the Orthodox Church is the most charismatic Church on the planet." That one statement was enough to start me on my quest for truth in this area. But he added more fuel when he said, "I finally had to admit to myself that much of what I saw such as "prophecies" in public meetings and to individuals turned out to be false and could not be authenticated." So that was a double whammy. As I researched his two assertions, I found them both to be true. The charisms have always been in the Orthodox Church throughout all of history. Saints were given names like John the Wonder Worker, because of the power of the supernatural gifts that poured through their lives. The monastic orders saw and continue to see the supernatural elements of the faith throughout all of history. The sacrament of Holy Unction, for the healing of the body by the anointing of Holy Oil, is a normative practice. All of the gifts of the Spirit found in the scriptures are considered Orthodox. But the question is: Are the gifts being demonstrated authentically and are the venues in which they are being demonstrated scriptural or profitable venues?

THE CHARISMATIC CULTURE

As a former Evangelical Charismatic, now Orthodox, I have become aware that the Charismatic culture is simply another denominational substitute for the Faith of the Fathers. In fact, it is predominately western in nature, particularly having its origins in America. The obstacle most Charismatics face when considering the Orthodox Faith is not the validity of the scriptural gifts themselves, but the methods and application of the gifts, especially in corporate worship. I had a conversation with a Charismatic minister recently and in trying to answer his questions about Orthodoxy was confronted with his presumptive dogma. He asked me if we had the "power" of the Holy Spirit. I knew instinctively, having been where he is, that he was not asking about the existence of the power of the Holy Spirit but whether or not the Orthodox Church allowed the demonstration of certain gifts and manifestations in the same manner and venue that he embraced. He asked me specifically about the gift of healing. I explained to him the sacrament of Holy Unction and how the Holy Chrism or Oil is blessed by the Bishops of the church to anoint the sick. He seemed satisfied with my answer until he realized that we didn't allow for that sacrament during every Sunday service. He just kept repeating, "See, you don't have the power. You've got to have the power!" Not even my explanation that we did have Holy Unction Services at other times just for the sick and that we pray for individuals at other times according to the needs, would satisfy him. Because we didn't "flow with the Spirit" in our Church services as he saw it, we were powerless and not Charismatic. I have discovered that elements of this mindset permeate much of the resistance some Charismatics have toward the Orthodox Faith. Their desire to have "freedom in worship" means they want to sing certain types of music and change things up if "the Spirit leads." "What if someone wants to give a prophecy or a message in tongues during a service", they ask, "we have to give the Holy Spirit freedom." Having been a Charismatic minister I understand all too well the cultural idea that to have a plan or agenda in a given corporate worship service is considered limiting the Holy Spirit. It is the mantra of many Charismatic pastors or leaders to begin a corporate meeting with the words, "We have no agenda here, we're just going to let the Holy Spirit do what he wants to do." This brings us to our former Vineyard Pastor's second assertion. What really are the results of this cultural atmosphere of "free" worship? What has it actually produced and what is just smoke and mirrors? One writer has said,

"What scares me is the anti-intellectual, anti-critical-thinking philosophy that has spilled over into the church. This philosophy tends to romanticize the faith, making the local church into an "experience center" . . . Their concept of "church" is that they are spiritual consumers and that the church's job is to meet their needs."
 

From this modern western Charismatic ethos has come the promotion of the individual. They either say they must go to a church where they "feel comfortable" or where they can publicly display their spirituality by demonstrating their spiritual gifts. Public demonstrations have become such a traditional, cultural part of the worship services that unless such demonstrations occur it is determined the Holy Spirit didn't "show up." It is in this unscriptural and unhistorical cultural atmosphere that error is bred and false unaccountable demonstrations occur.

WHERE IS THE VALIDITY?

Just so you will fully understand my perspective please know that I am considered a prophetic person. (Although I don't claim to be a Prophet). I have given prophetic words by the will of God in public and in private. I have seen angels and have experienced spiritual visions and dreams. I have been a Charismatic musician and worship leader, and have written many worship songs. I have danced in the spirit, spoken in tongues and been "slain in the spirit". I have also served on staff at several non-denominational Charismatic Churches as worship leader and associate pastor. I believe fully the power of the Holy Spirit and the existence of all the gifts that are found in Him. What I have discovered and what I have had to humbly admit is that much of what I saw in the Charismatic Movement was not authentic; in fact much of what I saw and experienced was wrought with deception. Although we should not judge the motive of people's hearts, we have the responsibility to judge the results of that done in the name of Christ. My most shocking epiphany was when I realized that 99.9 % of the so-called miracles, healings, and prophetic words were nothing more than anecdotal fables, wishful thinking, or soulish activity that could not be verified. Not only could they not be verified but in most cases there is no requirement that they be verified. Because so much of the Charismatic manifestations have been proven to be false, a new twist on a scriptural doctrine has had to be embraced. One Charismatic leader states the premise of this new doctrine concerning prophetic words, "In Pentecostal circles, we differentiate between primary revelation, which is the Bible and which we consider infallible, and secondary revelation prophetic utterances that we do not consider infallible." So to them it is okay to give an erroneous "prophetic word" that directly affects the response and lives of individuals with no accountability toward its authenticity. When it comes to the thousands of healing "miracles" that don't take, the doctrine is espoused that either they didn't have enough faith, they need to work to "keep their healing", or they just received a partial healing. An honest student will have to admit that ALL of the scriptural healings were 100% and unquestionable and if a prophet erred in even one point of his message he was deemed a false prophet and was stoned. As a former Evangelical Charismatic, my eyes were really opened when I began to read actual documentation of prophecies and healings that were verifiably false (See www.deceptioninthechurch.com). What was especially shocking was the blatant false doctrines also espoused by the prophets and healers such as, "You don't have God in you. You are a God!", the belief that God consists of nine parts not three, and the uncanny parallels between the latest manifestations happening in the latest Charismatic revivals and the cults of the eastern gurus (See www.bible.ca/tongues.htm). Without going into a thorough apologetic discourse to these points I will trust the integrity of your search to discover the accuracy of this assessment.

HOW THE EARLY CHURCH REALLY WORSHIPED

One of the paradigm shifts that I experienced, concerns methods of worship and the misconception of how the Early Church worshiped. I assumed and was taught that what we did as modern Charismatics was a model of the early Church. I had the idea that the Early Church met in homes, sat around in circles, and spontaneously (without any agenda) began to sing contemporary songs, say impromptu prayers, give sermons, and quote their favorite scripture as the "Spirit led". Using the list of gifts found in the scriptures, I imagined that at any given time in a corporate gathering, an individual might stand up and deliver a corporate or personal prophecy, a message in tongues, or suggest, "I just feel we need to pray for Miriam right now." It was a given that this might go on for several hours or until the atmosphere ebbed or it was deemed that the Spirit was finished doing "His" work. (I highly recommend that you study the early heresy of Montanism, which parallels much of the Evangelical Charismatic mindset today. Around c. 156 A.D., a so-called prophet named Montanus launched a very charismatic environment, believing that the Holy Spirit spoke directly through him, and his followers. Montanists believed that they were receiving Divine Revelation, like the Old Testament prophets. The concern among the Bishops of the Church was that such emphasis on new prophetic revelation whether corporate or personal might be viewed on the same level as Holy Scripture and could interfere with people's understanding of the core message of the Scriptures and the pragmatic servanthood required to be a grounded Christian. Does this sound familiar?) Make no mistake, there is authentic prophecy. I, myself, have given revelatory personal words of prophetic wisdom to individuals and Church leaders since becoming Orthodox, but not in a public worship service! It is not needed, is not necessary, and is, frankly, not what the worship service is for. The Church embraces all the gifts but not the modern heresy- based method in which it has been promoted.
COMPARE THE ORTHODOX AND CHARISMATIC WORSHIP ETHOS

There is a vast difference in the worship ethos of the west and that of historic Christianity which has its ethos origins in the east. Evangelical Charismatics value highly the idea of the invisible church or "everyone is a priest" doctrine and thus devalue the sanctity of worship implements or places of worship. Charismatics are comfortable calling their buildings auditoriums or centers. Even those who refer to their places of worship as "sanctuaries" have no qualms about taking cokes or coffee inside or having ordinary conversations of earthly matters. With few exceptions they enter into the building to the sound of a loud roar of conversation. The "call to order" is usually the band or choir striking up the music causing all to scramble to their seats. In Orthodoxy the word "sanctuary" is taken literally. The Temple is specifically "set apart" for the worship of God. The architecture itself lends itself to the Old Testament Temple with the outer court, the inner court, and Holy of Holies. Where individual expression is the hallmark for worshipers in an Evangelical Charismatic service, in Orthodoxy the goal is for all to worship with one voice. Each person enters the door in reverence and quietness paying respect to the Saints who have gone on before by venerating their pictures. They then enter the inner court and light candles, pray, and bow in the direction of the Holy of Holies where the Altar rests. There is always an awareness that one is in the presence of the Holy Trinity, the Host of Angels, and the Great Cloud of Witnesses who are the Saints that continue to worship around the throne of God with us. 90% of the Liturgy is scripture and sung corporately to the Trinity and the people stand 90% of the time out of respect for what is being said and done. The contents of the gospel book are revered and people show respect by kissing the cover as the priest presents it. The priest is shown honor and respect as he represents Christ to the people. Some touch the hem of his vestment as he passes in remembrance of Christ passing by or kiss his right hand when greeting him because it is that hand that blesses and holds the Eucharist. The Altar area itself is reserved only for those who are sanctified to minister there. It is not treated as a common area or a simple platform stage as in most Evangelical Charismatic Churches. If something comes in contact with the Altar it is treated as holy and with respect. The public Charismatic expressions have always been subject to confusion and infiltration of error and always considered an aberration of the shape and ethos of Christian Worship. Saint Saraphim of Sarov (1759-1833) who once spent 1000 days and nights in prayer on a rock and later died in the kneeling position while in prayer, speaks of the ethos of holiness required by all who come to corporate worship:

"Never, God forbid, not for anything, not for anyone, should one speak in the sanctuary. Even if one were to have to suffer for it. For the Lord Himself is present there and in fear and trembling all the Cherubim and Seraphim and all the powers of God stand before him. Who then will speak before his face? Even when wiping the dust and sweeping the dirt from the Temple of God, one should not throw it carelessly anywhere. Even the dust of the temple of God is sacred. And the water also to be poured into a special clean place. There is no higher obedience than a church obedience and were it only to wipe the floor of the house of the Lord with a cloth this will be counted higher than any other action by God!"
What a drastic contrast to the noisy self-promoting environment of the Evangelical Charismatic ethos where the criteria for spirituality is how well one can prophecy or how "anointed" the music set was!

THE TRUE MODEL OF WORSHIP

What I discovered through the perusing of history and the writings of the Early Church Fathers was that it is the Orthodox Church that is the model of the early Church worship not the modern Charismatic culture. The early Christians were Jewish. They continued to worship at the synagogue on Saturday and to meet in houses on Sunday, or what came to be known as The Lord's Day. As the Lord's Day meetings continued to develop they continued the structure and order of the synagogue services. It was anything but the free-wheeling "no agenda" atmosphere. Everything was done "decently and in order" as Paul would later state when the Corinthians public usage of some of the spiritual gifts became unbalanced and led to confusion. The work or praise of the people (liturgy) was centered around the Eucharist and all that led up to the partaking of it was designed to tell the whole gospel story. History has provided us with documentation to this effect. In Justin Martyr's First Apology, c. 150 A.D we see the shape of the Liturgical service that the Church has preserved even to today.

"And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world;and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration."

So, does the worship in the Orthodox Church look Charismatic as we have discussed? The answer is "no". But I would not trade one Liturgy for all the Charismatic "freedom" in the world. One of the greatest spiritual moments I have had since becoming Orthodox was during the Liturgy. As we were all singing, suddenly my propensity for individual desires, personal tastes and preferences in worship based on my own cultural passions fell away and I became part of the whole. We were all singing with one voice. Let me say it again: it was as if one person was singing. I didn't lose my own identity and yet it was melded with the others present and the Saints of the ages who were also present just as the Church has maintained for 2000 years. The Charismatic world has many catch-phrases, one of them being "open heaven". You might hear someone say, "We are praying for an open heaven," or, in reference to the newest Charismatic movement, "There is an open heaven over there." Heaven is truly open every time the Orthodox Liturgy ("work" or "glory" of the people) takes place and we have, not just some ethereal move of the Holy Spirit, but the fullness of the Holy Trinity in our midst and we actually take the Presence of Christ into our bodies by way of the Eucharist.

ORTHODOXY IS REAL FREEDOM

Until now you may have sincerely embraced the Charismatic because it is what you have known and I am sure there has been some value and comfort to you in it. Take heart as you Journey to Orthodoxy. There is room for expressions of worship outside the Liturgy through concerts, CD's and the like. In fact it may encourage you to know, being that our Orthodox Church is located in Nashville, we have as members, several contemporary Christian recording artists who don't feel a lack of freedom at all and whose CD's are available on our own Orthodox Bookstore. We have also had wonderful times of worship in Church fellowships and our annual talent show where different expressions are given freedom. There is also a place and proper time to move within all of the gifts of the Holy Spirit under the umbrella of the "One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church." Just remember, it is the Charismatic culture you have been living in that is the foreign one and not Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is meant for you and you are meant for it. My wife and I and our children found this out first hand when we stepped into the Orthodox faith. We knew it was The Faith but also knew that the culture and customs of it might be a shock to our senses. So, we agreed to attend the Liturgy in an Antiochian Orthodox Church for three months before deciding whether or not we "liked" it. I am happy to say, it didn't take that long. The best is yet to come for you in the fullness and the worship of the Church. You are meant to become part of the whole. Don't fear what the Church of the Living Trinity has preserved for all of the body of Christ for hundreds of years. The Holy Trinity is waiting to meet you there as are the myriads of other former Evangelical Charismatics which includes all the saints of the ages who have come before you. May God continue to bless you in your Journey to Orthodoxy.

It's All Relative

I received a comment from one of my sisters recently. She had recently read my article "Where I blew it with my children: A Father's recompense." (You can read her comment there). In my Journey To Orthodoxy I have refrained from discussing these things with any of my family members because I innately understood the propensity for my relatives to internalize my comments, making them a personal affront to their spirituality. (But alas, with this BLOG the cat is out of the bag.) Such is the nature of any dogmatic discussion, but more so when those you love are involved. One who makes this journey must expect to wade through a myriad of emotional responses, personal accusations, misread intentions, and extremes. I am an idealist at heart and an analytical thinker. I often make the miscalculation that others approach a discourse in the same way. I am often disappointed when that doesn't occur. For instance: The doctrinal theme of my article was: God as Punisher vs. God as Redeemer, The Total Depravity of Man vs. The Damaged Soul of Man. My sister wondered "what parents I had" and if I was saying she "was going to Hell". I fully understand the conclusions she has drawn but also see them as very unfortunate. I, too, saw my Protestant parents as loving and caring-the best in many ways. They brought me up in the church and taught me the respect of God and the meaning of life. It was my father who taught me the gospel message.

It was my mother who showed me what it was to be a servant. I do not credit them for any of my weaknesses or propensity to sin. However, my journey has held a unique dilemma. My father was also my pastor and it was from his pulpit, among other venues, that I gained my understanding of doctrine and world view. The fact is, Baptists believe and teach through the doctrinal filter that man is totally depraved, as guilty as Adam and Eve and God is the punisher of sin. Although there is a measure of truth to these things, this is not the Orthodox Faith or ethos (Please reread the article for comparisons). To say that I heard these things preached throughout my life is a fact, to say that I am indicting my parents as the personal perpetrators of this doctrine in my life is not. It is a puzzling dichotomy that the home and the church should have two such differing influences. But in my case as a preacher's kid it is reasonable that I would not be able to separate the two.

I do not have the right to characterize the state of anyone's soul, thus their eternal destiny. I do not even have the right to my own personal doctrinal opinions. That is not Orthodox. What I do have is the responsibility to seek out the truth of the undivided church, that which was "taught at all times, in all places, by all the Church". That is Orthodox. By necessity, some of these discoveries will smack in the face of some Protestant doctrinal stances and ideologies and therefore smack in the face of those family members who still hold to them. Smacking is not the heart or intent nor is it the Orthodox ethos. I have found the Orthodox ethos to be one of love and inclusion. For instance, when I was received into the Church, my baptism was accepted as authentic. This was the baptism by immersion administered by my own father. Entry in to the Orthodox faith "completed" what was begun in my years of Protestantism (*See UPDATE Below). Orthodoxy means "right belief". One aspect of that belief is the reticence to condemn other Christian individuals or groups. But another aspect is to proclaim loudly the Faith of the Apostles. It is in that proclaiming that the fires of dissent can ignite. The attitude of the Orthodox Christian should be "I know where the Church is but I don't know where it isn't". One can only hope to continue a dialogue with those relatives who will, and pray that there will be an absence of inferences and accusations and that no one brings a box of matches. It may be a formidable task, however, because "It's all relative."

* UPDATE 7/21/14: This article was originally written on 6/6/06. I subsequently learned that, although the reception of my Baptist baptism may have been a sign of "love and inclusion" by the Antiochians, that practice is highly irregular and is not in keeping with the canons of the church. For more on this read Why We Left, Where We Went.

My Beloved Priest

This is my beloved priest, Father Steven Rogers of St. Ignatius Antiochian Orthodox Church in Franklin, TN.

I feel a special affinity with him not only because he was the first to serve me the Holy Eucharist but because he, too, is a former Southern Baptist. Father Steven started his career as a journalist and didn't become a priest until his early forties. He has been senior priest at Saint Ignatius for 10 years. I have been blessed to see his heart of compassion toward the people whose souls he guards. He is quick to tears of compassion and strong to rebuke or correct in love. He is quick to wit and humor and strong to teach and expound the principals of the faith. The mark of a man's character is proven not by what one says to his face but by what one says behind his back. I have always heard only praise for this man of God. The only weakness I have spotted in Father Steven is the propensity to devote too much time and effort to the work of the ministry. Oh, that I might emulate that weakness! The only criticism I have heard is that Father Steven has a monastic heart of devotion toward his service to the Church and expects his parishioners to have the same. Oh, that I might be criticized thus! I always look for him to come near me when at the Temple, not because I desire his attention, but because I desire to offer my open hands to him, say the words "Father Bless", and kiss his right hand that blesses and offers me the Holy Eucharist from the Holy Altar. I pray that I may be an Aaron to this Moses his next 10 years as he leads the people toward the promises of the Kingdom of God.

In Their Own Words- "Baptism Saves You"

Jesus Christ

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." John 3:5

I was taught very young that the scriptures were literally true, to interpret them in the context in which they were written, and to understand the meaning of the original language. Those who maintain that baptism has no sacramental effect on one's salvation are compelled to err on all these points. They must say that Jesus didn't mean "water, water", He was referring to something else such as the preached gospel or one's deep belief. If this be so then why should the word "Spirit' here mean "Spirit, Spirit"?. Water means water and Spirit means Spirit. One might debate a word in one scripture at length and would not be wise to form a doctrine around it, however the scripture further supports baptism as a regenerational means.

Titus 3:5 "It was for no reason other than his own faithful love that he saved us, by means of the cleansing water of rebirth and the renewal in the Holy Spirit." (See also Romans 6:3-4 and Col. 2:12-13)

The Early Church Fathers were united in their understanding of these scriptures and their practice and writings coincided. Water Baptism is the door to the Kingdom of God, not just a symbol, but a sacrament. The problem some may have with this evolves around the failure to see the Church as a community or corporate entity. The Church is saved together as we move toward righteousness. The view that one can be saved independent of the Church just by believing certain things or confessing a series of right words is a foreign one to the Apostles' teaching. The practice of baptism predates Christianity. The Jews had their Mikva baptizing entire families. With the New Covenant, baptism continued that practice but as an entry not to the Law but to the New Covenant of grace found in the Kingdom of God. To believe that baptism is anything other than a part of sacramental salvation is to say that the Founding Fathers of the Faith had it wrong from day one and that the original twelve Disciples must have done a poor job of discipling. Suspend your doctrinal ideology for a moment and see what the church has always taught and practiced concerning the role and purpose of baptism. (If you don't want to read the whole text just view the bolded sentences.)

Justin Martyr

"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, "Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven" [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus

"'And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan' [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: "Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).

Tertullian

"[N]o one can attain salvation without baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says, "Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life." (Baptism 12:1 [A.D. 203]).

Hippolytus

"The Father of immortality sent the immortal Son and Word into the world, who came to man in order to wash him with water and the Spirit; and he, begetting us again to incorruption of soul and body, breathed into us the Spirit of life, and endued us with an incorruptible panoply. If, therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be God. And if he is made God by water and the Holy Spirit after the regeneration of the laver he is found to be also joint-heir with Christ after the resurrection from the dead. Wherefore I preach to this effect: Come, all ye kindreds of the nations, to the immortality of the baptism" (Discourse on the Holy Theophany 8 [A.D. 217]).

The Recognitions of Clement"But you will perhaps say, 'What does the baptism of water contribute toward the worship of God?' In the first place, because that which has pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because when you are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so . . . you shall be able to attain salvation; but otherwise it is impossible. For thus has the true prophet [Jesus] testified to us with an oath: 'Verily, I say to you, that unless a man is born again of water . . . he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (The Recognitions of Clement 6:9 [A.D. 221]).

Testimonies Concerning the Jews"That unless a man have been baptized and born again, he cannot attain unto the kingdom of God. In the Gospel according to John: 'Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' [John 3:5]. . . . Also in the same place: 'Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you.' [John 6:53]. That it is of small account to be baptized and to receive the Eucharist, unless one profit by it both in deeds and works." (Testimonies Concerning the Jews 3:2:25-26 [A.D. 240]).

Cyprian of Carthage

"[When] they receive also the baptism of the Church . . . then finally can they be fully sanctified and be the sons of God . . . since it is written, 'Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (Letters 71[72]:1 [A.D. 253]).

Council of Carthage VII"And in the gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with his divine voice, saying, 'Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. '. . . Unless therefore they receive saving baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ." (Seventh Carthage [A.D. 256]).

Cyril of Jerusalem

"Since man is of a twofold nature, composed of body and soul, the purification also is twofold: the corporeal for the corporeal and the incorporeal for the incorporeal. The water cleanses the body, and the Spirit seals the soul. . . . When you go down into the water, then, regard not simply the water, but look for salvation through the power of the Spirit. For without both you cannot attain to perfection. It is not I who says this, but the Lord Jesus Christ, who has the power in this matter. And he says, 'Unless a man be born again," and he adds the words 'of water and of the Spirit', " he cannot enter the kingdom of God.' He that is baptized with water, but is not found worthy of the Spirit, does not receive the grace in perfection. Nor, if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water, shall he enter the kingdom of heaven. A bold saying, but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it." (Catechetical Lectures 3:4 [A.D. 350]).

Athanasius

"[A]s we are all from earth and die in Adam, so being regenerated from above of water and Spirit, in the Christ we are all quickened." (Four Discourses Against the Arians 3:26[33] [A.D. 360]).

Basil the Great

"This then is what it means to be 'born again of water and Spirit': Just as our dying is effected in the water [Rom. 6:3; Col. 2:12-13], our living is wrought through the Spirit. In three immersions and an equal number of invocations the great mystery of baptism is completed in such a way that the type of death may be shown figuratively, and that by the handing on of divine knowledge the souls of the baptized may be illuminated. If, therefore, there is any grace in the water, it is not from the nature of water, but from the Spirit's presence there." (The Holy Spirit 15:35 [A.D. 375]).

Ambrose of Milan

"Although we are baptized with water and the Spirit, the latter is much superior to the former, and is not therefore to be separated from the Father and the Son. There are, however, many who, because we are baptized with water and the Spirit, think that there is no difference in the offices of water and the Spirit, and therefore think that they do not differ in nature. Nor do they observe that we are buried in the element of water that we may rise again renewed by the Spirit. For in the water is the representation of death, in the Spirit is the pledge of life, that the body of sin may die through the water, which encloses the body as it were in a kind of tomb, that we, by the power of the Spirit, may be renewed from the death of sin, being born again in God." (The Holy Spirit 1:6[75-76] [A.D. 381]). "The Church was redeemed at the price of Christ's blood. Jew or Greek, it makes no difference; but if he has believed, he must circumcise himself from his sins [in baptism (Col. 2:11-12)] so that he can be saved . . . for no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the sacrament of baptism. . . . "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (Abraham 2:11:79-84 [A.D. 387]). "You have read, therefore, that the three witnesses in baptism are one: water, blood, and the Spirit (1 John 5:8): And if you withdraw any one of these, the sacrament of baptism is not valid. For what is the water without the cross of Christ? A common element with no sacramental effect. Nor on the other hand is there any mystery of regeneration without water, for 'unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (The Mysteries 4:20 [A.D. 390]).

Gregory of Nyssa

"[In] the birth by water and the Spirit, [Jesus] himself led the way in this birth, drawing down upon the water, by his own baptism, the Holy Spirit; so that in all things he became the firstborn of those who are spiritually born again, and gave the name of brethren to those who partook in a birth like to his own by water and the Spirit" (Against Eunomius 2:8 [A.D. 382]).

John Chrysostom
"[N]o one can enter into the kingdom of heaven except he be regenerated through water and the Spirit, and he who does not eat the flesh of the Lord and drink his blood is excluded from eternal life, and if all these things are accomplished only by means of those holy hands, I mean the hands of the priest, how will any one, without these, be able to escape the fire of hell, or to win those crowns which are reserved for the victorious? These [priests] truly are they who are entrusted with the pangs of spiritual travail and the birth which comes through baptism: by their means we put on Christ, and are buried with the Son of God, and become members of that blessed head [the Mystical Body of Christ]" (The Priesthood 3:5-6 [A.D. 387]).

Gregory of Nazianz

"Such is the grace and power of baptism; not an overwhelming of the world as of old, but a purification of the sins of each individual, and a complete cleansing from all the bruises and stains of sin. And since we are double-made, I mean of body and soul, and the one part is visible, the other invisible, so the cleansing also is twofold, by water and the Spirit; the one received visibly in the body, the other concurring with it invisibly and apart from the body; the one typical, the other real and cleansing the depths" (Oration on Holy Baptism 7-8 [A.D. 388]).

The Apostolic Constitutions

"Be ye likewise contented with one baptism alone, that which is into the death of the Lord [Rom. 6:3; Col. 2:12-13]. . . . [H]e that out of contempt will not be baptized shall be condemned as an unbeliever and shall be reproached as ungrateful and foolish. For the Lord says, 'Except a man be baptized of water and of the Spirit, he shall by no means enter into the kingdom of heaven.' And again, 'He that believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believes not shall be damned." [Mark 16:16] (Apostolic Constitutions 6:3:15 [A.D. 400]).

Augustine"It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated . . . when that infant is brought to baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the infant so presented is reborn. For it is not written, 'Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents' or 'by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him,' but, 'Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit.' The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated in Adam" (Letters 98:2 [A.D. 412]). "Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ, it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism. For he that said, 'If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven,' made an exception for them in that other statement in which he says no less generally, 'Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father, who is in heaven." [Matt. 10:32] (The City of God 13:7 [A.D. 419]).

So, on what denominational tradition or on whose words do you base your doctrinal belief on baptism? "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

In their own words....

In Their Own Words-"Infant Baptism"

The Apostle Paul likens Baptism to circumcision, or "the circumcision of Christ."

"In him you were also circumcised with . . . the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead" (Col. 2:11-12).

So, like circumcision, the Church has always baptized infants and adults. The difference is that circumcision was powerless to save (Gal. 5:6, 6:15), but "baptism . . . now saves you" (1 Pet. 3:21).

The only debate over this practice in the early Church was whether or not the Church should wait until the eighth day after birth like as in Old Testament circumcision. The main difficulty some have in embracing this normative practice of the Church is the failure to see the visible authoritative Church as being the doors to the Kingdom of God. One who embraces the new Reformation theology of "Sola Fide", or salvation by "Faith Alone", will argue that an individual's personal belief alone will save him, totally independent of the Body Of Christ. In fact Luther's translation of the New Testament inserted, actually added, the word "alone" to the scriptural phrase, "By faith (alone) are you save by grace..." to promote the new doctrine. The Church orthodox has always maintained the Apostles' doctrine that Baptism is the gateway to salvation and the Church is the administrator of the sacrament. Never, until almost the year 1700 was Baptism considered only a symbolic sign of faith. Read the words of the Early Church Fathers concerning the doctrine and administration of baptism.

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]). 'And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan"[2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: 'Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven' [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).

Hippolytus

"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).

Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]). "The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian of Carthage

"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]). "If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5).

Gregory of Nazianz

"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]). "'Well enough,' some will say, 'for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?' Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).

John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ's] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).

Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]). "The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]). "Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]). "By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ's] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ�s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).

Council of Carthage V

"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).

Council of Mileum II

"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers' wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, 'Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned' [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).

The Council of Nicea-The Nicean Creed

"We believe in one Baptism for the remission of sins."

After 2000 years of holding to the the tradition of the Apostle's doctrine concerning baptism, the Church still maintains the same doctrinal practice. Only in some areas of the Protestant world is this long held practice held in distain. It is this opposition to infant or regenerational baptism that is the aberration of truth.