|
|
|
0 members (),
1,082
guests, and
72
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,506
Posts417,454
Members6,150
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,658 |
It's my understanding that the ROCOR (at least in Argentina with the exception of Met. Vitaly's offshot there) does not practice Baptism for the reception of Catholic converts as a rule. the Russian presence there is relatively old (the 1870's) and they respected the original usages.
I have heard from a Serb (and this is interesting, as a french-like way of Baptism is practiced in some regions of Serbia) that Baptism of Latins is sometimes favoured in their Church because "the Roman Church does not hold the Orthodox teaching of the Trinity" (because of the filioque).
Now if that was the case, could the Roman Church could also use the same argument if they wanted to deny the validity of Orthodox baptism?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,675 Likes: 7
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,675 Likes: 7 |
Mexican,
I would say no, because the Roman Church's whole argument is that the filioque is nothing more than a clarification. If the Latin's did say that there is a difference in doctrine - they would be changing their whole position and acknowledge that they have caused the schism by creating an innovation (heresy).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
