Infant Baptism (ritual, soul, grace, church, pray)

[joeboonda]

Originally Posted by Terrywoodenpic

The whole question of receiving the Holy Spirit Is interesting.
I have a somewhat heretical view, in as much as I believe it would be more difficult to avoid the Holy Spirit than to receive it.
The Holy spirit was sent by God to all men. We have the choice to accept the offer or reject it. But if we do one or the other the Holy spirit is still with us.... as a Gift.

The sealing with oil is an outward sign of Gods Gift. and is only able to be performed with oil that has been consecrated by a Bishop.

That is interesting, I believe the Holy Spirit was sent to all men and we have the choice to accept or reject Him. Although if we don't accept the gift, I don't think He strives with people forever, soon the gentle knocking fades, the heart grows harder, the eyes are blind and ears dull, and finaly one may go to a Christless grave. But as long as there is breath, there is hope! Ok, I gotta go! God bless you!

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by joeboonda

Ok, thanks for that information. I honestly thought being born again was any Christians belief whatever the denomination, as Jesus said, "Ye must be born again." May be just difference in wording. okay, anyway thanks for the last posts!
Peace and Love,
Mike

Hi Mike, Thank you for your questions. Hope you don't mind if I pipe in a bit.

We are born again at our baptisms. Our theology is like (I think) Catholics in that when we are baptized we die and are reborn in Christ. However, most Anglicans/Episcopalians shy away from the 'born again' label because of the negative connotations this term has come to be associated with. I think we should reclaim the terms 'born again' and 'evangelical' because to me they both are important in Christianity. We are 'in Christ' and part of the Church through our baptism and we do have a mission for the reconciliation of the world via His love.

2 c,
luna

[Terrywoodenpic]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Hi Mike, Thank you for your questions. Hope you don't mind if I pipe in a bit.

We are born again at our baptisms. Our theology is like (I think) Catholics in that when we are baptized we die and are reborn in Christ. However, most Anglicans/Episcopalians shy away from the 'born again' label because of the negative connotations this term has come to be associated with. I think we should reclaim the terms 'born again' and 'evangelical' because to me they both are important in Christianity. We are 'in Christ' and part of the Church through our baptism and we do have a mission for the reconciliation of the world via His love.

2 c,
luna

I put it the way I did because Many Protestants seem to see "being born again" as a sort of choice they make for them selves. In the Anglican/Episcopal sense all baptised are borne again. The two have quite different connotations.
"evangelical" has become a term taken over by a particular brand of Christianity.
In its true sense I agree with you that it is important. in its modern usage I do not care for it.

[joeboonda]

Thank-you lunamoth and Terrry. I understand how people may prefer to stay away from using certain phrases like 'born again'. But I speak purely in the Biblical sense as it refers to the regeneration of our spirit. I understand that many Christians believe this occurs at baptism, and there are a few scriptures along the lines of 'repent and be baptised for the remission of sins'. If I may, tell me if I cross boundaries here, share my belief. In scripture, I find that as Jesus said many times in John that whoever believes in Him has eternal life, throughout the N.T. it says to believe, that faith saves us. Like in Acts, people believed and were saved, then they were baptised. I do feel baptism is important, its a step of obedience, a symoblic outward profession of faith, but that belief saves us, not any sacrament we may perform. I hope sharing that belief is not offensive in this thread, I guess I am just very scripture oriented.
Peace and Love, ]
Mike

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Terrywoodenpic

I put it the way I did because Many Protestants seem to see "being born again" as a sort of choice they make for them selves. In the Anglican/Episcopal sense all baptised are borne again. The two have quite different connotations.
"evangelical" has become a term taken over by a particular brand of Christianity.
In its true sense I agree with you that it is important. in its modern usage I do not care for it.

Quite right there Terry. Even though I said that about the terms born again and evangelical, and there are some Episcopal Churches that are strongly Evangelical in the modern sense. I think I would be quite unhappy at one of those.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by joeboonda

Thank-you lunamoth and Terrry. I understand how people may prefer to stay away from using certain phrases like 'born again'. But I speak purely in the Biblical sense as it refers to the regeneration of our spirit. I understand that many Christians believe this occurs at baptism, and there are a few scriptures along the lines of 'repent and be baptised for the remission of sins'. If I may, tell me if I cross boundaries here, share my belief. In scripture, I find that as Jesus said many times in John that whoever believes in Him has eternal life, throughout the N.T. it says to believe, that faith saves us. Like in Acts, people believed and were saved, then they were baptised. I do feel baptism is important, its a step of obedience, a symoblic outward profession of faith, but that belief saves us, not any sacrament we may perform. I hope sharing that belief is not offensive in this thread, I guess I am just very scripture oriented.
Peace and Love, ]
Mike

It's not the act of baptism that saves. The act is an outward sign of grace that has already happened. There is no magic involved in the act of baptism. Since, for the Episcopalian, the community is important (we are the one Body of Christ, the Church is ecclesia) and since the worship is built around the Book of Common Prayer, it is important that all who are identified with our families are also identified with the family of God. Episcopalians believe that the parents are responsible for the proper upbringing of their children, and that includes acknowledging the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of their children.

As an aside to something Terry said, many Episcopal churches also communicate infants and young children who have been baptized and not confirmed.

[Terrywoodenpic]

Originally Posted by sojourner

and since the worship is built around the Book of Common Prayer,

Slightly off topic ... But many Anglican churches now use the Book of common worship...An up dated version of the book of common prayer. Some parts of services are quite extended and introduce a few new practices.
Is this used in the Episcopal churches?

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by Terrywoodenpic

Slightly off topic ... But many Anglican churches now use the Book of common worship...An up dated version of the book of common prayer. Some parts of services are quite extended and introduce a few new practices.
Is this used in the Episcopal churches?

Not that I'm aware of, as you describe it. We use the 1979 BCP. However, there are some new liturgies being introduced as corollaries to the BCP, with the intent (I think) of publishing a new and updated version of the BCP, that would include some new formulary.