On the Falsification of the Form of Baptism

Nikolaos Mannis | May 12, 2025

 

We often read in extreme zealot texts that "in our time the New Calendarists/Ecumenists have falsified the form of Baptism, abolishing full immersions."

In the present article, it will be demonstrated that the widespread neglect (that is, by a large portion of the clergy) of full immersions is not an innovation and a modern invention of the "New Calendarists/Ecumenists," but is attested in the Orthodox Church even centuries before the appearance of the new calendar and Ecumenism.

Here, testimonies will be presented in descending chronological order which prove this position.

The purpose of this post is of course not to justify those clergy who do not baptize correctly, especially without any serious reason or necessity, but to state the truth, so that Orthodox Christians are not led from one extreme to the other, and, escaping the heresy of Ecumenism, end up being rebaptized into the equally soul-destroying heresy of uninformed Extreme Zealotry.

TESTIMONY FROM 1929

Already a hundred years ago, Blessed Philotheos Zervakos, in a Memorandum to the Synod of the Church of Greece (November 25, 1929), writes:

"Some of the priests, as I have been informed, and have seen with my own eyes, do not perform the holy Baptism according to the sacred tradition with three immersions and emersions, but are content to submerge the infant up to the abdomen and, taking water with one hand, sprinkle the head of the infant. Such a thing is undoubtedly neither Orthodox Baptism nor should it be called as such. I made a remark to some, and they replied to me that this is how they received and were taught by their predecessors; and in some villages I observed that the baptismal fonts are small and unsuitable for baptism"

(Philotheos, Graphida 1, publ. Holy Monastery of Longovarda, Paros, 2019, p. 478).

We thus see that even a hundred years ago this manner of Baptism existed, which was in fact received from their predecessors. Saint Philotheos rightly concludes that this should not be called "Orthodox Baptism," yet nevertheless he does not reject its validity, since he neither considers those baptized in such a manner as unbaptized, nor does he recommend Rebaptism.

TESTIMONY FROM 1888

Alexandros Papadiamantis, in his article "Theophany" from 1888, writes:

"Since we are speaking about Baptism, I consider it good here to submit some practical observations concerning the manner in which Baptism is performed among us. The old priests, who were exceedingly practical and well-trained, though called unlettered, knew how to perform the three immersions and emersions in the most proper manner, holding the baptized upright facing east, applying the right hand under the infant’s armpit gently yet securely, and with the left hand closing its mouth. They took care regarding the temperature of the water, and each immersion was momentary, with the interval between immersions being sufficient for the infant to breathe. In such a manner, no baptized person ever suffered anything in the font. The present swarm of priests, whom the corrupt politics often impose—rough and uncultivated—on the Most Reverend Synodal Hierarchs to ordain, since they perform so many other rites poorly, or rather omit them entirely, ought at least to respect this foundation of our faith: holy Baptism. We write these things because we have reason to believe that many priests, yielding to the blind and often foolish fondness of ignorant and superstitious parents—who think that something will happen to their pampered newborn in the holy font—perform something closer to sprinkling than to Baptism. The members of the Western Church are excusable, for they were ignorant of the meaning of the Greek verb baptizo—that is, to dip, immerse, submerge—but the Greeks must never be ignorant of it. It is time for this sacred form to be preserved, for if the clergy's ignorance continues, and atheism and impiety increase, then in a generation, when we shall all be half-baptized, it will be necessary to order the general rebaptism of all the inhabitants of the Greek Kingdom, male and female."

(https://www.papadiamantis.org/works/88-epiloipa/468-4-thrhskeytika)

Likewise, Papadiamantis, 35 years before the introduction of the new calendar, observes that the form of Baptism has been falsified, but in no case does he characterize those baptized in such a manner as unbaptized; he merely expresses his indignation in a justifiably exaggerated manner.

TESTIMONIES FROM 1869

In a book by an anonymous Greek Papist, we read:

"Eastern: It is indeed true that some of our priests, either out of incompetence, or indifference, or also out of fear—both their own and that of the parents—do not immerse the heads of infants, but pour water upon it with the palm of the hand."

(Dialogues on Baptism between an Easterner and a Westerner, Hermoupolis, 1869, pp. 193–194).

In a book by Monk Christophoros the Peloponnesian, we learn the following most revealing account:

"Being found also in the year 1869 in the Sporades Islands, I addressed a letter to the then Hierarch of Rhodes, Synesios (also a well-educated man), in which I outlined various religious shortcomings that I observed being committed by the priests, especially concerning the divine Baptism, which was not being performed as the Eastern Orthodox Church dogmatically requires—that is, by full immersions—but only up to the shoulder blades, so that he, being competent, might bring about correction. In reply, I received the following letter from him: '…As for the manner of the immersions in Baptism, since there is a risk of drowning the infant submerged in the water by the canonical immersion, and a worse error than the first may result, it is therefore altogether necessary that the infant be immersed up to the shoulder blades, and consequently, that water be poured upon its head by the hand of the priest, who is unable to perform the canonical immersion due to the small size of the font.' Rhodes, 24 September 1869, Synesios."

(Divine Scourge, Hermoupolis, 1877, pp. 59–60, footnote a).

All this decades before Ecumenism and the new calendar...

TESTIMONY FROM 1859

The Protestant Jonas King, an American philhellene and friend of Ioannis Kapodistrias, referring to the Orthodox, writes:

"And even those who profess that only baptism by immersion is correct, often—dare I say, generally—place the infant in the font within the water up to the neck, and then, taking water with the right hand, pour it three times upon its head; and this is considered by them to be valid and complete baptism, and thousands, if not tens of thousands, are thus baptized in the Eastern Church."

(Jonas King, Homilies, Athens, 1859, p. 38).

King, moreover, as a resident of Athens for 31 years, testifies that this manner was widespread and did not pertain to exceptional cases.

TESTIMONY FROM 1850

The anonymous editor of the book Heaven’s Judgment (Ουρανού Κρίσις, Athens, 1850) by Saint Athanasios of Paros, which also includes the Life of Saint Clement of Ohrid, reveals in a footnote on page 94:

"Do the present-day priests of those pitiable Christians know how to perform any sacrament? Do they know how to baptize, to crown, to celebrate the Liturgy without danger? Do they know, in the end, how to baptize, and not leave the children of Christians unbaptized? Alas for the wretchedness; alas for the divine concession. We have seen in our own days the Sabellian Patripassianism being enacted in Baptism, not by a few of our own priests, and what then are we to believe about those most ignorant ones?"

TESTIMONY FROM 1829

A Synod under the Patriarch Agathangelos of Constantinople declares:

"To immerse only up to the loins, and with the right hand to sprinkle water upon the head of the infant three times—first invoking ‘In the name of the Father,’ then thrice again, and thrice a third time—and all other such deviations from this canonical manner of performing this sacred mystery, which may be practiced irregularly and heretically, and are in no way confirmed by ancient ecclesiastical tradition, are wholly unacceptable to our Eastern Church, as they are contrary to the apostolic and synodal canons and opposed to the very divine commandment of the Lord, as was set forth above. And the one who undertakes in practice such irregular and unacceptable to the Church acts, and who does not correct himself, is liable to the penalties established by the holy Apostles for the transgression of these things, and is to be rejected."

(Mansi 40, pp. 142–143).

This decision proves that even two hundred years ago some priests were baptizing in this manner. And of course, the Synod rightly threatens these clergy with punishment, but in no way does it reject the validity of the Baptism of those baptized in such a manner!

TESTIMONY FROM 1807

In a synodal text under the Hieromartyr Patriarch Gregory V of Constantinople, we read:

"We command the beloved in Christ brethren hierarchs that, being attentive themselves, they strictly instruct all the priests in their provinces to perform, according to the ecclesiastical rite, in a holy font containing sufficient water so that the infant may be baptized, and to read the sacred prayers, and that the one being baptized be baptized with three emersions and three immersions."

(Manouēl Gedeōn, Canonical Decrees, vol. II, Constantinople, 1889, p. 116).

Since a command is thus given to put sufficient water, it is evident that this was not being observed, as is likewise demonstrated by the other testimonies.

TESTIMONY FROM 1803

Patriarch Kallinikos V, in a letter to the Serbian Metropolitan of Užice in 1803, points out the errors of the priests in the region regarding the Mystery of Baptism, who do not use baptismal fonts, "but placing water only in a basin, they read the prayers over it, and, while the godparent holds the infant, they pour the water upon it, pronouncing the words ‘The servant of God is baptized,’ etc., which is rather a Latin-style pouring than Baptism." And he recommends that it "be performed exactly according to the canonical form found in the Euchologion itself, with the infants being baptized within a holy font." (Kallinikos Delikanēs, Patriarchal Documents, vol. III, Constantinople 1905, p. 711).

Nevertheless, not even he recommends Rebaptism.

TESTIMONY FROM 1800

Saint Nikodemos wrote characteristically in the Pedalion, first published in 1800:

"We Orthodox must also take great care with our own [sc. Baptism], that it not be done in basins and tubs, in which only a small part of the feet of the baptized infants is immersed. And I leave aside mentioning how often even those tubs are overturned, and the holy water is spilled. Therefore, if we reproach the Latins for having transgressed the Apostolic Baptism, we must, by contrast, ensure that our own is safe and beyond reproach. And concerning this, as with all other things, the care and duty lie with the shepherds of souls. We, for our part, perform the work of the watchman and cry out, giving the warning. As for them, let them attend to their own, as they will give an account."

(Pedalion, Footnote on the 50th Canon of the Holy Apostles).

And in the time of Saint Nikodemos this manner of Baptism existed, which the Saint rightly condemns, yet he neither characterizes those baptized in such a way as "unbaptized," nor, of course, does he call for their Rebaptism.

TESTIMONY FROM 1788

Bishop Theophilos of Kampania, in his well-known work, writes:

"Priests have the most necessary duty to immerse the one being baptized—whether he be an infant, or an adult, or of lesser age—three times fully into the water, because, as we have said, it contains a hidden mystery, and then the one being baptized is baptized completely, and the priest does not sin. And let the baptismal font be sufficient so as to contain the entire infant standing upright. In such matters the care of the hierarchs is necessary, for the priests are unlearned, and from such sins our Orthodox people have fallen into many misfortunes."

(Treasury of Orthodoxy, Venice, 1788, p. 24).

By writing these things, he demonstrates that even in his time many priests (for had they been few, he would not have noted it) were not baptizing with full immersions. Who then perfected and supplied what was lacking in such baptisms performed by unlearned priests at that time, if not the Most Holy Spirit? For if this were not the case, then the author would have recommended that Rebaptism of those baptized in such a manner be absolutely carried out. Yet, although these baptisms are not devoid of validity, as the author observes, they bring punishment upon our people.

TESTIMONY FROM 1784

The renowned Teacher of the Nation, Nikephoros Theotokis, as Archbishop of Slaviansk and Kherson, issued an Encyclical against Baptism without full immersions, which had become widespread at the time in that region, and in which he concluded (our translation from the original Russian):

"Strive to ensure that in every church there is a vessel made of silver or copper or some other respectable material, which will have the shape of a bell or censer—narrower at the bottom and wider at the top—with a depth no less than one arsin (note: the arsin is a Russian and Turkish unit of length, corresponding to about 70 centimeters), and the width should be proportionate to the depth, so that it may be suitable for use."

(https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Nikifor_Feotokis/protiv-oblivatelnogo-kreshhenija/ – in the referenced Russian source, the incorrect date 1754 has been given instead of the correct 1784, since in 1754 Theotokis was neither an archbishop nor yet in Russia, whereas he is known to have served as Archbishop of Slaviansk and Kherson during the years 1779–1786).

Although Theotokis strictly recommends the adoption of canonical Baptism, he does not order Rebaptism.

TESTIMONY FROM THE 1770s

Saint Kosmas of Aitolia, in the seventh of his Teachings (delivered during the 1770s), says:

"Holy priests, you must have large baptismal fonts in the churches, sufficient for the whole child to be immersed, to swim in it so that not even the size of a flea's eye remains dry, for even there the devil enters. And this is why your children become epileptic, demon-possessed, fearful, and ill-fated—because they are not properly baptized."

(http://users.uoa.gr/~nektar/orthodoxy/tributes/patrokosmas/didaxai.htm)

Therefore, even in the time of Saint Kosmas, full immersions were not always performed, but the Saint, despite rightly urging the priests to observe the proper form, does not characterize those baptized in such a manner as "unbaptized."

TESTIMONY FROM 1763

A Synod under Patriarch Ioannikios III of Constantinople observes that various priests baptize infants "in whatever vessel may be found... some baptize them in a cooking pot, others in whatever container happens to be available." (Manouēl Gedeōn, Canonical Decrees, vol. II, Constantinople, 1889, p. 461).

And despite the fact that these Baptisms were performed in cooking pots (from the Turkish tencere = téntzeris, cooking pot) and other vessels, neither is the validity of the Mystery questioned, nor is Rebaptism ordered.

TESTIMONY FROM 1647

The well-known editor of the Euchologion, Iacobus Goar, who lived for years in Greece collecting manuscripts and recording the liturgical customs of the Greeks, writes concerning Orthodox Baptism (our translation from the Latin):

"The ancient method was Baptism by immersion; however, now the Greeks more frequently use affusion. As far as it could be observed, they cleanse the child, who is seated in a basin or tub deep to the elbow (what is today called the baptistery or font, like the one in which the blind man was and came out seeing), pouring over it three times no small amount of warm water (so that the child’s body not freeze or suffer greatly from the cold). Or, so that the quantity of water not cause it to suffocate or perhaps ingest too much, they place it face down, holding it with the left hand at the stomach, and the priest washes and cleanses its head and entire body with sanctified water."

(Iacobi Goar, Euchologion sive Rituale Graecorum, Paris, 1647, p. 365, footnote 24).

TESTIMONY FROM 1401

In the work "Forty-Nine Chapters" (Κεφάλαια Ἑπτάκις Ἑπτά) by Joseph Bryennios, written between the years 1401–1405, we read about the manner of Baptism that prevailed in his time (600 years ago!):

"In the Mystery of Baptism, an irrational and broken custom prevails… For some indeed baptize with three immersions, yet pronounce all three names [of the Holy Trinity] in each. And in the first two [immersions], they immerse only the feet, and in the third, also the head, while facing west. Yet it is proper in each immersion to pronounce one name of the blessed Trinity, concluding with ‘Amen’; and the whole body should be baptized from the head down, and the one being baptized should face East, being immersed three times upright. For most of the priests use rotten tubs and altogether unsuitable means for Baptism..."

(Joseph Bryennios, Paraleipomena, Leipzig, 1784, p. 106).

No comment necessary.

TESTIMONY FROM THE 14th CENTURY

Saint Cyprian of Kiev, a disciple of Saint Philotheos Kokkinos and admirer of Saint Gregory Palamas—whose anti-Latin positions he adopted—writes in a letter to Abbot Athanasios (a disciple of Saint Sergius of Radonezh) (our translation):

"Holy Baptism must be performed thus: not by sprinkling with water, as the Latins do, but by immersion in a river or in a clean vessel designated for this purpose; and at each immersion, one of the names of the Holy and Life-giving Trinity must be said: ‘in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’ Whoever does not do it in this manner does not rightly perform Baptism."

(https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Amvrosij_Ornatskij/drevnerusskie-inocheskie-ustavy/3_2)

Nevertheless, in the Euchologion which he translated from Greek into Slavonic, there is an exception for infants—not, of course, adopting sprinkling, which he had condemned—but recommending the well-known method still attested today (as we have also seen in the following centuries), since we read in a footnote (our translation):

"If it is an infant being baptized: it is placed seated in the font up to the neck and is washed while being held with the left hand. With the right, warm water is taken and poured over its head. For the infant, being weak and delicate, may drown from the quantity of the water."

(Manuscript of the National Library of Russia, Sol. 1085/1194, f. 180).

This is also the oldest testimony I have found, proving that the manner of Baptism commonly practiced today in the Orthodox Church is not an invention of the New Calendarists/Ecumenists, but is attested for at least seven centuries, without any of our forebears being considered unbaptized.

 

Greek source: https://krufo-sxoleio.blogspot.com/2025/05/blog-post.html