Are Charismatics truly Catholic?

[Redeemerslove]

You have not provided evidence for the following statements which you have made Beng:

Beng:

And according to the test 99% of Charismatics are fake because they violate the rule of faith in the Bible.

Where is your evidence for this statement? Where is your research to back this statement up? You don’t need Omniscience to do a survey….

Beng:

I can give you thousands of opposing testimonies showing how disapointing and bland Charismatic is from people who have experienced Charismaticism.

Where is your evidence for this statement?

Beng:

If they start speaking tongues amongst believer without interpretation, even if a Pope say it’s ok. it’s unbiblical.

Where do you get your authority to make such a decree?

All in all, you seem to make statements with any evidence to back them up. Either you are lying, exaggerating, or you don’t want to provide this evidence. I rather vote for the latter.

 

[Joanna]

Dave Young:

Yes, I have heard that the Church recognizes the charismatic movement as legitimate. I just don’t know why. I have read some history of the Church. I am aware of the references in scripture. Did this disappear for 2000 years, only to reappear in the 1970’s? I mean no disparagement againist anyone who happens to be charismatic. I am a southern catholic familiar with the protestant pentecostal movement which has it’s roots here in South Carolina. I am simply asking: What authority in the Church blessed this movement?

Dave,

Here’s a bit of history on the Catholic Charismatic Renewal by a very holy priest, though he wouldn’t agree: ccc.garg.com/ccc/articles/Foster/Foster_001.html

 

[Redeemerslove]

beng:

Then there’s an article about Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Umm sorry, but there’s only Baptism of Water which also include Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The analogy made in that article (That when you’re first baptised you just pour syrup into your glass of milk, you need to stir it to really taste the syrup. Stir means being baptized by the Holy Spirit) is a dangerous theology. Hopefully it’ll be anathemized.

I doubt it, simply because it is a different description of conversion and renewal than you are use to, doesn’t mean its anathema. Problem is with many posters in this thread, they don’t seem to be able to do any cultural interpretation at all.

If a different term for the same thing experienced through the Ages of Christendom is reason for anathemizing - then Teresa of Avila, foundress of my order and Doctor of the Church, shouldn’t be a doctor of the Church. For she introduced many new terms into the Church: Including Intellectual Vision, Imaginative Vision, and many other terms.

Simply expressing a reality (conversion) with a different term (baptism of the holy spirit) is not enough for condemnation of that term.

“Then the LORD stirred up the spirit of the governor of Judah, Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, and the spirit of the high priest Joshua, son of Jehozadak, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people, so that they came and set to work on the house of the LORD of hosts, their God…”(Haggai 1:14)

According to the International Catholic Charismatic Movement their statutes have been approved. I have not been able to find this decree on the vatican website, nor contact information for the Pontifical Council for the Laity, but they are listed on many documents as attending Council events. Also, the Council does not have a list for all approvals they have made, only recent ones.

If: “Rome has spoken, the matter is settled.” - Saint Augustine

 

[Karl_Keating]

This thread has been deteriorating and largely has become a “so’s your old man” exchange among three or four people.

To the extent light could be shed on the issue through this thread, it has been. There doesn’t seem to be much additional light forthcoming, but there is plenty of heat.

That means it’s time for a break, folks.

This thread is now closed.