W
wet-rat
Guest
Perhaps it is especially necessary today for “miraculous proof” that such a thing as a “divine origin” exists?
- Status
B
beng
Guest
Why not use this as a prove? One could even witness the miracle using their own eyes.
Plus 99% fo tongues today are fake.
W
wet-rat
Guest
beng said:
I have no opinion as to the validity of particular Charismatic reports of charisms. I would lump them in with the many private revelations that are reported.
This means, however, that I’m not going to discount them outright.
My only point is that we can not say with authority that widespread charisms only were appropriate to the early Church. They may be appropriate to other periods of Church history.
That is why it is important to follow the guidance of the Church pertaining to these matters. Apparently bounds exist for the Charismatic movement. If this movement is operating outside of those bounds, then it is suspect because God gave the Church authority to bind and loose.
B
beng
Guest
No. I’m not saying that the Gift of Tongues cease to be given nowadays.
Just that, since it’s no longer necessary, the gift would only be given for very few people. Unlike in Charismatic where everyone supposedly speak tongues.
That is why I suggest to check the spirit (1John 4:1). How? Refer to my bold red statement.
M
MIDGIE
Guest
Beng, you need to listen to the Holy Father. You may be just as sinful as Paul was by leaning unto your own understanding. You could be fighting against God Himself!
***«I am convinced that this movement is a sign of His action (of the Spirit). The world is much in need of this action of the Holy Spirit, and it needs many instruments for this action. …] Now I see this movement, this activity everywhere.» ** *
Private audience of Pope John Paul II with the ICCRO Council, Rome, 11 December 1979
***«This year marks the 20th anniversary of the Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church. The vigour and fruitfulness of the Renewal certainly attest to the powerful presence of the Holy Spirit at work in the Church in these years after the Second Vatican Council. Of course, the Spirit has guided the Church in every age, producing a great variety of gifts among the faithful. Because of the Spirit, the church preserves a continual youthful vitality, and the Charismatic Renewal is an eloquent manifestation of this vitality today, a bold statement of what “the Spirit is saying to the churches” (Rev. 2:7) as we approach the close of the second millennium.» ** *
Address of Pope John Paul II at the Sixth International Leaders’ conference, Rome, 15 May 1987
***«The Catholic charismatic movement is one of the many fruits of the Second Vatican Council, which, like a new Pentecost, led to an extraordinary flourishing in the Church’s life of groups and movements particularly sensitive to the action of the Spirit. How can we not give thanks for the precious spirituals fruits that the Renewal has produced in the life of the Church and in the lives of so many people? How many lay faithful - men, women, young people, adults and elderly - have been able to experience in their own lives the amazing power of the Spirit and his gifts! How many people have rediscovered faith, the joy of prayer, the power and beauty of the Word of God, translating all this into generous service in the Church’s mission! How many lives have been profoundly changed! For all this today, together with you, I wish to praise and thank the Holy Spirit.» ** *
Audience of Pope John Paul II with the National Service Committee of the Italian “Renewal in the Spirit”, Rome, 4 April 1998
Read more of what the Pope has said about the Charismatic Renewal in the Church: iccrs.org/popes.htm
God bless you
***«I am convinced that this movement is a sign of His action (of the Spirit). The world is much in need of this action of the Holy Spirit, and it needs many instruments for this action. …] Now I see this movement, this activity everywhere.» ** *
Private audience of Pope John Paul II with the ICCRO Council, Rome, 11 December 1979
***«This year marks the 20th anniversary of the Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church. The vigour and fruitfulness of the Renewal certainly attest to the powerful presence of the Holy Spirit at work in the Church in these years after the Second Vatican Council. Of course, the Spirit has guided the Church in every age, producing a great variety of gifts among the faithful. Because of the Spirit, the church preserves a continual youthful vitality, and the Charismatic Renewal is an eloquent manifestation of this vitality today, a bold statement of what “the Spirit is saying to the churches” (Rev. 2:7) as we approach the close of the second millennium.» ** *
Address of Pope John Paul II at the Sixth International Leaders’ conference, Rome, 15 May 1987
***«The Catholic charismatic movement is one of the many fruits of the Second Vatican Council, which, like a new Pentecost, led to an extraordinary flourishing in the Church’s life of groups and movements particularly sensitive to the action of the Spirit. How can we not give thanks for the precious spirituals fruits that the Renewal has produced in the life of the Church and in the lives of so many people? How many lay faithful - men, women, young people, adults and elderly - have been able to experience in their own lives the amazing power of the Spirit and his gifts! How many people have rediscovered faith, the joy of prayer, the power and beauty of the Word of God, translating all this into generous service in the Church’s mission! How many lives have been profoundly changed! For all this today, together with you, I wish to praise and thank the Holy Spirit.» ** *
Audience of Pope John Paul II with the National Service Committee of the Italian “Renewal in the Spirit”, Rome, 4 April 1998
Read more of what the Pope has said about the Charismatic Renewal in the Church: iccrs.org/popes.htm
God bless you
C
CatholicGeek
Guest
Beng, I see that people have been hammering you for your opinions, and for this I am sorry. I have to admit, I do not understand where you are coming from, so please bear with me.
It sounds like your challenge (quoted above) is based on the scripture from 1 Cor 14:5. Is this correct? Paul does say in 1 Cor 14:28 “But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God.” This would seem to support your argument and challenge.
When I read the whole section it appears to me that Paul is providing guidelines for order in church. Maybe sort of like the GIRM we have today for our liturgy? But I also see further down in 1 Cor 15:34 “women sould keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says”. It does not appear that this applies to the church today, based on the current liturgical norms. If it did, women would not speak a word in church, either as lector, or participant.
My thought here is maybe is it possible that Paul is giving instructions relevant to the church of the time. I’m not arguing that we should ignore it, but that we should look at it in the light of tradition and the authority of the church.
My other question is about 1 Cor 14:13 “Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray to be able to interpret.” Interpretation seems a pretty important thing in this whole section of scripture, but if Paul is encouraging those people who speak in tongues to pray for the ability to interpret, doesn’t that mean that not everyone can interpret?
I assume/hope that this is sarcasm?
May the Holy Spirit guide this discussion!
God Bless
B
beng
Guest
So if I don’t agree to the woefully wrong practice of Charismaticism then I’m going against God? Really.
I thought I already adress about Papal Audiences. What do you expect the Pope to say? Outright condemnation? He’s just being a fatherly shepard.
He even say nice things to Dalai Lama. Altough he should know better how wrong Budhism is.
I just hope that in time Charismaticism would get a strong warning so it could become a REAL renewal. They could start by banning fake tongues (99% of tongues are fake), sugar coated sermons, clapping/waving during Mass and laying of hands. Yup, I think those are the things that need to be gone. The charismatic spirit should be stronger than ever.
And what about aplying that test? what do you got to lose?
I suggest anyone who encounter tongue ala Charismaticism challange them to interpret it if they do it in front of you. If they can’t, then it’s either fake or disobedience to what Paul said
B
beng
Guest
No problem.
OK
Yes
Differentiate between discipine and doctrine of faith.
Has there been any Church authority who said that those speak in tongue should flaunt it?
When Paul is talking about tongue this is about the unchanging nature of the Gift of The Holy Spirit, whcih is God. While woman being silent is liturgical norms.
If they can’t interpret it then:
- They should pray for it
- They should keep it to themselves and not flaunt it.
And you know what? I NEVER been in any charismatic where any of the attandent pray for the ability to interpret.
You know why? Because if one could really interpret it, then maybe all the fakeness would be reveal. Charismatics are to scared of this possibility.
This is as clear as crystal.
No it’s not. Saul comitted a sin by defying what he was ordered. I don’t see I’m comitting any sin by calling it like it is.
C
chosunhoon
Guest
And I completely agree. I never said everyone can get all gifts, but I do believe that God gives at least some gifts in accordance to his will:
1 Cor 12:7 - Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.
Because all people would be given the holy spirit of God as prophesied in Acts 2:17:
'In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
This was directly referring to God’s people. While Mark 16:9-20 is a bit disputed, I do believe Mark 16:17-18 has something important to say:
And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." (Mark 16:17-18)
I’m not suggesting the everyone who picks up snakes will get well, but I am suggesting that these gifts function within the Church, though not the same way for everyone.
You’re misunderstanding me. All of God’s people are given the Holy Spirit. With this Holy Spirit, all of God’s people have some charism, but not all have the exact same gifts for obvious reasons (see 1 Cor 12:4-11).
Exactly! I totally agree.
And again I agree.
I don’t disagree here either
While 1 Cor 14 addresses the Corinthian’s problem with misuing the gifts, it’s certainly possible that they did have different gifts.
And I call this ‘biblical evangelism’:
1 Cor 2:4-5 - “And my speech and my preaching were **not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power ** [gk. dunamis], that your faith should NOT be in the wisdom of men but in the power [gk. dunamis] of God.”
1 Thess 1:5 - because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power [gk. dunamis], with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction. You know how we lived among you for your sake
Rom 15:18-19 - I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done-- by the power [gk. dunamis] of signs and miracles, through the power [gk. dunamis] of the Spirit. So from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum, I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ.
I believe that entire premise is erroneous. The gifts exist for the purpose of building up the body. The spiritual gifts include administration, teaching, and evangelism (1 Cor 12:28, Eph 4:11). To say they’re less necessarily is to say the teachers of the Church (i.e. Magisterium) are less necessary. The gifts exist to build up the body towards maturity (see all of 1 Cor 14 and Eph 4:12-13).
And as I mentioned before, St. Paul’s view on evangelism heavily relied upon the Holy Spirit’s miraculous ministry, not human wisdom or rational arguments.
And to consider the gifts like tongues, or prophesy as useless now is perhaps to mock the holy Spirit (reminds me of Luke 12:10). Because if the gifts are useless it doesn’t make sense for St. Paul to encourage individuals to desire them (1 Cor 12:28, 1 Cor 14:1), which was a direct command - one that some don’t seem to obey… (not that I’m pointing fingers)
C
CatholicGeek
Guest
Are you asking me to Differentiate? Or are you making the statement that the difference between women speaking in church and speaking in tongues is discipline vs doctrine. If the latter, who is making that determination? Is it more than your opinion, entitled as you are to it, or do you know of something the church teaches that makes this proclaimation?
I don’t believe flaunting any gifts is ever appropriate for a christian. I would suggest that those performing this “flauting” would not consider themselves as flauting the gift.
As above, one should not flaunt. But one person’s flaunt is not another’s. Perhaps you are more sensitive to it because of your convictions about it? I know that I can be like that when dealing with something I do not agree with.
I have heard this before, but I do not think it is what the church teaches. Paul calls it the least of the gifts. I think some people in the renewal may be overzealous in this point.
I have seen it prayed for on occassion. The times where when a person spoke in tongues during a time of quiet, where only the one voice is heard. They prayed for an interpretation, and someone received it and shared it with the group.
No, I personally do not know why. I find it difficult for anyone to know.
I was taking the post to mean you were suggesting of yourself that you never sin. That wouldn’t be to good!
I found some info on catholic-jhb.org.za/tracts/renewal.htm
From a 1969 statement issued by the United States bishops, we read: *“Theologically the movement has legitimate reasons for existence. It has a strong biblical basis. It would be difficult to inhibit the working of the Spirit, which manifested itself so abundantly in the early Church. Thus the charismatic gifts of today cannot simply be denied as impossible or rejected as contrary to Catholic teaching. Even misuse of these gifts does not justify condemnation of the gifts themselves.” *
It appears to me from this and from statements made my JP2 that the church recognizes the charasmatic movement, the renewal as the call it, as a work of the Holy Spirit, not just a “fad”. They don’t say that it is perfect or infalable. People are people, they sin and fall short (don’t we all).
JP2’s statement "I am convinced that this (charasmatic renewal movement) is a sign of his (the Holy Spirit) action." convinces me, maybe not everyone, that he believe this to be the work of the Holy Spirit.
B
beng
Guest
Ok
You make a case for Numbers and then go to Acts?
I don’t get it.
These signs are necessary because they have to convert the unbelievers (which is why tongues would be usefull). Hardly the case nowadays where about 50% of the world are Christian.
This is my understanding too.
Yes. That is why Paul was listing them all.
Umm, all those verses were for the time of the Apostles. Where signs are necessary
St Augustine is talking about tongues which is the easily abused and hard to detect its authenticity.
Really, seing that God picked Paul actually proves that one need wisdom. Paul is by far the most effective Apostle than the other because HE WAS SMART AND EDUCATED!
It’s incorrect to seperate wisdom and Holy Spirit, since Holy Spirit gives wisdom. Not always in a sense that dumb people could be made wise (altho this had happened) but mostly an educated people is chosen to effectively preach the Gospel. We have people like Justin Martyr, Origen, Augustine and even Thomas Aquinas.
Did I say useless? I thought I say unnecessary.
And about Paul command that all individual to desire them, well, someone already brought that up. And my answer is, if you read the complete verse you sould see that he mentioned it in a rhetoric way not a direct encouragement.
B
beng
Guest
C
CatholicGeek
Guest
What do I think? I think Paul was talking about a discipline - setting order - for these people in both cases.
I have read the articles posted, by you and by others.
I don’t argue that there are no misuses of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Some probably do have an over-reliance on emotion, although this is a tough argument for the men/women who have been a part of this renewal for over 20 years. Some are in my parish, and I see the fruit of their lives, which includes daily Mass, eucharistic adoration, and solid traditional catholic practices and values.
It seems to me that the main point of difference I have is that you seem to believe that this is a FAD, not a work of the Holy Spirit. If this is / was a work of the Holy Spirit, why are you so adamantly against it? I on the other hand feel that it is a work of the Holy Spirit, and feel that the church does support this view.
That is not to say that the church has given a blanket approval of it, nor that it has not urged some level of caution, correction or direction.
You have stated that 99% of tongues is fake. I find this hard to believe and see no supportive evidence of this claim. If this were true, I would think that the church would issue some guidelines or corrections to this “abuse”. It’s been around in close to its current for, with prayer groups praying in tongues, for over 30 years.
In your posts, I find some good points, but not a conclusive argument for your point of view. Some of your statements come off as you knowing better than everyone else. (Maybe this is a downfall of this mode of communication, not being able to hear a person’s voice.) If so, perhaps you can write to the local bishops or the pope to state your case for this. If it is an abuse, with 99% being fake, it should be rooted out of the church. On the other hand, if it is of God, nothing you can do will stop it.
I pray that God shed His light on both you, I and others who read this thread. God Bless
B
beng
Guest
If Paul is speaking about mere discipline when it concerns tongue than why did he put such a strong words:
1 Cor 14
1 Make love your aim, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.
Here, Paul single out prophesising.
2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 3 On the other hand, he who prophesies speaks to men for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.
This is the reason why Paul prefers prophesising and said that prophesising edify the church. Tongues is seen as rather “selfish” while prophesising is for the good of many.
5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless some one interprets, so that the church may be edified.
I found it funny that many [fake] tongues advocate use verse 5 to claim that Paul encourage to speak tongues. But in a fact if we look at it closely, Paul is simply being rhetorical.
In here even he said that someone should interpret. Paul is heart struck for the faithful to edify the church and focus on that, not unintelligible tongues
6 Now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how shall I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching?
Here he slammed again tongues without interpretation. It gets interesting below.
7 If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will any one know what is played? 8 And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle?
He used analogies to show the uselessness of tongues without interpretation. (but seems that Charismatic doesn’t care about interpretation. They just like to “tongue”. It’s cool)
9 So with yourselves; if you in a tongue utter speech that is not intelligible, how will any one know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air.
Whoa, Paul say that tongue without interpretation is un-intelligible and doing so is like speaking into the air (uselessness).
10 There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning; 11 but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me.
Again, another emphasize on the uselessness of tongue without interpretation.
12 So with yourselves; since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church. 13 Therefore,** he who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret**.
Again and again and again Paul stressed the need for interpretation after speaking od the uselessness of tongue without interpretation using analogies above.
14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 15 What am I to do? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also.
And again, Paul stressed the importance of interpretation. I don’t know how many times he has done this since the first chapter. But I don’t think he had enough. Read more.
16 Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how can any one in the position of an outsider say the “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17 For you may give thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.
This is a prelude of Paul’s next warning. Which is "if you speak tongues in front of fellow believer, YOU BETTER KNOW HOW TO INTERPRET IT!
continue…
B
beng
Guest
18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all; 19 nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue. 20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; be babes in evil, but in thinking be mature.
Again, in church (church could also mean assembly of the faithful) Paul said that he’d rather speak a mere 5 words that is understandable than 10,000 useless tongues.
He even said to not be like children. What did he mean? Well, perhaps people who speak tongues thinks that with a lot of words their tongue would be usefull. But then he’d be wrong.
21 In the law it is written, “By men of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.” 22 Thus, tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers.
This is a key point. So, in a prayer group if ANYONE start to speak tongue WITHOUT interpretation YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DOUBT THE VALIDITY OF THE TONGUE!! Most likely they are fake.
23 If, therefore, the whole church assembles and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.
Now, these verses are interesting because it seems that Paul went a step ahead to show the uselessness of tongue without interpretation and on the other hand he also went a step ahed to show the usefullness of prophesy.
Look at verse 23. Even to an unbeliever Paul said that the unbeliever will think that the one who speak tongues (without interpretation) is mad. So it doesn’t even edify him. But on verse 24, if all prophesies then even the unbeliever will be convicted.
26 What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.
Here Paul said what are the arrangement is when people come together. It seems that if there’s tongue, there should be someone who interpret it. And all should be done for edification of the church obviously. not oneself.
27 If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. 28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God.
chapter 28 is the biggest bomb for those who speak fake tongues (and 99% of tongues aout there are fake). if you are in charismatic group and no one is doing the interpretation THERE SHOULDN’T BE ANY TONGUE SESSION TO BEGIN WITH! KEEP SILENCE! But if they keep flaunting their fake tongue, then it’s obviously a fake and those people need to be shown the error of their practice.
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30 If a revelation is made to another sitting by, let the first be silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged; 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,
Again, the emphasize on prophesy and interpretation.
34 the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35 If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
Now, this is the first that CatholicGeek gave. But see, this verse only appear ONCE, while all the warning about tongue, the need for interpretation, the usefullness of prophesy were repeated by Paul so many times.
This is about discipline! While the issue with tongue, interpretation and prophesy is about doctrine that it bears repeating time and time.
I’ll adress more point below.
Again, in church (church could also mean assembly of the faithful) Paul said that he’d rather speak a mere 5 words that is understandable than 10,000 useless tongues.
He even said to not be like children. What did he mean? Well, perhaps people who speak tongues thinks that with a lot of words their tongue would be usefull. But then he’d be wrong.
21 In the law it is written, “By men of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.” 22 Thus, tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers.
This is a key point. So, in a prayer group if ANYONE start to speak tongue WITHOUT interpretation YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DOUBT THE VALIDITY OF THE TONGUE!! Most likely they are fake.
23 If, therefore, the whole church assembles and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.
Now, these verses are interesting because it seems that Paul went a step ahead to show the uselessness of tongue without interpretation and on the other hand he also went a step ahed to show the usefullness of prophesy.
Look at verse 23. Even to an unbeliever Paul said that the unbeliever will think that the one who speak tongues (without interpretation) is mad. So it doesn’t even edify him. But on verse 24, if all prophesies then even the unbeliever will be convicted.
26 What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.
Here Paul said what are the arrangement is when people come together. It seems that if there’s tongue, there should be someone who interpret it. And all should be done for edification of the church obviously. not oneself.
27 If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. 28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God.
chapter 28 is the biggest bomb for those who speak fake tongues (and 99% of tongues aout there are fake). if you are in charismatic group and no one is doing the interpretation THERE SHOULDN’T BE ANY TONGUE SESSION TO BEGIN WITH! KEEP SILENCE! But if they keep flaunting their fake tongue, then it’s obviously a fake and those people need to be shown the error of their practice.
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30 If a revelation is made to another sitting by, let the first be silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged; 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,
Again, the emphasize on prophesy and interpretation.
34 the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35 If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
Now, this is the first that CatholicGeek gave. But see, this verse only appear ONCE, while all the warning about tongue, the need for interpretation, the usefullness of prophesy were repeated by Paul so many times.
This is about discipline! While the issue with tongue, interpretation and prophesy is about doctrine that it bears repeating time and time.
I’ll adress more point below.
B
beng
Guest
Good. I wouldn’t think that tongue is the fruit in all that. Probably the feling of community is. Because, as I said 99% of tongues out there are fake.
The FAD i’m talking about is the FAKE TONGUE. I believe that there are real tongue even today (only 1%)
And I go against such FAD because IT IS NOT the work of the Holy Spirit even though they claim that it is.
They are very wrong and never read 1 Cor 14 carefully. They just want to feel that they “have” something. They neglect that they actually HAVE something. And that is the sacraments, more importantly, the Eucharist. When the priest consecrate the bread and wine THAT IS THE REAL HOLY SPIRIT AND IT’S AS REAL AS IT’S GET!! Why not contemplating on that but rather doing some fake tongue which is not by the Holy Spirit at all.
For the true tongue, not only the church supports the view, but also the Bible. BUT MOST OF TONGUE TODAY ARE FAKE! They could not pass the test!!
The Bible has provided us with the caution, correction and direction. And it shows that 99% of tongue out there ARE FAKE (just because they were used in front of believers without interpretation)
It’s probably because tongues in Charismaticism doesn’t create enough harm that the church should be concern about (like South American’s Liberty Theology)
I hope they would be strong warning later on. And here I am doing the work to warn people.
Well, my Bishop is Tod Brown who is the protege of, none other than, the only,… tret tet tet… Cardinal Mahoney.
But I do work to bring people understanding on this. I go to Charismatic prayer meeting and slowly trying to get them to understand better.
And about me knowing better than anyone else, well, I think that would be the case for SPOKENWORD. What I know is what’s on the Bible and maybe some from Newadvent (Catholic Encyclopedy online) and Patrick Madrid’s article that quotes Augustine. The Bible alone offers the strongest rebuttal for tongue current practice within the Charismatic circle.
Amen.
Keep reading 1 Cor 14. You’ll understand soon enough.
J
James_2_24
Guest
This kind of stuff from Charismatics makes my stomach turn! I have to deal with this in the area I am from. They often seem to think they are closer to God and anyone that isn’t like them doesn’t have as deep a relationship with God or understand God as deeply as they do.. Like I said you have witnessed it but not experienced it. You need to submitt yourself over to the Power of the Holy Spirit. You do not know what you are missing so I would suggest that you stop putting it down. Like I said the best kept secret in the Rcc, and you are an example of this much needed secret.
To say, “you need to submit yourself over to the power of the Holy Spirit” to someone is to imply that they have already not. That somehow you have been totally submissive to God and others have not. Thus, you have been given this gift that other Catholics have not because they are not open to God. I have had to deal with this Charismatic elitism a lot and it really bothers me.
And to call Beng an example as to why this “much needed secret” should be told to all Catholics… is to say Beng isn’t on your level and hasn’t the gift of the Holy Spirit that would be given him only if he would submit to God.
This attitude is also very dismissive of the sacraments. Confirmation is the outpouring the Holy Spirit! This sort of spiritual elitism is definitely anti-Catholic… it says the Holy Spirit you get from the Church in the sacrament isnt sufficient, and that anyone without their special ‘gift’ is deluded/poor/insufficient in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
If this speaking in tongues and other Charismatic stuff was sufficient or somehow a sign of a deeper and more submissive faith, then why do so many of us leave it for the Church and the Sacraments? ‘Better is one day in Thy courts than a thousand elsewhere’ - give me once partaking from the chalice over a lifetime of Charismatic phenomena!!!
I’m sorry if i come off as upset. I am a bit, I have to had to deal with this in several places… it’s almost as if you are looked at as not willing to let God FULLY and TOTALLY in your life if you do not speak in tongues like the rest of the Charismatics…
E
epiphania
Guest
Hi Rae,
The level of holiness of a person actually doesnt affect the gifts of the holy Spirit he’s been given in any way…lemme explain:
you need to make the distinction here between the fruit of the Spirit and the gifts. The fruit of the Spirit as mentioned in Gal 5:22…love,joy,peace patience…etc…come only through abiding in the vine and are a good indication of the person;s holiness…
the gifts however are just that: gifts.
They are not deserved by the person. They are given for the building up of the church, and also for building oneself up( tongues esp, as given in 1 Cor 12)
Now, the catholic church also mentions as gifts of the holy Spirit those in isiaih 12? (not sure)…temperance,fortitude and so on…these are again, not got “just like that”…they need some quality time with the Lord…
I was born catholic but the church meant nothing to me till I attended a charismatic retreat…that changed my whole life…turned it around just like that…and today I would say Im more catholic than I ever was and have a deep appreciation and love for the church…but i have to thank the movement which got me into it…
Its true its also done a lot of damage…there is a general obsession with gifts which is not too good…again thats not with everyone…you will find a lot of people (atleast in my homeplace,India) who take their faith seriously today only because of teh experience of Christ they had in a retreat of this sort…hope this helps…!
Blessings,
Leo
E
epiphania
Guest
You really cant say that Beng…there are people who fake it I agree…but in my experience,most of the cases Ive come across are genuine…I know…cause I speak in tongues myself…!!
There are two types…generally…
- The usual one is where you speak in tongues, you dont understand anything taht you speak - youre speaking “mysteries in Spirit” (1 Cor 14:2)
"For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God, for no one listens; he utters mysteries in spirit. " - * no one listens*
and God who understands what you speak answers that…this is only for your own edification…
The other form is the language of a variety of tongues…which is what happened at pentecost when Peter spoke in one language and others heard it in several languages…
I just didnt care too much about it…but the next day I saw written on a car “Masha Allah”…I found a muslim friend and asked him what it meant and he said its a term of praise…
see…most tongues is actually praise of God…it actually overflows at times when youre so awed by God youre unable to find words of expression…but you can pray in tongues at will also…
Blessings,
Leo
B
beng
Guest
Do you understand what you’re saying?You really cant say that Beng…there are people who fake it I agree…but in my experience,most of the cases Ive come across are genuine…I know…cause I speak in tongues myself…!!
Have you ever pray to interpret it?
Have your tongues been interpreted?
Did you speak it in front of believer without interpretation? (if you do, then it’s probably a fake)
That is why if there’s no one who interpreted it, one better not speak tongue at all (1 cor 14:27:28).
I would question your tongue if in a prayer group you start doing your tonegue when there’s no one who could interpret it.
“Masha Allah” or maybe “Masya Allah” just means “Dear God.” Muslems say this when they saw something disheartening. For example, you tell a Moslem woman that your husband just beat you. The Moslem woman would say “Masha Allah”
In my observation differnt Charismatic group have differnt word. Such as if someone is a “graduate” from a certian charismatic group then his “tongue” will resamble that group. I have observed this thing. This further proves the fake-ness.
This would be jubilation chanting. Not tongues. So, sorry, you probably don’t have the gift of tongue. But you may continue doing jubilation chanting but be careful of Mat 6:7.
And if one doesn’t know what to say to God then simply go for simple prayer like Glory Be, Our Father or Hail Mary. The Holy Spirit knows your heart.
- Status