Are Charismatics truly Catholic?

[beng]

I thought this article would help with understanding if
Charismatics are truly Catholic! Enjoy

**ZENIT - The World Seen From Rome **

**Code: ZE04061022

****Date: 2004-06-10

****Charismatics Tell of Effects of the Holy Spirit (Part 1)

****Members Testify to a Life-Changing Encounter

**ROME, JUNE 10, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Profound friendship with Jesus Christ and a sure and strong sense of conversion are just two of the effects of the Holy Spirit, say charismatic renewal leaders.

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

It’s funny when charismatic is cornered they always rely on suff like this. Altough the Pope speak nicely to almost anything.

 

[John_Of_Cinci]

beng:

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

It’s funny when charismatic is cornered they always rely on suff like this. Altough the Pope speak nicely to almost anything.

I am not real sure how nice it is to be STUCK in a closed mind position (fake) when you let the Holy Spirit into yourself you experience a new life a hunger for the truth…(which is not fake)

“I began to experience profound changes within myself,” recalled Panozza, an Australian. “I found myself being led to a deeper love and devotion to the Blessed Eucharist. I experienced a hunger to know more about the Word of God, and avidly read and studied the Scriptures.”

Panozza also found himself “letting go of long-held habits of impressing my own attitudes and beliefs onto other people. I began to see myself more in the light of being loved by Almighty God, and that love became mine to share.”

I also believe the Pope spends a lot of time on his knees in front of Our Lord in the Eucharist before he speaks nicely about anything…

 

[beng]

John Of Cinci:

I am not real sure how nice it is to be STUCK in a closed mind position (fake) when you let the Holy Spirit into yourself you experience a new life a hunger for the truth…(which is not fake)

Are you saying that the Bible is not inspired by the Holy Spirit? Well, the Bible already proveide the test about the “suppose” gifts. And according to the test 99% of Charismatics are fake because they violate the rule of faith in the Bible.

Do you think the Holy Spirit is the spirit of confussion and contradiction.

“I began to experience profound changes within myself,” recalled Panozza, an Australian. “I found myself being led to a deeper love and devotion to the Blessed Eucharist. I experienced a hunger to know more about the Word of God, and avidly read and studied the Scriptures.”

Panozza also found himself “letting go of long-held habits of impressing my own attitudes and beliefs onto other people. I began to see myself more in the light of being loved by Almighty God, and that love became mine to share.”

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

I also believe the Pope spends a lot of time on his knees in front of Our Lord in the Eucharist before he speaks nicely about anything…

Does this mean that Budhism and Islam is right?

 

[Josh_Miller]

While I don’t disregard the tongues phenomenon, I think it’s quite frequent that Charismatics who claim to speak in tongues really don’t have the miraculous gift as one of their charisms.

It’s possible that with the expectation of speaking in tongues (an expectation apparent in Pentecostals, for example), we drive ourselves psychologically in to the belief that we do have the charism.

It also seems significant that when the Holy Spirit descends upon the original Apostles, speaking in tongues served a function; it was a mode by which they were to evangelize to people not known to them. An indecipherable tongue that not even the speaker understands seems to serve no function.

In short, it’s obviously possible (since Catholic teaching holds to it), but I don’t think we see it nearly as often as some would have us believe.

 

[Peg]

There is a difference between “speaking” in tongues and “praying” in tongues. Speaking is for the congregation. Praying is between you and God through the Holy Spirit.

I have been to numerous charismatic Masses. I love the joy and enthusiasm. It is not however my main style of worship.

 

[Redeemerslove]

Marie:

We are all Charismatic through our Confirmation as Catholics. As to what we do with it, that is another matter. Some people appear to get very hung up on those gifts and never advance beyond and mature. Others I have found to be quite mature and good Catholics. It’s a mixed bag. I am more Cath-O-Matic than anything though so who knows how to judge this movement.

You seem to have no idea of what Charismatics are about, nor the breadth of the Movement. I think a good example of the Charismatic movement is found in The Word Among Us Magazine, written by the Mother of God Community in Maryland. If you know how much Protestants fight against the term “Mother of God,” you would know that this community has thrown down the gauntlet simply by the choice of it’s community name.

The Vatican has approved the movement…but it does state the guidlines. I would trust those in the movement who follow those. As to the overall population of the movement I really don’t know.

This is the bottom line, the Vatican has approved the movement. People who tend to not like this movement, have a problem handling their feelings, thoughts and behaviors - in short they have a low self-knowledge in Spiritual Theology terms. At least that is my experience.

 

[Redeemerslove]

Pray4Life:

Am I right in inferring from this quote that you are saying that the Church has taken a “hands off approach” to devotions such as the brown scapular devotion (because she doesn’t want, in your opinion, to “interfere in something (real or unreal) that brings people closer to God?”) If I am understanding you correctly, than you picked the wrong example. The brown scapular devotion has been encouraged and promoted by the Church since its inception. Out of countless examples of Popes, saints, and Church approved Marian apparitions that openly encourage this devotion, I shall pick one of the most recent: our Holy Father himself wears the brown scapular and regards the devotion highly. Please refer to this link : catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=3525. I don’t really think this qualifies as a “hands off approach” but to the contrary, quite an endorsement.

Any sacramental can be used, and any devotion practiced, superstitiously. Superstition is definitely something to be guarded carefully against, and good education about the reasons and roots of these devotions/sacramentals is an important step towards that.

Just had to throw in my two cents there God bless you!

Being a professed Secular Discalced Carmelite of eight years, I can tell you that the holy father belongs to my order. Yes the Discalced Carmelites started out as a “movement.” But five hundred years later, we’re still here.

And the brown scapular is our habit. That’s why the Holy Father wears it.

 

[beng]

Peg:

There is a difference between “speaking” in tongues and “praying” in tongues. Speaking is for the congregation. Praying is between you and God through the Holy Spirit.

You wanna do tongue in front of congregation? Fine. But you’ll need interpreter(s). If you don’t have it DON’T DO TONGUE!!

1 Cor 14:27-28
*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. *

 

[beng]

Redeemerslove:

You seem to have no idea of what Charismatics are about, nor the breadth of the Movement.

I do know that 99% do fake tongues.

This is the bottom line, the Vatican has approved the movement.

Vatican also approved SSPX when It was first started.

People who tend to not like this movement, have a problem handling their feelings, thoughts and behaviors - in short they have a low self-knowledge in Spiritual Theology terms.

I only know biblical knowledge. And it seems to me, using the Bible (per 1Tim 3:16-17), that 99 of Charismatics retain abusive practices.

 

[Redeemerslove]

Mandi:

I think that the question asked at the beginning of this thread is extremely accurate. After reading all this I have come to the conclusion that Charismatic Chatholics have started their own religion.

Is this what the Holy Father said? You are putting words in his mouth, and could be considered to be in Schism - since he lauded the Charismatic Movement.

All that baptism of the holy spirit is, is an experiential deepening of the Sacraments of Confirmation. The disciples on Pentecost Day did have Chrism put on their foreheads, but they were confirmed nonetheless. God is not limited by the performance of the Sacraments by human hands: Think about perfect contrition…

So before you jump the gun, you might want to stick to what the Holy Father has said about the movement, before you release your own decrees.:ehh:

 

[Redeemerslove]

beng:

I do know that 99% do fake tongues.

You do, can you give me the name of your study please? I would also like to review your research methodology.

Vatican also approved SSPX when It was first started.

They may have, but the Charismatic movement has been around for more than twenty-five years to my recollection.:ehh:

I only know biblical knowledge. And it seems to me, using the Bible (per 1Tim 3:16-17), that 99 of Charismatics retain abusive practices.

I think you mean 99 *percent *of Charismatics retain abusive practices. And do you mean Second Timothy 3:16-17? First Timothy 3:16-17 is:
1 TIM 3:16:

Undeniably great is the mystery of devotion, Who 7 was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed to the Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory.

There is no 1 Timothy 3:17. You must be a Protestant to quote the bible and not refer at all to The Holy Father? If so, this has to be considered.

 

[Redeemerslove]

beng:

Are you saying that the Bible is not inspired by the Holy Spirit? Well, the Bible already proveide the test about the “suppose” gifts. And according to the test 99% of Charismatics are fake because they violate the rule of faith in the Bible.

We Catholics are not bible alone. we have a living Magsiterium and composed of very educated theologians to guide us.

[quotes]
I can give you thousands of opposing testimonies showing how disapointing and bland Charismatic is from people who have experienced Charismaticism.Thousands, really? I would like to see them.

Does this mean that Budhism and Islam is right?

We are talking about a ***movement ***(words of the Holy Father) within a religion, not a separate religion by itself.

 

[beng]

Redeemerslove:

You do, can you give me the name of your study please? I would also like to review your research methodology.

Name me ONE VALID person who can interpreted VALID tongue. Give me names and email and I will contact him/her.

They may have, but the Charismatic movement has been around for more than twenty-five years to my recollection.:ehh:

Arianisme was embraced by 80% of ALL Bishops (and this is when the church was still truly united) and it has been around since… I’d say quite a while.

I think you mean 99 *percent *of Charismatics retain abusive practices.

Yes

And do you mean Second Timothy 3:16-17? First Timothy 3:16-17 is:

There is no 1 Timothy 3:17.

Second Timothy.

You must be a Protestant to quote the bible and not refer at all to The Holy Father? If so, this has to be considered.

So quoting the Bible make me a Protestant?

Look up the first few pages. I give Augustine which was, what do you know, AN EARLY CHURCH FATHER.

 

[Redeemerslove]

Tom D:

On my journey to Rome I passed through Pentecostal and Charismatic churches. In my experience of this movement I had to suspend my objectivity to such an extent that I had to move on. For most of them it seemed to be more about who had the best tongue and how quckly they could conjur up the Holy Ghost.

Catholic Charismatics are quite different than Pentecostal or Protestant Pentecostals. You seem to miss the distinction.

A wise and Holy man told me that one way of knowing if what someone was saying was from God was to ask the follwing:

Did it have depth?
Did it have clarity?
Did it have simplicity?

In my experience nothing I heard had any of the above.

A wise and holy man in your experience. Depth clarity and simplicity are great attributes to look for - so is that is conforms to the Teaching of the Magisterium . :ehh:

 

[beng]

Redeemerslove:

We Catholics are not bible alone.

Does this make Bible useless?

If I gave prove from Bible then this makes me a Protestant?

Since Bible would never contradict Tradition, what is wrong with quoting Bible only when Bible is sufficient enough for the particular purpose?

we have a living Magsiterium and composed of very educated theologians to guide us.

I have cited Augustine and one Fr William G. Most who is a very competent theologian. I also cited one Patrick Madrid.

Thousands, really? I would like to see them.

Do you really? what about just a 20+ testimonies found in this thread alone first?

We are talking about a ***movement ***(words of the Holy Father) within a religion, not a separate religion by itself.

Arianism was a movement. SSPX was a movement. Montanist was a movement etc

 

[Redeemerslove]

beng:

Name me ONE VALID person who can interpreted VALID tongue. Give me names and email and I will contact him/her.

I don’t have to, you made the assertion that their tongues were invalid. The burden of proof is yours.

Arianisme was embraced by 80% of ALL Bishops (and this is when the church was still truly united) and it has been around since… I’d say quite a while.

Until you can prove that this movement is heretical, and the Holy Father has said nothing of the sort, the burden of proof is again, on you.

So quoting the Bible make me a Protestant?

Nope I was just asking, but quoting second Timothy is very suspicious. And you didn’t answer the question: Are you a Protestant?

Look up the first few pages. I give Augustine which was, what do you know, AN EARLY CHURCH FATHER.

You did not cite Augustine, unless you are talking about an earlier post of yours. The specific post I responded to, had no mention of Augustine in it at all.

 

[Redeemerslove]

beng:

Does this make [the] Bible useless?

The bible is never useless. But citing a text about scripture being useful for refutation, etc., has nothing to do with citing abuse or condemnation of abuse, in the bible.

If I gave prove from Bible then this makes me a Protestant?

I didn’t say you were a Protestant, I asked. And you still haven’t directly answered my question: Yes or no: Are…you…a…Protestant?

Since Bible would never contradict Tradition, what is wrong with quoting Bible only when Bible is sufficient enough for the particular purpose?

When it has nothing to do with the question being considered?

I have cited Augustine and one Fr William G. Most who is a very competent theologian. I also cited one Patrick Madrid.

I did not read your earlier posts, I responded to the one I quoted.

Do you really? what about just a 20+ testimonies found in this thread alone first?

You said thousands, I’m waiting for thousands - which is what you stated you had.

Arianism was a movement. SSPX was a movement. Montanist was a movement etc

And they were condemned in their turn, the Charismatic Movement has not been condemned. And a proper representation of it has not been made in this thread…

 

[Redeemerslove]

Redeemerslove:

Is this what the Holy Father said? You are putting words in his mouth, and could be considered to be in Schism - since he lauded the Charismatic Movement.

All that baptism of the holy spirit is, is an experiential deepening of the Sacrament of Confirmation. The disciples on Pentecost Day did have Chrism put on their foreheads, but they were confirmed nonetheless. God is not limited by the performance of the Sacraments by human hands: Think about perfect contrition…

So before you jump the gun, you might want to stick to what the Holy Father has said about the movement, before you release your own decrees.:ehh:

 

[Redeemerslove]

beng:

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

It’s funny when charismatic is cornered they always rely on suff like this. Altough the Pope speak nicely to almost anything.

It’s funny when a spiritual Pharisee is defeated totally in his position, he relies on personal attacks.

 

[Redeemerslove]

Mandi:

You can do this and STILL be Catholic???

Wake me up from my nightmare!!!

Do they do this?