R
RosaryCrusader
Guest
Here’s an audiosancto sermon by a well studied Thomistic Priest on this very subject:
audiosancto.org/sermon/20030119-The-True-Pentecost.html
audiosancto.org/sermon/20030119-The-True-Pentecost.html
- Status
C
crazzeto
Guest
PatienceAndLove,
I think what you meant to say is that “…no on can argue that Fr. Larry Richards is not orthodox” in liu of “…no on can argue that Fr. Larry Richards is orthodox”
I love Fr. Larry Richards BTW, his talk on confession is particularly powerful!
I think what you meant to say is that “…no on can argue that Fr. Larry Richards is not orthodox” in liu of “…no on can argue that Fr. Larry Richards is orthodox”
I love Fr. Larry Richards BTW, his talk on confession is particularly powerful!
O
Ockham
Guest
Who is this priest?
H
HCC
Guest
Apparently, the Charismatic Movement kept a lot of people in the Church and brought a lot of people to the Church in the 1970s/80s. A lot of people associated with that movement are the mainstream OF orthodox Catholics of today.
I was dragged to a number of charismatic masses in the 1990s. There was great lament that it was dying out. I met a range of people from very inline with the Magesterium, hard core Marianists, to really out there people, who believed if you don’t have the gift of tounges you aren’t truly praying, to a woman who was never baptized, but went to Mass everyday and took Holy Communion.
There was lots of hand holding, people bringing big sippy cups to church with water to drink through the long Mass and healings and prophecies, etc…, some came in their sweats and kicked their feet up over the backs of pews, most hand their hands up to the sky through the entire Mass. The priests all seemed to be engaged in the 12 steps and there seemed to be a blurring between the 12 steps and Church teaching, as if they were one in the same. One priest announced that that was going to be his last Mass, as he was leaving the priesthood. He then made up his own Eucharistic Prayer and said all sorts of kooky things through Mass. I didn’t receive Holy Communion that night. Then they all prayed over him and anointed him with oil.
After Mass, or during, can’t remember, maybe both…everyone was invited to come forward and be prayed over and anointed by lay people with “gifts.” So, I did and I did not like the feeling. I ended up on the floor and they were on top of me, praying and putting their hands on me. It was really, really weird and I prayed to St Michael after that experience. Then a woman took my hands and said, “You’re on drugs, aren’t you?” “Ummmm…no, I’m not!” Then she insisted that there was something else that I was doing that was wrong because she could, “sense it.”
The majority that I have met, can’t stand the EF Mass. Many, priests and laity, who ascribe to this sort of “Charismatic Catholicism,” adhere to the theories around “being vs doing.” They feel it is better “to be.” So, they classify novenas, rosaries, adoration, etc as “doing.” Which is a bad thing because someone obsessed with “doing” most likely has a sick, ritualistic, controlling, obsessive personality. Again, intertwined with 12 Step mentality.
I never could understand how/why so many people, orthodox in so many ways, concerned about liturgical abuse, very pro-life, love the Church and the Holy Father find this “movement” acceptable.
Side note: These have been my personal experiences, they may not have been yours, keep that in mind.
I was dragged to a number of charismatic masses in the 1990s. There was great lament that it was dying out. I met a range of people from very inline with the Magesterium, hard core Marianists, to really out there people, who believed if you don’t have the gift of tounges you aren’t truly praying, to a woman who was never baptized, but went to Mass everyday and took Holy Communion.
There was lots of hand holding, people bringing big sippy cups to church with water to drink through the long Mass and healings and prophecies, etc…, some came in their sweats and kicked their feet up over the backs of pews, most hand their hands up to the sky through the entire Mass. The priests all seemed to be engaged in the 12 steps and there seemed to be a blurring between the 12 steps and Church teaching, as if they were one in the same. One priest announced that that was going to be his last Mass, as he was leaving the priesthood. He then made up his own Eucharistic Prayer and said all sorts of kooky things through Mass. I didn’t receive Holy Communion that night. Then they all prayed over him and anointed him with oil.
After Mass, or during, can’t remember, maybe both…everyone was invited to come forward and be prayed over and anointed by lay people with “gifts.” So, I did and I did not like the feeling. I ended up on the floor and they were on top of me, praying and putting their hands on me. It was really, really weird and I prayed to St Michael after that experience. Then a woman took my hands and said, “You’re on drugs, aren’t you?” “Ummmm…no, I’m not!” Then she insisted that there was something else that I was doing that was wrong because she could, “sense it.”
The majority that I have met, can’t stand the EF Mass. Many, priests and laity, who ascribe to this sort of “Charismatic Catholicism,” adhere to the theories around “being vs doing.” They feel it is better “to be.” So, they classify novenas, rosaries, adoration, etc as “doing.” Which is a bad thing because someone obsessed with “doing” most likely has a sick, ritualistic, controlling, obsessive personality. Again, intertwined with 12 Step mentality.
I never could understand how/why so many people, orthodox in so many ways, concerned about liturgical abuse, very pro-life, love the Church and the Holy Father find this “movement” acceptable.
Side note: These have been my personal experiences, they may not have been yours, keep that in mind.
P
PatienceAndLove
Guest
Thanks!PatienceAndLove,
I think what you meant to say is that “…no on can argue that Fr. Larry Richards is not orthodox” in liu of “…no on can argue that Fr. Larry Richards is orthodox”
I love Fr. Larry Richards BTW, his talk on confession is particularly powerful!
too late to edit now, though
M
Melchior_1
Guest
It’s alright. I can’t understand how self-styled traditionalists can be schismatic so I suppose there’s stuff on both sides.
I do find it interesting that instead of focusing on the “A lot of people associated with that movement are the mainstream OF orthodox Catholics of today” and “I met a range of people from very inline with the Magesterium, hard core Marianists” you elected to focus on the negative experiences.
Anyway, I love our Holy Father, love our Church, staunchly Pro-Life, and concerned about outrageous abuses yet I accept and participate in the movement. I’m sorry you don’t understand how that works.
And like Patience said, there’s a bit of contradictions in that section of your post.
C
crazzeto
Guest
I downloaded and listened to this, while I can agree with some of what the Priest says other portions frankly raise an eye brow or two. In line with Ockham I wondered who the priest may be, so I attempted to look it up on the Audio Sancto website and found this:
First bullet point if you click about audio sancto, I found this curious and found the explanation below:
Ok… I guess I can understand… maybe… Some priests may in fact be shy… But unfortunetly my problem is this, these people are claiming to be priests, who claim to be in good standing with the Church, who claim to be speaking FOR holy mother church. As such, they should be easily identifiable, and because of this I find the linked audio sermon difficult to accept.
A
archangel04
Guest
Very interesting, I think (IMHO) many of these people are led by emotions and feelings, hence what you qutoed the lady saying she could sence it. I went to one of these Charismatic overnighters day of Pentecost. There were people falling down and listening to this preacher (non priest) speak about the Holy Spirit. That’s all fine, but then we (I was the thurifer) brought out the Eucharist for adoration, no one got on there knees, the preacher was still babbling, and people were still yelling and falling down. This type of movement is not for me, if it helps others to keep in-line witht the Church teaching then so be it, it must serve a good purpose, but I will stick to the traditions the Saints before me stook to.
H
HCC
Guest
How so in opposition? I started out by saying a lot of people formed by the Charismatic Movement in the 1970s/80s make up a good percentage of the Ordinary Form Mass going, mainstream, orthodox Catholics today.
Then I said at the end, I don’t understand how/why they approve of this type of movement, after what I saw there. It was rife with liturgical abuse and some strange goings-on.
How is that contradictory?
Overall, I was just stating my experience. It ranged. It definitely was not for me and that’s fine. I do wonder though how other’s find it acceptable and inline with Church teaching and Liturgical norms. I suppose they would say I’m just being a pharisee and that their liturgical abuses are ok and excused because, well, they like it and they see it as doing some good.
C
challam2010
Guest
My experience with the charismatic movement occurred in the late 70’s and included many people who had been very traditional and orthodox in the past.
I didn’t find the masses to be out of line with any of the other liturgies of that time but simply expanded to include the presence of a more emotional response than we usually see at mass. This included more physicality (raising of hands, moving with the music, etc.). There was VERY little speaking in tongues – a handful of people in a 500-person church, and that was quietly and very reverantly done. The main difference I saw was the expression of outward emotion, which appeared very genuine to me – an emotional response to the presence of the Spirit, expressed in a more public way than Catholics are used to.
Because I was raised in the pre-V II church and am a very private and reserved person, this emotion didn’t appeal to me personally. I did and do embrace all the fruits of V II changes, however, and never saw or heard anything at mass that seemed at all unorthodox to me.
The people I knew who continued with the movement becamemuch more active in doing good for the Catholic and secular communities – very involved in church activities and those benefiting the poor of the area, and more interested in actively evangelizing. Seems like the fruits of the Spirit to me, flowing from the grace of their preferred type of worship.
St. Paul wrote about the varied gifts we all have to serve the Christian community. It’s been my experience that the people who participate in the charismatic movement need to be fed by more emotion than some of us – but the gifts they return in loving service are certainly of the Spirit.
I didn’t find the masses to be out of line with any of the other liturgies of that time but simply expanded to include the presence of a more emotional response than we usually see at mass. This included more physicality (raising of hands, moving with the music, etc.). There was VERY little speaking in tongues – a handful of people in a 500-person church, and that was quietly and very reverantly done. The main difference I saw was the expression of outward emotion, which appeared very genuine to me – an emotional response to the presence of the Spirit, expressed in a more public way than Catholics are used to.
Because I was raised in the pre-V II church and am a very private and reserved person, this emotion didn’t appeal to me personally. I did and do embrace all the fruits of V II changes, however, and never saw or heard anything at mass that seemed at all unorthodox to me.
The people I knew who continued with the movement becamemuch more active in doing good for the Catholic and secular communities – very involved in church activities and those benefiting the poor of the area, and more interested in actively evangelizing. Seems like the fruits of the Spirit to me, flowing from the grace of their preferred type of worship.
St. Paul wrote about the varied gifts we all have to serve the Christian community. It’s been my experience that the people who participate in the charismatic movement need to be fed by more emotion than some of us – but the gifts they return in loving service are certainly of the Spirit.
R
RosaryCrusader
Guest
They’re FSSP Priests. If you listen frequently to audiosancto you can hear them drop names or locations and figure out who they are or if you listen to other lectures from other sites where they’re credited with their talks. Audiosancto is just Sunday sermons with an occassional mission thrown in. These people aren’t frauds.
C
crazzeto
Guest
That may well be, and certainly I wish them all the best if that’s what the situation… For me I like having that authority established, it puts me at ease. The problem from my perspective is when the sources can’t be easily identified then it’s nearly impossible to prove authentisity.
God bless,
O
Ockham
Guest
Of course one could always just listen to the message and let the sermon stand on its own merit. Was there anything against Church teaching in that sermon?
C
crazzeto
Guest
The eye brow raiser was that according to the person offering the sermon, Pope Paul VI him self declared that Vatican II was not infallible. I would like to see the proof of this statement.
O
Ockham
Guest
It was a pastoral council. No dogma was created or defined, thus nothing to be infallible about. Pope John XXIII said there was no pressing need, just wanted to crack a window and let some fresh air into the Church.
In the interests of keeping this thread on topic should you wish to discuss V2 I suggest starting a new thread.
In the interests of keeping this thread on topic should you wish to discuss V2 I suggest starting a new thread.
C
crazzeto
Guest
I don’t wish to discuss it, rather I did cite my concerns with this sermon and those concerns remain particularly in light of a priest who doesn’t identify him self.
Edit
Incidently if anyone can substantiate the claim this priest makes, I’d be happy to give it a look see. But to date I have never read, seen, or heard of (out side of certain specific circles) any claim along these lines. As such, I have problems with the sermon. Even if I accept a good portion of what this person says.
Second Edit
Pope Paul VI’s closing speech:
ourladyswarriors.org/teach/v2close.htm
This does not match up with the spirit of what is discussed in the sermon.
Specific quotation:
O
OraLabora
Guest
I do completely share your reserve concerning the charismatic movement. It holds very little appeal to me, as I tend to be a very reserved person and I think the type of glossolalia that goes on today has very little to do with the Biblical gift of speaking in tongues which incidentally meant recognizable languages, not gibberish.
But I don’t necessarily agree that traditional devotions do not require caution; maybe theologically they don’t, for instance the Rosary is a masterpiece of theological distillation of the essentials into simple elements.
But their practice can go overboard, and I think all forms of devotion require balance and prioritization of needs. I have seen people put their traditional devotions ahead of attending to their family’s needs, for instance. The Benedictine motto of “Ora et Labora” emphasizes the balance between prayer and work, and a deeper reading of the Rule of St. Benedict demonstrates the need for a wholesome equilibrium between all parts of life: the spiritual, work, material, nutritional and recreational aspects of life. It is all to easy to go overboard on one’s particular favourite devotion, and end up in a state of disequilibrium.
That said, the charismatic movement seems to me unbalanced from the start. As my spiritual director said of a charismatic community that started praying over a visiting monk that needed emergency medical care, rather than tending to his immediate need, “The idiots started praying over him, instead of doing what needed doing: calling 911”. It seems to me assigning magical powers to the Holy Spirit whereas the true meaning of the Spirit is to inspire in us a will to more directly conform ourselves to God’s path, and to open ourselves up to hearing the Word and receiving Our Lord in a state of grace, and of course carrying out His will in the Church Militant.
N
napoli426
Guest
The novus ordo has led to a lot of these abherations. What did we expect would happen.
B
benedictgal
Guest
One thing is to support a movement; quite another is to support the manner in which the movement treats the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. These are two very different issues. The most recent example of a movement being reprimanded for its treatment of the Mass comes from the Neocatechumenal Way. Back in 2005, early on in Pope Benedict’s pontificate, he cautioned the movement against the ilicit practices they were employing in the Mass. In fact, final approval of the movement’s constitution was delayed until the movement corrected the problems. Thus, a pope can very well support ecclesial lay movements, but, when it comes to their treatment of the Mass, that is an entirely different matter.
- Status