Catholic Charismatic Renewal

[nfabienne]

Not to mention that nearly all of those uneducated saints were, in fact, clergy.

true but they weren’t born clergy, they as children were very holy and wise by Gods graces they were brought to the fullness of their faith by their desire to die to self and serve Him. I am sure they encouraged and led many to the Lord who in turn teaches and guides along with His clergy, many must have done this before they in fact became part of Gods clergy. Look at St. Monica, St. Maria Goretti, St. Rita. There are so many saints who were not nuns or priests or monks, this is God he can teach anyone He desires. There are again two sides to all things. We must be open to what God can do and yes we must be cautious of course I think that this is obvious to those whom it’s not well we must pray for them and pray for our clergy and each other. We are all called to be saints not canonized or recognized by anyone but God. He knows our hearts and will teach those who open themselves to His will, which I am sure He is doing within your hearts.

 

[The_Theotokos]

true but they weren’t born clergy, they as children were very holy and wise by Gods graces they were brought to the fullness of their faith by their desire to die to self and serve Him. I am sure they encouraged and led many to the Lord who in turn teaches and guides along with His clergy, many must have done this before they in fact became part of Gods clergy. Look at St. Monica, St. Maria Goretti, St. Rita. There are so many saints who were not nuns or priests or monks, this is God he can teach anyone He desires. There are again two sides to all things. We must be open to what God can do and yes we must be cautious of course I think that this is obvious to those whom it’s not well we must pray for them and pray for our clergy and each other. We are all called to be saints not canonized or recognized by anyone but God. He knows our hearts and will teach those who open themselves to His will, which I am sure He is doing within your hearts.

Well, my point was that if a person feels called to evangelize, build the church, increase fervor, and lead others to Christ, perhaps they should consider a religious or diocesan vocation.

 

[nfabienne]

agree but this is God hands it is our decision only to accept. I think all who are in a vocation are called to it. One who is a lay person and feels called to a ministry should do so after proper teaching, but not all are wise enough to seek this teaching some will be and some won’t. Like I want and feel called to work with youth but I know I will need to go through some schooling but I also know I am not ready yet I have my own family to raise and right now this is where I am. As for bible studies and such yes they should be led by the clergy our prayer group had a priest as a member and he often corrected and guided us. It all is a matter of knowing right from wrong in regards to teaching does a teacher go to college, yes but a parent can also teach a child at home what this parent knows, one should not take it any further than what they know for certain. We all have certain abilities within evangelization but we only teach so much as we know to be truth. By the way if we do make a mistake that is a chance for us to admit fault and learn our mistakes. No one is perfect even clergy can make mistakes. God Bless

 

[vz71]

How do you feel about being made uncomfortable because you do not see the “miracles” or do not show the “gifts” or are told in no uncertain terms that you are a lesser person because you do not participate in the happy-clappy? Oh yeah, and in front of a big group of people, too.

As has been shown in this thread multiple times, this is not the norm within the charismatic movement.
At least one from within the movement itself has been online to state within this thread that those actions are wrong.

Again I am left with the illogic of throwing out a whole movement based on the actions of the worst within the movement.

 

[vz71]

Notice how CorinneNJ states that the Movement “puts the responsibility of evangelizing and the building up of the faith and fervor of the Church on the everyday layperson”. She isn’t saying it places a greater responsibility on the laity to witness to Christ (which, incidentally is the type of evangelization the Church expects of the laity unless they are properly trained [Catechism of the Catholic Church 905-906]). She is saying that it puts the responsibility of evangelizing on the laity…period. Now, perhaps I am reading too much into her post, but with the sort of demands many in this thread have put on me to be clear with my words, I don’t think it is inappropriate for me to hold everyone else to the same standard.

You are reading more into it then is there.

I read no effort whatsoever to remove anything from anyone. What I do read is a reaction to the ‘traditional’ that has placed the job of evangelization entirely upon the shoulders of the clergy.
As you stated: "Only the Magisterium and its represented clergy is qualified to evangelize and build the faith of the Church. "

Now that statement is very clear. And I can understand well where it came from as my own upbringing also supports that line of thought. Throughout my own Catholic education it was never stated directly, but it was always made clear that we do not teach or explain the faith to others as we may make a mistake concerning church teaching. This was a job best left to the trained and schooled…the clergy.
It was not until much later that I learned that was wrong, and I was not only free, but was also obligated to explain and defend my faith as I was capable.

 

[vz71]

Intellectually dishonest? Or are you expecting me, once again, to clarify every single off-topic point I make, while others are free to be as vague as they choose?

That is not the point.
The point was you deciding upon a meaning of what was said as completely wrong, when you knew well there was truth to what had been said.

There was nothing at all implied or otherwise to the statement. You chose to twist the meaning into something that was not shown to be there. Then you called it false.

It no longer matters what is said…your going to tell us what they meant and then summarily condemn the meaning.

 

[nfabienne]

agree but this is in God hands it is our decision only to accept. I think all who are in a vocation are called to it. One who is a lay person and feels called to a ministry should do so after proper teaching, but not all are wise enough to seek this teaching some will be and some won’t. Like I want and feel called to work with youth but I know I will need to go through some schooling but I also know I am not ready yet I have my own family to raise and right now this is where I am. As for bible studies and such yes they should be led by the clergy our prayer group had a priest as a member and he often corrected and guided us. It all is a matter of knowing right from wrong in regards to teaching does a teacher go to college, yes but a parent can also teach a child at home what this parent knows, one should not take it any further than what they know for certain. We all have certain abilities within evangelization but we only teach so much as we know to be truth. By the way if we do make a mistake that is a chance for us to admit fault and learn our mistakes. No one is perfect even clergy can make mistakes. God Bless

 

[The_Theotokos]

That is not the point.
The point was you deciding upon a meaning of what was said as completely wrong, when you knew well there was truth to what had been said.

There was nothing at all implied or otherwise to the statement. You chose to twist the meaning into something that was not shown to be there. Then you called it false.

It no longer matters what is said…your going to tell us what they meant and then summarily condemn the meaning.

I made it very clear why I read it the way I did. There was nothing at all to suggest otherwise. I stand by my actions, even if you prefer to read into them a deception. No one else read them that way. Only you.

 

[The_Theotokos]

You are reading more into it then is there.

I read no effort whatsoever to remove anything from anyone. What I do read is a reaction to the ‘traditional’ that has placed the job of evangelization entirely upon the shoulders of the clergy.
As you stated: "Only the Magisterium and its represented clergy is qualified to evangelize and build the faith of the Church. "

Now that statement is very clear. And I can understand well where it came from as my own upbringing also supports that line of thought. Throughout my own Catholic education it was never stated directly, but it was always made clear that we do not teach or explain the faith to others as we may make a mistake concerning church teaching. This was a job best left to the trained and schooled…the clergy.
It was not until much later that I learned that was wrong, and I was not only free, but was also obligated to explain and defend my faith as I was capable.

I don’t believe explaining and defending one’s faith is what the post in question was referring to.

 

[The_Theotokos]

Again I am left with the illogic of throwing out a whole movement based on the actions of the worst within the movement.

Perhaps then we should look at the best of the Movement and consider if what they do warrants the continuation of the Movement’s existence in light of the dangers and falsifications that seem to orbit “Charismatic” thinking.

 

[PCM]

It is my understanding that Fr Sudac said tongues in the form of babbling should be spoken aloud only if there is one with the gift of understanding present so that it may be shared for the benefit of others. If no one is there to “translate”, it should be done quietly/privately. This makes sense to me.

 

[The_Theotokos]

It is my understanding that Fr Sudac said tongues in the form of babbling should be spoken aloud only if there is one with the gift of understanding present so that it may be shared for the benefit of others. If no one is there to “translate”, it should be done quietly/privately. This makes sense to me.

You know, let’s handle this subject in detail. Could someone please provide all supporting scriptural references to the gibberish tongues phenomenon.

 

[The_Theotokos]

As has been shown in this thread multiple times, this is not the norm within the charismatic movement.

By what? Two people? I’ve already mentioned the vast range of abuses I have witnessed. Oh wait, my experiences don’t count! Sorry about that.

 

[mantilla410]

As has been shown in this thread multiple times, this is not the norm within the charismatic movement.
At least one from within the movement itself has been online to state within this thread that those actions are wrong.

Again I am left with the illogic of throwing out a whole movement based on the actions of the worst within the movement.

Really? I noticed how cleverly you edited my answer. I addressed how it is in fact been my experience the movement that has been clubbish in its actions, that they have discounted anyone who does not pray as they do and that anyone who does not show “proper enthusiasm” or is “on fire for the Lord” is a lesser person.

By what? Two people? I’ve already mentioned the vast range of abuses I have witnessed. Oh wait, my experiences don’t count! Sorry about that.

Ah! Good point! My experiences don’t count either.

 

[vz71]

Perhaps then we should look at the best of the Movement and consider if what they do warrants the continuation of the Movement’s existence in light of the dangers and falsifications that seem to orbit “Charismatic” thinking.

The dangers and falsifications you have spoken of here are by no means unique to the Charismatics within the church.
My own experience has shown more liturgical abuse outside of the movement then within it.

 

[vz71]

You know, let’s handle this subject in detail. Could someone please provide all supporting scriptural references to the gibberish tongues phenomenon.

Do you mean speaking in tongues, or ‘gibberish.’

There is a difference. One is insulting, the other not.

 

[vz71]

By what? Two people? I’ve already mentioned the vast range of abuses I have witnessed. Oh wait, my experiences don’t count! Sorry about that.

No, your experiences highlight well the potential for abuse within the movement.
But since I see these same abuses outside the Charismatic movement, I have reservations painting the entirety of the movement in that light.

 

[vz71]

Really? I noticed how cleverly you edited my answer.

Not at all. I cannot answer for your own experiences. So I am not going to quote it back as a response. No deception at all intended, I simply quotee the part of thread I am responding to.

I addressed how it is in fact been my experience the movement that has been clubbish in its actions, that they have discounted anyone who does not pray as they do and that anyone who does not show “proper enthusiasm” or is “on fire for the Lord” is a lesser person.

True. And I have seen within this thread as well as spoken with others that have condemned such action as wrong and not reflective of the movement.

Ah! Good point! My experiences don’t count either.

Hardly. No one has discounted yours or anyone elses experiences.

But I am calling to task how it is you can paint an entire movement based upon the actions of a few.

 

[cazayoux]

But I am calling to task how it is you can paint an entire movement based upon the actions of a few.

It’s like I tell my sons.
The people you hang out with will paint a picture of you as well.
If there are ‘bad’ boys that you hand around with, you will be thought guilty by association.
I tell my boys to be an example, especially for those that do not act properly.

While you might refute it, ‘the movement’, especially in the U.S. is considered a group of babblers. I would not ever lower my faith life by associating with or attending a meeting of ‘the movement’.
I do not believe these individuals are speaking in tongues. I do believe they are babbling … only to prove to themselves that the Holy Spirit is with them.

You’ll want to point out all of the positives of the movement, such as community activism, but these are things I think should be done AS A PARISH NOT AS A COMMUNITY OF “THE MOVEMENT”.

I see ‘the movement’ as divisive.
I don’t think you will lift a finger to be the good example by admonishing those that babble.

Now let’s look at the gifts of the Holy Spirit, those gifts that we should receive to bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Gifts of the Holy Spirit
Knowledge
Understanding
Wisdom
Piety
Fortitude
Fear of the Lord
Right Judgement

Fruits of the Holy Spirit
Charity
Joy
Peace
Patience
Benignity
Goodness
Long-suffering
Mildness
Faith
Modesty
Continency
Chastity

So those fruits of the Holy Spirit that you will say come from the movement come from those gifts listed above … not from tongues.
There is NO reason this should be done as a separatist movement away from the parish.

michel

 

[vz71]

I don’t think you will lift a finger to be the good example by admonishing those that babble.
michel

Well perhaps not a finger…but…
I once was at a meeting where I witnessed someone attempting to show how much ‘in spirit’ they were by running around with his eyes closed.

I asked why they were doing this and was told they were filled with the Holy Spirit, and that God was guiding him. I then asked what would happen if someone stuck a leg out to trip them.
I was told that God was guiding them, they would not be tripped, fall, or be otherwise hurt.

I didn’t get opportunity to stick my leg out. Instead I simply stepped out into the man’s path. Apparently he did have his eyes opened enough to see me and turn.
But he did not see the pillar directly in his path after this turn.
The sound he made against the pillar was impressive. As was the spot of blood he left on it.

I was surprised by the silence that suddenly came over the crowd.
I was not surprised that I was not invited back.