G
grannymh
Guest
May I respectfully point out that you omitted the word “Tongues” from you post.
If Tongues were the subject matter, then *yielding *rationality and intellect would not be an appropriate description.
- Status
If Tongues were the subject matter, then *yielding *rationality and intellect would not be an appropriate description.
J
Jon_Mallory
Guest
The Charismatic movement crosses conventional “denominational” lines in an attempt to bring about more unity among Christians through the bond of a common experience. In my opinion, it further splinters Christian confessions by dividing the way members in such confessions worship from each other. Furthermore, it creates a divide between “haves” and “the have nots”. One Catholic does not receive the gift of tongues while another does. One Episcopalian loves the experience of Charismatic worship while another is put off and alienated by it. Is the individual who experiences alienation lacking something in his/her faith the other has? Do people need to have these experiences to receive gifts from the Holy Spirit that will build up the Church? The movement creates a real tension for those outside it.
I like Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick’s summary of the origins of the movement. You can find his series of podcasts on ancient faith radio. ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/pentecostalism_part_1a
I like Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick’s summary of the origins of the movement. You can find his series of podcasts on ancient faith radio. ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/pentecostalism_part_1a
P
PapyrusDouay
Guest
Could you please define “charismatic”? I’m under the impression there are a couple definitions going on here. The “charismatic” aspect of the modern Charismatic Renewal is not at all what I would associate with the Apostles, St. Anthony, and Padre Pio all of whom you mentioned. I would call them “mystics”, not “charismatics”…but perhaps my understanding of the term is off.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Agree with the first part - tongue is the Holy Spirit praying for God’s intention.
Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words. (Rom 8:26, RSVCE)
So this was praying in tongue, or singing, since we can sing it as well.
But also, 1 Cor 14:28 - But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God.
1 Cor 14:28 asks one to keep silent if there is no interpreter. If you see at the praise and worship session, singing and/or prayer in tongue are being done corporately or we do pray it individually, alone in prayers. So definitely, this tongue is not for interpretation; it is ‘too deep for words’.
You still have to categorize tongues: For interpretation (prophecy) and for praying (individually or corporately). Otherwise one should not do the latter if there is no interpreter, as St Paul said in 1 Cor 14, but we still do it nevertheless, and thus it is not for interpretation but for personal prayers.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Charismatic is loosely to mean ‘by/from the Holy Spirit’. There are many type of gifts or talent which belong to the supernatural. IOW, not by our human ability. Sadly only tongue and perhaps prophecy get the most publicity, and often for anti-Charismatic to discredit them.
Padre Pio had an extraordinary gift, definitely not from his human ability. In 1 Cor 12, there are many gifts but they are given by the same Spirit, the purpose being to be used to serve the body (of Christ).
It is just semantic. One can say that Padre Pio was a mystic or Charismatic since his gift is from the same Lord (Spirit).
G
grannymh
Guest
Tongues is under the control of the person yielding to the Holy Spirit.
This person freely sets aside the normal rational powers of memory or intellect which are usually employed in speaking. Not using or setting aside is not eradicating these powers from the mind. Because Tongues is controlled by the person, she or he can immediately stop speaking and go back to the mind’s normal rational powers. Because tongues is verbal, the lips, tongue and larynx are in active use. The difficulty with being verbal is that the “words” are not necessarily discernible and often without cadence.
Considering the above, it is understandable that an individual may not want to yield to the Holy Spirit. In some charismatic circles there is the comforting saying that the Holy Spirit is a gentleman, never forcing His gifts. Tongues is at the personal command of the individual. Tongues is not an outward badge of holiness.
There is always the question – Is the person really using Tongues or is it a happy form of glossolalia? Because the real Tongues is under personal control, it is impossible to accurately judge someone’s private intentions.
When someone uses Tongues to present God’s message to the assembly, the “interpretation” is discerned as to its truthfulness. Discernment is a necessary gift of the Holy Spirit. If the interpretation is for the congregation to build an Olympic size swimming pool in the Pastor’s backyard, the red flag flies.
Scripture refers to a variety of Tongues. This does not necessarily mean that there are different kinds of Tongues, type A, type B or different forms for different outcomes and the individual has to choose a particular type/form to personally use in giving God’s message to the assembly or to offer prayers to God. Like other individuals, the person humbly yields his speech mechanism directly to the Holy Spirit to be used by Him. It is the universal process of yielding that unifies Tongues and separates Tongues from Glossolalia. In yielding, the personal desire to pray to God or to preach publically is there. Yielding is the one formula which activates each gift. Personal yielding is why it can be said that Tongues itself is under the control of the individual.
Yes, I can hear someone asking what happens if a person ends Tongues before the complete message from God is given. There is half a message. This is why there is serious preparation, including discernment, and long hours of both prayer and study for this use of Tongues.
This person freely sets aside the normal rational powers of memory or intellect which are usually employed in speaking. Not using or setting aside is not eradicating these powers from the mind. Because Tongues is controlled by the person, she or he can immediately stop speaking and go back to the mind’s normal rational powers. Because tongues is verbal, the lips, tongue and larynx are in active use. The difficulty with being verbal is that the “words” are not necessarily discernible and often without cadence.
Considering the above, it is understandable that an individual may not want to yield to the Holy Spirit. In some charismatic circles there is the comforting saying that the Holy Spirit is a gentleman, never forcing His gifts. Tongues is at the personal command of the individual. Tongues is not an outward badge of holiness.
There is always the question – Is the person really using Tongues or is it a happy form of glossolalia? Because the real Tongues is under personal control, it is impossible to accurately judge someone’s private intentions.
When someone uses Tongues to present God’s message to the assembly, the “interpretation” is discerned as to its truthfulness. Discernment is a necessary gift of the Holy Spirit. If the interpretation is for the congregation to build an Olympic size swimming pool in the Pastor’s backyard, the red flag flies.
Scripture refers to a variety of Tongues. This does not necessarily mean that there are different kinds of Tongues, type A, type B or different forms for different outcomes and the individual has to choose a particular type/form to personally use in giving God’s message to the assembly or to offer prayers to God. Like other individuals, the person humbly yields his speech mechanism directly to the Holy Spirit to be used by Him. It is the universal process of yielding that unifies Tongues and separates Tongues from Glossolalia. In yielding, the personal desire to pray to God or to preach publically is there. Yielding is the one formula which activates each gift. Personal yielding is why it can be said that Tongues itself is under the control of the individual.
Yes, I can hear someone asking what happens if a person ends Tongues before the complete message from God is given. There is half a message. This is why there is serious preparation, including discernment, and long hours of both prayer and study for this use of Tongues.
G
grannymh
Guest
My comment is that in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, the operative word is renewal – renewal of the Catholic Faith.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
I am not sure what you are saying here.
Tongue is word gift. Discernment is to determine its authenticity – is the tongue authentic or not. Usually this is to help a person to know whether he/she has the gift in the initial phase of having it.
Interpretation of tongue as mentioned by Paul in 1 Cor 12, is when tongue is exercised as prophetic utterance. That’s why it has to be interpreted. Usually if it is done during praise and worship, it would be after the quieting down, then one person speaks in tongue and another with the gift of interpretation of tongue, says it in language that the rest of the congregation can understand. St. Paul always mentions the speaking in tongue together with interpretation of tongue. No doubt these two gifts must be used as complimenting each other, otherwise he said to remain silent – do not exercise it (1Cor 14:29).
You have to justify why there’s variety of tongues if they are not for different usage.
M
MaryHelp777
Guest
In Pentecost and the letters of St Paul, it describes exactly what both pentecostal and charismatic prayer groups follow. The charisms which you are against are Scriptural.
If you want to know what a Catholic Charismatic prayer group is like, read the acts of the Apostles and letters of the new Testament (specifically St Paul’s).
The Popes support.the catholic charismatic renewal, (and if you have seen any falsities or heresies in specific ministries, that is something that can be found in any kind of church ministry not run by devout Holy people loyal to the Catholic Magisterium). Don’t condemn the entire catholic charismatic.renewal that the Popes all support just because you have bad experience of a few prayer groups.
Many have left the catholic.church because of the abuse scandal. Only 3% of priests were involved in.the abuse scandal.
Are you going to condemn the entire catholic charismatic renewal just because you know a few prayer groups that were not Orthodox?
Please.tell me which of my quotes showing Papal support of the last four Popes of the catholic charismatic renewal do you disagree with?
You are disagreeing with Papal Approval and scripture, and the catechism which does mention extraordinary charisms.
You are choosing to brush aside catholic approval for your own opinions.
M
MaryHelp777
Guest
If you even read the websites I posted you would see Pope Francis was head of the charismatic renewal in Argentina as bishop, and that they all used to sing in tongues at certain parts of the catholic charismatic masses that he said with the catholic Charismatics.
You are ignoring all my posts showing specific approval of the Papacy and throwing you own opinions around. You are using Sola Scriptura and ignoring Papal Approval.
You are ignoring all my posts showing specific approval of the Papacy and throwing you own opinions around. You are using Sola Scriptura and ignoring Papal Approval.
M
Medawlinno
Guest
“Tongue is the Holy Spirit praying for God’s intention”
I don’t think so - the Holy Spirit is one of the three aspects of God; it does not need to pray to itself.
I don’t think so - the Holy Spirit is one of the three aspects of God; it does not need to pray to itself.
G
grannymh
Guest
Briefly. Each of the three aspects of God is a Divine Person. Granted that the Most Holy Trinity is difficult to understand. Still, the Catholic Church maintains it as truth. Actually, the prospect of one of the three aspects of God praying to Itself can stand as a reason that Tongue is silly. In Catholic circles, Tongues is, at times, debated from the point of silliness. The practical reality of Tongue always wins.
Looking at the statement “Tongue is the Holy Spirit praying for God’s intention” the real question is Why pray? Prayer can be simply a request that it does not rain on the parade. Or prayer can be a statement of Faith like the Our Father.
Naturally, each Divine Person (separate aspect) has more power than a human with a decomposing anatomy. Why not ask one of those Divine Persons to design a prayer which a human can use? One of the manifestations (charismatic gifts) of the Holy Spirit is Tongues used as the designed prayer. Because the author of Prayer Tongues is Divine, that does not translate into Tongues being the best ever.
God, regardless of how He is described, understands each person as a special unique person. God respects the choices of prayer. Prayer is never a contest.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
If you read Rom 8:26, it can be said as such.
‘but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words’. In other translation, it say ‘groan’. The way tongue is being used, it may be applied here. So The Holy Spirit ‘intercedes’ for us in word we cannot understand. The Spirit prays but the ‘groan’ comes out of our mouth.
That must be the highest form of prayer. And perfect prayer can only comes from God. So if one looks at it from that angle, it is not too wrong to say it is praying for God’s intention.
Remember Mt 7, ‘ask, and you shall receive’. The asking is only given if it is according to God’s will. And who knows God’s will better than God Himself?
Of course, the interceding can be for any other good intention. of which it cannot be discounted either.
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
These Bible verses are being used to fit into an action that it doesn’t clearly describe.
The “tongues” described in the Bible could easily be stated to be intelligible language. The sighs or groanings of the Spirit filling in our void, do not necessarily point to the verbal soundmaking that Charismatics call “tongues” - a term I think is used incorrectly to describe this auto-action of the mouth. This action akin to a divining rod or the ideomotor effect.
The Scriptures describe something, but I think what is popular among charismatics is not this something.
The “tongues” described in the Bible could easily be stated to be intelligible language. The sighs or groanings of the Spirit filling in our void, do not necessarily point to the verbal soundmaking that Charismatics call “tongues” - a term I think is used incorrectly to describe this auto-action of the mouth. This action akin to a divining rod or the ideomotor effect.
The Scriptures describe something, but I think what is popular among charismatics is not this something.
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
Wow, you don’t see here how you are cramming the verse to fit into the action? Just because something “may be” forced into the Scriptural verse, does not mean that the verse actually states this.
This is even more devastating. The highest form of prayer is unintelligible, individual, self-uplifting, and private?? I’d differ on all those points - the highest form of prayer is communal, intelligible, theologically rich, uplifting to all, LITURGICAL and public.
Clearly any verse(s) can be pulled out to fit the narrative if one really wants to do this. The definition of “tongues” is loose, the verses are forced to fit the narrative, and the actions are similar to ideomatic glossolalia - what could be wrong?
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
We’ve already written about this. Are you attempting to goad me into dismissing the Holy Father - I won’t do it.
No one has ever accused me of being a sola scriptura, and at the same time pull one or a dozen ill fitting verses from various Books of the Bible to fit the charismatic narrative. Ask any protestant or JW or Mormon on this site that has ever communicated with me if I’m a a Sola Scriptura - they’ve always described me as too attached to Sacred Tradition, Patristics, Apostolic teaching and the Early Church Fathers.
M
MaryHelp777
Guest
I have not picked a few little verses only from the Bible but quotes of 100% approval of the last four Popes and current Pope, and of the Catechism. Which you keep ignoring.
Once again you are refusing to acknowledge that four Popes are in 100% full support entirely of the Roman Catholic Charismatic Renewal.
You are refusing to acknowledge that the Catechism is in 100% full support of the extraordinary charisms of the charismatic renewal.
You are refusing to acknowledge that Pope Francis was head of the charismatic renewal in Argentina and led masses where they sung in tongues on occasions.
It seems as if
You are using Sola Scriptura to deny that Pentecost can continue as it did for the Apostles.
You are using the parts of tradition and the Bible to deny that Pentecost had extraordinary charisms and to deny complete Papal Approval of the extraordinary charisms of the catholic charismatic renewal.
You are refusing to acknowledge all the Papal and Catechism support and accusing Catholic Charismatics of “borrowing a few quotes here and there to falsely claim the Papacy and Catechism support 100% the charismatic renewal.”
Of the last four Popes, find one quote of theirs that condemned the catholic charismatic renewal. You will nit be able to find it. Because they were in 100% full support and our Current Pope is a catholic charismatic himself.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Of course, don’t worry, you are entitled to your own opinion, as others theirs. Basically you are saying, you are right, we are wrong. There is no argument there.
What are you objected to, the manifestation of charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit, perhaps as one from one’s of the Catholic rites, they are being recognized by the highest authority of the Church, the Pope and the Vatican.
If you are part of the Catholic Church, you have to be obedient to that, even if you disagree. It is that simple. So you have to examine your position within the Church.
As being mentioned, the CCR is not something new. If you do not know about it, you have to update yourself.
For us as Catholics to argue about this in the Forum, in a thread started by a non-Catholic, would not be looked so nice seen from the outside. My position and perhaps other posters as well is to make clarification as to what the CCR is.
The Catholic Church is so big, there are many spiritualities within it. There is bound to be disagreement but it does not mean that they are not parts of the Church.
We can only note your objection, and hope you are happy that you can voice it here, which it seems you do enjoy doing so.
God bless.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
G
grannymh
Guest
- Status