That’s the phenomenon known as “Slain in the Spirit” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slain_in_the_Spirit , wow, even between Fundamentalists and Pentecostals, there seems to be some major theological differences on this concept and SIT, Speaking in tongues.
True, that is an extreme example but it doesn’t take much reading to see that some of our Protestant Brethren have cracked down on their own Charismatic services getting a bit excessive for whatever that means. I think I found a quote the Assembly of God Churches have done this.
Obviously they were missing the point of the whole thing!
I’ve been to many Charismatic prayer sessions/Holy hours over the years (because my friends were all going) and I have never seen anything like that.
a) That doesn’t happen at a Mass (Resting in the Spirit/Baptism of the Holy Spirit). b) that isn’t the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. If someone did that at a any Charismatic event, be it an OF Mass or a prayer meeting, I would be getting a) a priest (to test the spirits) and b) possibly the paramedics, because it really could be a seizure. That epileptic type of behavior is not normal in a Catholic Charismatic gathering, that isn’t even normal for many Protestant Charismatics. But you will see that among the Holiness/Oneness type of classic Pentecostalism.
Charisms are a gift of the Holy Spirit (CCC799). So, eliminating Him as the source of opposition to them, I then ask myself just which spirit or spirits would oppose the use of charisms?
Newbies to the Charismatic Renewal take part in a Life in the Spirit Seminar. One of the items studied is the Church’s teachings of Mystical Theology on the Discernment of the Spirits. There are 3 spirits; Holy Spirit, Human Spirit, Evil Spirit. This requires prayer and experience. Mature members in the Renewal can usually discern the source of a charism. A priest can test the charisms by simply commanding the person exhibiting the charism to cease in the name of Jesus. If the charism is true, the person would immediately obey the priest; if not, then one must consider that the human spirit, and possibly the evil spirit, is at play here. This same test is used to verify the source of mystical phenomena.
“Modern ways”? 2,000 years ago, the twelve were thought to be drunk, so filled were they with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:12-15). The charisms have applied in each and every year in which the Church has existed - they are neither relics of biblical antiquity, nor a borrowed Protestant novelty. They are how God, the Holy Spirit, accomplishes all the good that is done upon this earth.I have tend to think of it as a quasi-modernist strand of enthusasim and a way of prayer, rooted in emotion, that copies charasmatic protestants. I have distain for it, but tolerate it because the Church does and the people in it seem genuine (many of my friends are charasmatics to some extant or another.
However, I tend to think, why invent new ways of praying if the existing ways are good the way they are. There is 1500+ years of church history to draw on for prayer, and yet people want new “modern” ways. They already have plenty of options.
But here I go ranting again.
God Bless and Ave Maria!
So you think that some who are opposed to the use of charisms are under the influence of evil spirits. Fair enough; I think I understand that.
I am a Charismatic Catholic and proud of it! Thank you Jesus!!
JESUS is the main focus…the movement is simply a place where people can worship and use their spiritual gifts in whatever way the Holy Spirit leads. It should never replace or downplay or contradict the teachings of the Church. The Bible talks about spiritual gifts in I Corinthians chapter 12.
Thank you, but I’m hoping that po18guy will address my question.
In other words, even if the things he listed were abuses (which you don’t consider), they weren’t abuses in your eyes because in your opinion he didn’t like the Charismatic movement in the first place, so his observations are invalidI don’t know that I would say there are “often” abuses. As far as I know, unlike some other renewal movements, the Charismatic Renewal Movement has yet to incur any “reigning in” on the part of the Vatican.
I have trouble taking seriously the one-sided reporting on a random guy who went to Steubenville with the express intent of reporting on how bad it was. If that’s the attitude you go with, then of course you’re going to see “abuse” everywhere you turn.
Agree. The Charismatic renewal woke me up in my faith and ignites me to go and grow. I am sad when I hear so much animosity toward what is so very helpful for the Church. I’m certain it is very misunderstood.
Again, I am not questioning spiritual movements within the Church, I only question this one, no where in the history of our Church have we seen a movement such as CCR. You have cited a few Saints that have indeed had this charism, although, they were not within a sanctuary full of fellow Catholics expecting the same gift as at a charismatic Mass. How do you know who is being genuine? If one person fell or stated dancing during Mass, I would think “weird, but ok. God bless them”, but if 50 out of 200 did so, I would question the source of their enthusiasm.
Please define what the CCR is, so I can have it from someone who is knowledgeable of it, as you seem to be. All of it fruits seem commendable, but this movement is a novelty in our church, why is it that, for centuries it was not even a consideration - even by those whom you have said had this said charism? Why is there a need to redefine our liturgy, when the Saints before us needed no such action in this modern sence?
I am hesitant because this is a movement that demands so little of those attracted to such a said movement, no intellect, no will, just the emotions (although, I agree they might be fruits of it). I would never suppose that the reform that those Saints are attributed with, where made on only their emotions.
Apparently overlooked in all of this is that the Church, for her part, has well examined this movement over the course of decades, and has declared that those concerns are basically unfounded. There is a Bishop over each group, surveying it and monitoring it, if not actually participating in it. The concern appears to be, not that the charismatics are taking over, but that they exist at all.
First, let us agree that charisms are a good thing:
