C
CWBetts
Guest
So am I to understand that the Vatican has approved a movement that is demonic in origin? Is that what you are saying?
- Status
M
Mickey
Guest
I cannot speak for the Vatican.
In 1974, in a scathing criticism of the Charismatic movement, the staunchly orthodox Archbishop Dwyer of the United States said, “We regard it bluntly as one of the most dangerous trends in the Church in our time, closely allied in spirit with other disruptive and divisive movements; threatening grave harm to unity and damage to countless souls.”
Joseph Fitcher, in his 1974 book The Catholic Cult of the Paraclete, mentioned that some Catholic prelates were “worried about the Protestant influence on their people” due to Pentecostalism. Fitcher quoted Bishop Joseph McKinney’s worry about Catholics being “misled and not being firmly grounded in theology”.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Satan does not bestow gifts of the Spirit. Do you know any Charismatic Catholics? I have seen no greater outpouring of love. From those who are staunchly opposed to the Renewal, I see discord and division. Which is more in tune with the fruits of the Spirit?
M
Mickey
Guest
Did I say that he did?
Yes. The gibbersih tongues are the most disturbing aspect–followed closely by being “slain in the Spirit” and the awful pop/rock revival music.
I see nothing but deception on the level of a Benny Hinn revival.
Check out this article by the Catholic Traditionalists.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a032htFusionCatholicism_Vennari.htm
D
DrPiano
Guest
Sorry. I’ve been following this thread since the beginning and I just can’t stay silent any more.
I attend a parish that is considered a “personal parish of the bishop” and has been granted special permissions to incorporate several “charismatic” elements into our worship - primarily this means that we have approximately 60 seconds of free-form worship twice during mass: once at the end of the Gloria and once in between communion songs, after everyone has received. During these times people are free to sing/pray in the Spirit (in whatever language they feel led to use) - or pray silently. On the whole, a good portion of our parishoners raise their hands as they feel led during the music. Many, but not all, have prayed in tongues at some point in time or another.
HOWEVER - all that being said, we have one of the most REVERENT parishes I have ever found. We have a deep love for the Eucharist (including those gestures that many associate with this reverence - many choosing to fully genuflect before receiving, many receiving on tongue, most receiving under both species, etc). We have the only perpetual adoration chapel in the area. Our tabernacle is located centrally, directly behind the altar. Everyone serving on the altar kneels briefly when the Eucharist is reserved, and many people in the congregation remain kneeling until the Eucharist has been reserved.
Few, if any, people in our parish hold hands during the Our Father. Few use the Orans position for that matter- recognizing that it is reserved for the priest. Our music is a mixture of gregorian chant, traditional hymns, modern (but very beautiful and reverent) compositions (often by parish members), and a few reverent and theologically sound non-Catholic songs. I’ve heard more non-Catholic songs at Non-Charismatic parishes than I’ve heard at ours. Of our settings of the ordinary, at least 25% are in Latin/Greek (and during most liturgical seasons at least one of the parts of the Ordinary is in Latin). Our Kyrie is always in Greek. We make use of a wide variety of instruments and musical forms, but the music is always beautiful, always lifting us closer to God. It is never noise for the sake of noise or modern for the sake of being moern.
We have all the smells, bells, and trappings of a traditional parish. Our church is beautiful, with plenty of room for stained glass (we couldn’t afford it when it was built, but there are a number of planned projects when we can) and with architecture that was intentionally and explicitly Catholic. We have a larger-than-life Crucifix in a VERY prominent place. We have absolutely beautiful vestments, altar cloths, etc. We regularly utilize incense. Bells are rung during the consecration every week (again not true in many parishes I’ve been to that are not charismatic). Our altar servers are all male. Most if not all bow during the appropriate part of the creed. Many women choose to wear headcoverings of some sort. In fact, in part due to all the reasons I just stated, when I mention what church I go to to others in the community, they say “oh, you go to that conservative, traditionalist parish” - it kind of blows me away really. I think to myself “no, I go to an absolutely orthodox parish” (not Orthodox as in the Eastern Church, but orthodox as meaning “of, pertaining to, or conforming to the approved form of Catholicism”).
We are absolutely faithful to the Vatican - and to the Apostolic faith it represents. Father frequently references papal encyclicals, church documents, the Catechism, etc. in his homilies. Everything we teach is completely in line with church teaching (again, not true in many parishes I’ve visited). Last Lent, our parish mission was geared to studying the documents of Vatican II - helping people understand what was, and was NOT, part of that wonderful council. We have deep respect and reverence for our bishop, the bishops, and especially the Bishop of Rome. We produce the most Seminarians in our diocese.
Our parish life is vibrantly sacramental. We have, for example, the most time in our area set aside for Confessions - because it is necessary to accomodate everyone wanting to go to confession. We are also a deeply contemplative parish: we have a third order Carmelite group closely associated with us, and, as I said earlier, a Perpetual Adoration chapel as two examples. We are constantly being called to fall more deeply in love with Jesus.
A Priest once visited our parish and later told the congregation: “I used to tell everyone I met that you cannot be both Charismatic and Reverent. After visiting your parish I realize that I am wrong and need to go apologize to everyone I said that to and correct my mistake.”
(continued…)
D
DrPiano
Guest
(Part 2)
One of our deacons once explained that hierarchy, by its nature, pulls an organization inward. The Charisms of the Charismatic movement pull us outward. Left unchecked, each leads to danger. If a Charismatic group rejects the authority of the bishops and of Rome, it heads down a path to heresy and ruin. If the Church, or a parish, looks further and further inward, rejecting the outward pull of the Spirit to love God and our Neighbor, it leads to navel-gazing, a loss of relevancy in the community, and a loss of relationship with God. Both are dangerous and unfortunate, when in excess. For it to be a true Charismatic movement, it MUST recognize the authority of the Bishops, the authority of Rome, the authority of the Magesterium. But the Heirarchy must also be in a deep, communicating relationship with the Holy Spirit, and a deep, loving relationship with God. A true Charismatic movement will always lead to a deeper love of the sacraments.
Have there been abuses? Yes. I don’t deny that there have. I had, for example, a poor experience when I went to a Life in the Spirit seminar. That isn’t to say all of those seminars are bad (I believe there are better-led ones out there), but there are certainly ways in which I think they could be fixed (the materials they handed out could definitely use some improvement, and people need to be corrected on the “babbling” thing discussed earlier as two examples). But abuses do not make the movement wrong - any more than a priest sexually abusing a child makes the priesthood a bad thing. For those who have experienced abuses, I am truly sorry. And if you don’t understand it, or don’t find raising your hands to be an authentic expression of your own adoration or praise, I understand that too. I personally have not been granted the gift of speaking in tongues (my husband has, but didn’t ask for it), and while I’m open to that gift if God desires to give it to me, I am not going to ask for it any time soon. During the “charismatic worship” periods of the Mass in our parish, I usually pray silently. My own gifts have been of a more contemplative nature, and I think that is wonderful and fine.
But I agree with what has been said here: just because you don’t get it, or you don’t agree, does not mean you can say you know people’s motives, people’s internal reasons for doing what they do. In an example given above, perhaps the people who sit near the front of the church and raise their hands sit at the front (not the back) because they feel that sitting in front helps them feel closer to Christ (it works for little kids…). Perhaps they do not realize that they are being “distracting” by raising their hands (I certainly wouldn’t think I was distracting - I’d need to be told). You can’t tell that they’re doing it “to get attention.”
Not getting it, or not liking it also does not give you the right to say that the Church in her Wisdom has made a mistake by approving of the Charismatic Renewal. I know when I joined the Catholic Church I promised to abide by Her teachings, even when I don’t get it. And She teaches that this is Authentic. So while you may not like it or not get it, you can no more say that She is wrong or mistaken than someone can say that She is wrong or mistaken for introducing Mass in the vernacular.
So… if its your opinion, you can say you don’t like it, you can say you don’t want to participate, you can say you don’t feel comfortable, you can even say that there have been abuses. All of that is fine - and I will readily accept your right to hold such an opinion. But you cannot say it is “Dangerous” or that the Church in her Wisdom is wrong for allowing an authentic expression of the Charismatic Renewal - because that would be setting yourself as a judge over Rome.
One of our deacons once explained that hierarchy, by its nature, pulls an organization inward. The Charisms of the Charismatic movement pull us outward. Left unchecked, each leads to danger. If a Charismatic group rejects the authority of the bishops and of Rome, it heads down a path to heresy and ruin. If the Church, or a parish, looks further and further inward, rejecting the outward pull of the Spirit to love God and our Neighbor, it leads to navel-gazing, a loss of relevancy in the community, and a loss of relationship with God. Both are dangerous and unfortunate, when in excess. For it to be a true Charismatic movement, it MUST recognize the authority of the Bishops, the authority of Rome, the authority of the Magesterium. But the Heirarchy must also be in a deep, communicating relationship with the Holy Spirit, and a deep, loving relationship with God. A true Charismatic movement will always lead to a deeper love of the sacraments.
Have there been abuses? Yes. I don’t deny that there have. I had, for example, a poor experience when I went to a Life in the Spirit seminar. That isn’t to say all of those seminars are bad (I believe there are better-led ones out there), but there are certainly ways in which I think they could be fixed (the materials they handed out could definitely use some improvement, and people need to be corrected on the “babbling” thing discussed earlier as two examples). But abuses do not make the movement wrong - any more than a priest sexually abusing a child makes the priesthood a bad thing. For those who have experienced abuses, I am truly sorry. And if you don’t understand it, or don’t find raising your hands to be an authentic expression of your own adoration or praise, I understand that too. I personally have not been granted the gift of speaking in tongues (my husband has, but didn’t ask for it), and while I’m open to that gift if God desires to give it to me, I am not going to ask for it any time soon. During the “charismatic worship” periods of the Mass in our parish, I usually pray silently. My own gifts have been of a more contemplative nature, and I think that is wonderful and fine.
But I agree with what has been said here: just because you don’t get it, or you don’t agree, does not mean you can say you know people’s motives, people’s internal reasons for doing what they do. In an example given above, perhaps the people who sit near the front of the church and raise their hands sit at the front (not the back) because they feel that sitting in front helps them feel closer to Christ (it works for little kids…). Perhaps they do not realize that they are being “distracting” by raising their hands (I certainly wouldn’t think I was distracting - I’d need to be told). You can’t tell that they’re doing it “to get attention.”
Not getting it, or not liking it also does not give you the right to say that the Church in her Wisdom has made a mistake by approving of the Charismatic Renewal. I know when I joined the Catholic Church I promised to abide by Her teachings, even when I don’t get it. And She teaches that this is Authentic. So while you may not like it or not get it, you can no more say that She is wrong or mistaken than someone can say that She is wrong or mistaken for introducing Mass in the vernacular.
So… if its your opinion, you can say you don’t like it, you can say you don’t want to participate, you can say you don’t feel comfortable, you can even say that there have been abuses. All of that is fine - and I will readily accept your right to hold such an opinion. But you cannot say it is “Dangerous” or that the Church in her Wisdom is wrong for allowing an authentic expression of the Charismatic Renewal - because that would be setting yourself as a judge over Rome.
C
CWBetts
Guest
I refuse to accept the opinions of radical traditionalists. The “gibberish” of tongues is scriptural. I urge you to read Acts (its in the New Testament, Right after the Gospel of John)
M
Mickey
Guest
(Edited)
There are tongues of fire. There are tongues that can be interpreted. There are tongues of different languages. There are the unutterable tongues.
(Edited)
Besides, St John Chrysostom regarded the whole phenomenon of ‘speaking in tongues’ as not only something that was not practiced in his own day, but was even obscure.
“This whole phenomenon [of speaking in tongues] is very obscure, but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such then as used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more”? (Chrysostom, 344-407)
There are tongues of fire. There are tongues that can be interpreted. There are tongues of different languages. There are the unutterable tongues.
(Edited)
Besides, St John Chrysostom regarded the whole phenomenon of ‘speaking in tongues’ as not only something that was not practiced in his own day, but was even obscure.
“This whole phenomenon [of speaking in tongues] is very obscure, but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such then as used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more”? (Chrysostom, 344-407)
D
Dominique1234
Guest
The Orans posture is what the priest does as he extends his arms outward, palms facing upwards, asking God to intercede for all. This is something that I see people do at every Mass I attend. People do this, and it originated from Priests allowing the congregation to join in doing the Orans posture. These priests were not Traditional priests, if I may note, nor were they orthodox in their Faith. They wanted change. I’ve seen it first hand. When priests change the liturgy, that’s not correct either.
The Code of Canon Law (1983) does mandate: “The liturgical books approved by the competent authority are to be faithfully observed in the celebration of the sacraments; therefore, no one on personal authority may add, remove, or change anything in them” (Canon 826.1)
There is also that 2/3 ruling, WITH approval of the Holy See… I’m sure you’ve read that before…
There’s so many facts that go, not necessarily against it, but that are not FOR it. There’s already a number of gestures which the Church asks of us to do, (kneel, beat our chest at the Confiteor and the Agnus Dei, stand & sit, etc…) The Church prescribes these and to add to them or simply remove some by changing it with another inane gesture (NOT prescribed by the Church) is futile and may lead to consequences.
I am in no way knocking those who do it. I am knocking the gesture, which is going against Church teaching. Holding hands OR the Orans posture done by the lay people is NOT right. Simple as that.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Are you joking. You have obviously NEVER read the Scriptures. Does Pentecost ring a bell? In addition, St. Paul refers to speaking in the tongues of angels. So yest, tounges IS scriptural. It is praying without your brain getting in the way. And for the record, the Scriptures (which are infallible) trump a statement made by a saint (which fallible)
M
Mickey
Guest
Well then…you must have real problems with bouncing and swaying with hands in the air, being “slain in the Spirit”, gibberish tongues, semi-seizures,Holding hands OR the Orans posture done by the lay people is NOT right. Simple as that.
rock n’ roll Eucharistic adoration, etc., etc., etc…
C
CWBetts
Guest
Your insulting characterizations of legitimate worship are completely lacking in charity.Well then…you must have real problems with bouncing and swaying with hands in the air, being “slain in the Spirit”, gibberish tongues, semi-seizures,
rock n’ roll Eucharistic adoration, etc., etc., etc…
M
Mickey
Guest
You are the one that must be joking…or you are sadly misinterpreting. Sacred Scriptures does not define the type of “gibberish” tongues to which you subscribe. And furthermore, Sacred Tradition tells us that the gift of tongues has fallen out of use.
But the Pentecostal revivalists found it again…and the charismatic catholics copied them.
C
CWBetts
Guest
tradition, not TraditionYou are the one that must be joking…or you are sadly misinterpreting. Sacred Scriptures does not define the type of “gibberish” tongues to which you subscribe. And furthermore, Sacred Tradition tells us that the gift of tongues has fallen out of use.
But the Pentecostal revivalists found it again…and the charismatic catholics copied them.
M
Mickey
Guest
I am sorry that you feel that way. I am not attacking you personally. I do not see the charismatic movement as legitimate worship. I see it as something very, very protestant.Your insulting characterizations of legitimate worship are completely lacking in charity.
M
Mickey
Guest
The Church Fathers are part of Tradition.
D
Dominique1234
Guest
But you cannot say it is “Dangerous” or that the Church in her Wisdom is wrong for allowing an authentic expression of the Charismatic Renewal - because that would be setting yourself as a judge over Rome.
Rome never proclaimed the Charismatic movement to be a doctrine of the Faith.If they have, please provide PROOF of what you claim to be Catholic doctrine… or was it just a letter to the faithful?
J.P. II, at a pilgrimage I attended when I was 11, also said of one particular Marian movement I used to be part of who is today, excommunicated, that they were a good group following the teachings of the faithful, and helping people towards a better devotion to our Heavenly Mother… Did I mention that their members (as well as religious communities with many nuns, brothers and priest) excommunicated?!
Rome speaks of the CHARISMS of the Holy Spirit, not the movement itself. The movement provides, AT TIMES, some religious education on the Charisms, but to say that EVERYONE has a gift, EVERYONE gets to speak tongues, etc… is wrong. This is false and is what is being taught today in the Charismatic movement. I’ve been to many, in different areas of the world, and I can tell you STRAIGHT UP that there is practically NO difference from one or the other… MAYBE a more reverent leader or priest including a rosary or a less lenient priest saying a more traditional Mass…
This is why, as a past Charismatic, I say what I do. You can judge a tree by it’s fruits, and all I can say is that you have a bunch of nuns, over emotional lay people, and modernist priests getting together to ‘pray’ or ‘worship’, when in the end, it’s who can scream up to the heavens the loudest, or can cry the longest, or can ‘feel the spirit’ and roll on the ground the most times…
I can see why these people say that it changed their lives! They’d look CRAZY if they said anything opposing that! I’m sorry… the truth hurts… take it from someone who’s known it for a LONG time. Not saying I’m perfect… FAR from it. But to avoid what’s in your face and deny the fact that it’s wrong… you get the idea…
Rome never proclaimed the Charismatic movement to be a doctrine of the Faith.If they have, please provide PROOF of what you claim to be Catholic doctrine… or was it just a letter to the faithful?
J.P. II, at a pilgrimage I attended when I was 11, also said of one particular Marian movement I used to be part of who is today, excommunicated, that they were a good group following the teachings of the faithful, and helping people towards a better devotion to our Heavenly Mother… Did I mention that their members (as well as religious communities with many nuns, brothers and priest) excommunicated?!
Rome speaks of the CHARISMS of the Holy Spirit, not the movement itself. The movement provides, AT TIMES, some religious education on the Charisms, but to say that EVERYONE has a gift, EVERYONE gets to speak tongues, etc… is wrong. This is false and is what is being taught today in the Charismatic movement. I’ve been to many, in different areas of the world, and I can tell you STRAIGHT UP that there is practically NO difference from one or the other… MAYBE a more reverent leader or priest including a rosary or a less lenient priest saying a more traditional Mass…
This is why, as a past Charismatic, I say what I do. You can judge a tree by it’s fruits, and all I can say is that you have a bunch of nuns, over emotional lay people, and modernist priests getting together to ‘pray’ or ‘worship’, when in the end, it’s who can scream up to the heavens the loudest, or can cry the longest, or can ‘feel the spirit’ and roll on the ground the most times…
I can see why these people say that it changed their lives! They’d look CRAZY if they said anything opposing that! I’m sorry… the truth hurts… take it from someone who’s known it for a LONG time. Not saying I’m perfect… FAR from it. But to avoid what’s in your face and deny the fact that it’s wrong… you get the idea…
C
CWBetts
Guest
But at the same time, not every statement they made was infallible. The Scriptures are free from error. Tongues are in the Scriptures, and we are also exhorted not to quench the Spirit. Lumen Gentium 12 also tells us to welcome the gifts with thanksgiving. You are in serious error.The Church Fathers are part of Tradition.
M
Mickey
Guest
Dear CW,
I see that you are getting angry. I do not want to be the cause of any anger. I will always be opposed to the Charismatic movement. I was opposed to it for many years as a Roman Catholic and I am opposed to it as an Orthodox Christian. I will be ending my contribution to this thread.
Please forgive me.
D
Dominique1234
Guest
(Edited)
I don’t have a problem with any of that done in the right place at the right time. I bounce and sway with the best of them, just not at Holy Mass. It’s not in the rubrics or teachings of the Church.
I don’t mean to offend anyone, and if I did, I’m terribly sorry. My intention is to bring some truth to the table. Some things that are done in the liturgy are not part of our Faith. Anyone who opposes this cannot and should not call themselves Catholic. It’s like disagreeing with Confession but going to Communion… it just doesn’t fit. I don’t believe that it is good or correct to try and make the Catholic Church our own, or change it to our liking so that we can get a better feeling out of it.
If one leads their life this way, they don’t live for God. They live for themselves, for their own personal feelings. It’s the hard, honest truth. Hard to hear sometimes. But it’s got to be said.
God bless you and please pray for me. Thanks.
I don’t have a problem with any of that done in the right place at the right time. I bounce and sway with the best of them, just not at Holy Mass. It’s not in the rubrics or teachings of the Church.
I don’t mean to offend anyone, and if I did, I’m terribly sorry. My intention is to bring some truth to the table. Some things that are done in the liturgy are not part of our Faith. Anyone who opposes this cannot and should not call themselves Catholic. It’s like disagreeing with Confession but going to Communion… it just doesn’t fit. I don’t believe that it is good or correct to try and make the Catholic Church our own, or change it to our liking so that we can get a better feeling out of it.
If one leads their life this way, they don’t live for God. They live for themselves, for their own personal feelings. It’s the hard, honest truth. Hard to hear sometimes. But it’s got to be said.
God bless you and please pray for me. Thanks.
- Status