Charismatic Evangelical Church transforming christianity

[Abira]

lol, Lucy…

you just reminded me of someone I know who said that some people in her church were applauding parts of the service they liked…eg comunion or a sermon lol… (I don’t know if they ever booed any)

But it’s the same idea; that some people look for what pleases them, instead of how they can please

 

[valient_Lucy]

It’s a terrible tragedy that “worship styles” cause schism in a church. It’s a tragedy that people are so worried about what they can “get out” of worship rather than what they can offer to God in the act of worship. It’s a tragedy that people cannot make a sacrifice by listening to music they don’t like rather than split up a church simply over style of music.

Even the Church website has a section about what that church can do for their family.

I wonder what Jesus would have responded to someone who asked him, “So, you keep telling us to follow you. What’s in it for me?”

I can picture Him answering, “All men will hate you because of Me.”

By teaching people that they can simply split up a church because of the music style, they are teaching people (unintentionally, but still teaching them) that Christianity is about selfishness, and NOT about sacrifice.

THAT’S the tragedy here.

 

[valient_Lucy]

lol, Lucy…

you just reminded me of someone I know who said that some people in her church were applauding parts of the service they liked…eg comunion or a sermon lol… (I don’t know if they ever booed any)

But it’s the same idea; that some people look for what pleases them, instead of how they can please

EXACTLY!
Jesus said, Pick up your cross and follow me, and St. Paul warned against divisions in the church. What would they think of people who refuse to make a sacrifice of listening to music that they don’t like, and would rather cause a division in the church over something so silly?

That church is teaching people that worship is about entertainment, that it’s about ME.
Worship is not about ME. It’s about GOD. I think that church has forgotten that.

 

[Abira]

That church is teaching people that worship is about entertainment, that it’s about ME.
Worship is not about ME. It’s about GOD. I think that church has forgotten that.

I don’t know if the church (specifically) has forgotten that, I think society is more self focussed, a kind of fast paced compensation culture that is all about ‘me’…

I think it makes it harder for any church to function on that level within a self centred society.

S x

 

[MariaG]

Hiya Maria (or anyone else who can help me out )

I don’t fully understand this… I have often confused the terms Catholic, catholic (in the protestant sense) Roman Catholic and Roman Church…

What do Catholics understand these termsto be in their simplest sense… and is it truly offensive when someone uses the wrong one?

From the times of the early Church, quite early on, the early Christians used the term “Catholic” to refer to herself. This is the term that the Catholic Church uses in all official church documents from about 100ad.

Sometimes to differentiate between different rites, like the Roman Rite or the Byzantine Rite, the Catholic Church will say Roman (or Byzantine).

When the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox split, the Catholic Church still retained the name “Catholic Church”.

It was not until the Reformation that the Catholic church was ever referred to as a whole, ie all those who were in communion with the pope, as “Roman” Catholic Church, or the Roman Church. And this was STILL not done by the CAtholic Church herself, but those who wished to differentiate the Catholic church from those protestant Churches who wished to still call themselves “catholic” since Catholic means universal. (Again, except to differentiate between different rites, but as a whole, we call ourselves the Catholic Church or simply the Church.)

While some Roman Rite Catholics will refer to themselves as “Roman Catholics”, it is not an official name of the Catholic Church.

As to whether or not it is offensive, some disagree and proudly claim it. However, historically, it WAS used in a derogative manner. Today, those who refer to the Roman Church, usually do not understand and frequently present a “Jack Chick” sort of mentality about the teachings of the Catholic church. Jack Chick prints highly offensive LIES about the teachings of the Catholic Church so it tends to promote and contiued aversion to the term “roman church”

Even dictionary.com lists it as “often offensive” (#11)

. a member of the Roman Catholic ChurchOften Offensive.

We are the Catholic Church. That is our official name. Part of the Catholic church are many different “rites” of which only ONE is the Roman Rite.

That is the name we have had for over 1900 years. It is only polite to use the proper name of a Church rather than the name given to it by those who “protested” against it.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[Abira]

ok I’ll try and remember that… you’re right though, the only way I’ve ever heard ‘catholic’ used is to mean the worldwide Christian church during the creed.

thanks a lot,

S x

 

[JimO]

Sorry you felt that way. Certainly wasn’t my intention, although being provocative is always fun.

As a resident of Spain, a country with hundreds of years of persecution of Protestants up until really the 1970s, I know a bit about religious “hubris”.

Is this all part of “falling in love with Jesus”? Don’t you realize that we are supposed to be brothers and sisters in the body of Christ?

As a Catholic resident of the Southeastern U.S., I know a bit about personal recent persecution.

 

[MariaG]

ok I’ll try and remember that… you’re right though, the only way I’ve ever heard ‘catholic’ used is to mean the worldwide Christian church during the creed.

thanks a lot,

S x

You are welcome.

It helps to remeber that for over 1500 years, there was only one church and that Church called herself the Catholic Church.

Just because people decide to leave that church, does not mean that the Church does not still exist nor have the right to call herself the Catholic Church because others wish to lay claim to “catholic” name.

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

 

[rtconstant]

To be honest I had problems with the Charismatic movement when I was a Southern Baptist even before I was a Catholic. While I don’t want to insult anyone who is sincere in their search for God within these movments it just seems to me that the Charismatic movement as a whole suffers from skewed perception about what it means to be Christian.

I want to stress the fact that as a Christian I completely believe that Holy Spirit is as active today within the Church as he ever has been. Miracles and gifts do occur today and thank God for that! However, in my experience I’ve never seen these miracles connected to the Charismatic movement.

I’ve seen and know of family members and friends who have been healed of sickness and who have survived against impossible situations (I think many of us do). However, most of these people were humble and quiet people of prayer.

Which brings me to the jist of what I’m getting at. The Charismatic movement IMHO seems to lack a heart of humility. To be honest why would someone seek after the gift of tongues? I’m not saying it isn’t real or that it doesn’t serve a purpose. However, I’m of the opinion that if I humble myself before My Lord and with all my heart love and honor His commandments He will provide for me whatever grace He feels would be most beneficial to me.

Within Sacred Scripture we see St. Paul instruct that Love is the greatest of the gifts of the Spirit. Yet in my experience I’m used to seeing Charismatics seeking or displaying things like: tongues, healing, prophesy etc. It strikes me odd that the “greater” but more subtle gifts of The Spirit are less sought after than the more explicit gifts. This smacks of showmanship and a desire for attention. This is compounded by the generally superior attitude (which is unchristian) that is displayed, commonly, amongst many in the movement. To me this does not bode well for the origin and nature of the movement.

Also, I’m prone to wonder what practical application this movement has. In Scripture we see that usually gifts of The Spirit typically had a practical and immediate use. Such as tongues at Pentecost. The teleporting of the Apostle to the Ethiopian etc. Yet now we have this movement that is supposedly accomplishing something that was already present. The Holy Spirit never left the Church and never had a problem moving within her faculties. So why do we need a Charismatic movement?

Lastly let’s face it the rapid growth of Prosperity Gospel with the Charismatic movement is VERY disturbing. “Name it and Claim it” is as blantant a corruption of the Gospel as has existed since well… I really can think of anything like it. It is a justification for pastoral greed and slap in the face to the faithful who live in less prosperous nations. Yet this movement is gaining ground in the evangelical church. That does not bode well for evangelical chrisitanity.

 

[happygal]

It is dishonest to pull people away form Catholic churches rather than show them how to become better disciples as Catholics. The hidden implication is that they can’t do so as Catholics. In other words, I prefer the Billy Graham approach. I’ve heard that he would refer folks at his crusades to Catholic churches if that was their background. Why do these growing evangelical churches feel the need to do otherwise, if not to imply that the Catholic church isn’t validly Christian?

Hi djrakowski

I guess you should not use the word DISHONEST, we are all Christ believers and not some non believer spreading gospel. I totally agree with you that Billy Graham approach is better for fallen away Catholic, coz recently i got to know lots of fallen away Catholic and i wonder why God let me know them!! Then i begun to understand, that coz i learn bits here about Catholicism and i believe God wanted me to help them back to CC, thus my approach is never to ask them to my church , provided they wanted to go themselve…else i would volunteer to attend Mass with them…becoz it is always happy to see fallen away Christ believers going back to church. You don’t need to show off what you did, what we need is to do thing for God that’s all, no need to be ask no be to gain credit, the more humble we are, the more we get closer to God…

 

[happygal]

But only Roman Catholics have the chance and opportunity for the relationship with Christ which He himself demanded. Other Churches can have some sort of relationship, but it is not the relationship which Christ wanted.

**Hi Peterdiago

Look at what you are saying, please do not speak on behalf of Jesus “what relationship which Christ do not wanted” You aim Jesus then please do not make such remarks. It is very rude of you!!!**

I find it interesting that you have this in your signature;

“Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.” - Peter

And yet you appear to be arguing exactly the opposite. That quote follows the hard teaching on the Eucharist - something which every single non-Catholic rejects. St. Peter says that after many others have left (John 6:66 - easiest Bible verse to remember!) because of the Eucharistic discourse.

Don’t you see that this is exactly what the Protestant heresy has done? It has caused many to leave Christ’s Church and follow the traditions of men. It has caused people to leave the one who has the words of eternal life.

I would rather prefer you to be more nicer in your words, what Protestant heresy has done…Come on, did God ask you to speak to other Christ believers this way!!! I appreciate your way of ministering the protestant, but then again your way is just unpolish.Ministering to others is good, but it does not mean spouting poison words to others

Non-Catholics do NOT have the full relationship with Christ that Catholics can have, and they can NEVER approach the level of relationship that a Catholic can. A Catholic can approach Jesus Christ in the flesh; body, blood, soul and divinity. That’s a level of relationship no Protestant can ever achieve.

**Oh my goodness, if you are telling me, this is how Catholic experience God, and this is how God have spoken to Catholic like you, then please make it clear that this is a private revelation that God has given you to speak on behalf for him…Come on only those who eat solid foods are charitable to speak which is only the Pope, pple like us are drinking milk still have a long long journey to walk…

As a protestant i love the Catholic Church and their doctrine, but what is disappointing are those who practise it. So before you wanted to evangelize to protestant, i would suggest you pray for godly wisdom to avoid causing yourself to stumble even more **

That is why Protestantism should be fought with every fibre of our being - because it makes lowers the bar for what a relationship is and can be. Shoot for the moon and you’ll land among the stars even if you miss. Shoot for something lower and you’ll land on your face if you fail.

 

[Fidelis]

Hi djrakowski

I guess you should not use the word DISHONEST, we are all Christ believers and not some non believer spreading gospel. I totally agree with you that Billy Graham approach is better for fallen away Catholic, coz recently i got to know lots of fallen away Catholic and i wonder why God let me know them!! Then i begun to understand, that coz i learn bits here about Catholicism and i believe God wanted me to help them back to CC, **thus my approach is never to ask them to my church , provided they wanted to go themselve…else i would volunteer to attend Mass with them…becoz it is always happy to see fallen away Christ believers going back to church. **You don’t need to show off what you did, what we need is to do thing for God that’s all, no need to be ask no be to gain credit, the more humble we are, the more we get closer to God…

happygal, if this is what you are really doing you have just risen considerably in my estimation! Thank you for being a true sister in Christ. Even though we may have our differences, we all can better build Christ’s Kingdom by strengthening what we have, not by tearing down and competing for souls.

Anyway,

 

[Catherine_S]

The Economist magazine had an interesting article on the rise of Pentacostal/charismatic Christianity.

If you haven’t read it, here is the source:
economist.com/world/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=8401206

Forget theology for a minute: one thing that is heartening for Evangelicals, and must be depressing for Roman Catholics, is how the Evangelical Church is growing in Latin America, Africa and China, mostly the charismatic brand of Evangelical Christianity. China is now the second largest nation of practicing Christians (estimated 100 million), the large majority of whom are Evangelicals.

I as a Catholic do not find this depressing at all. I find it difficult to believe that so many can go this way! It is definately built on sand but God can and may bring good from it!

The Mormons went for tongues etc…
frontiernet.net/~bcmmin/tongue1.htm
.
The Hindu’s display some of these things…
The Grofs state that "individuals involved in this process might find it difficult to control their behavior; during power rushes of Kundalini energy, they often emit various involuntary sounds, and their bodies move in strange and unexpected patterns. Among the most common manifestations … are unmotivated and unnatural laughter or crying, talking tongues … and imitating a variety of animal sounds and movements" (p. 78-79). The Grofs state that “careful study of the manifestations of Kundalini awakening confirm that this process, although sometimes very intense and shattering,** is essentially healing”** (citing Warren Smith by permission in an article for Spiritual Counterfeits Project entitled “HOLY LAUGHTER or Strong Delusion” (Fall, 1994, Vol. 19.2), p. 14).
.
Paul to Corinthians 13:1-13
.