Charismatic Mass

[VociMike]

The music that I have heard at every charismatic Mass I have ever attended can probably be summed up with some lyrics I remember from one song:

“The engineer on the glory train is Jesus. Jesus.”

Oh dear!

But seriously, charismatics, are you open to adopting the music given pride of place by the Holy Spirit in your worship? Will you be forming scholas soon? Why or why not?

 

[palmas85]

I apologize for making a wrong assumption. Had you made this clarification, I would not have responded that way.

It sounds like you think the Catholic Charismatic is heretical. Is this your opinion, a “red flag,” or merely a hypothetical? Please clarify.

I am sorry you’ve experienced this within the CCR. This has not been my experience. I have found that the majority that belong to the movement have a very rich love and deep spirituality. As a former Charimatic/Evangelical Protestant, I’m afraid I have seen these things in those circles. Perhaps this is why the Saints were so reluctant to embrace their charisms? (Fear of pride)

Just as a word of caution though; perhaps your perception of those in the movement do not reflect what’s truly going on in their hearts. Likewise, many Evangelicals see a lack of enthusiasm in mainstream Catholic spirituality. As a result, they mistakenly assume there is spiritual deadness. The reality is, our faith is quite lively, just expressed differently.

I do believe that baptism of the Holy Spirit can infuse with more grace; however, it’s not a requirement. Certainly it’s possible to get carried away in the movement, and miss the whole point: love of God, love of neighbor, and true holiness.

**I suppose we can only speculate on this one. I also find this troubling on a number of levels. However, we know that the renewal started while a devout woman was praying before the Blessed Sacrament. **

In my opinion, I think God is pouring His Spirit out on other groups because of their evangelical zeal, something the Church has seemingly been dormant in. I also think that God is capable of extraordinary means of grace beyond the Sacramental system. This is all speculation and certainly does not answer everything.

The only other thing I can say is that as a former Evangelical, I know that God can and does move in powerful ways. The inner workings of the human soul, and what truly burns in one’s heart transends theological truths. Above all, I believe God is looking into the heart. Anyone who truly loves our Lord, but rejects the Church does so “through no fault of their own.”

**It matters to me (and most of the faithful) that JPII supported the movement. Were there any heretical popes teaching Arianism? Until the Church dogmatically affirms or denies this movement, ultimately must it be left to human opinion? That’s hardly comforting.
**
Just out of curiousity, would you leave the Church if the CCR was affirmed as a genuine movement of God?

Fair enough. Thank you for the honest response.

Do you think it’s unreasonable for many Catholics to embrace the movement, considering the good fruits and support from those at the highest levels of the Church?

From what I understand, the CCR has brought countless people back to the Church. This hardly seems like the workings of a malign deceiver.

God bless!

Actually the renewal started at a Protestant prayer gathering at Duquesne University when several Catholics in attendance asked for baptism of the Holy Spirit from a Presbyterian Minister. It did not begin with a woman praying in front of the Blessed Sacrament.

The late Holy Father had a dream of uniting all faiths under one umbrella with the Roman Church in the center with all other faiths ringed around it. He saw spiritual value in every religion Christian or not. A beautiful dream but a tad unrealistic and actually contrary to what both Scripture and the Catholic Church teaches. His approval of the Charismatic renewal was his personal opinion as far as I know. He did not teach it, encourage it or declare that it would be done. It is allowed to be done. It is not the normal practice of the Church however nor is it’s practice encouraged over the normative rite and devotions.

If the Holy Father comes out and declares that henceforth all Masses would be charismatic, I would accept and obey as I did when the Pauline Rite was instituted.

As to whether or not the Charismatic movement is heretical, I really don’t know. Since it grew out of groups, protestant evangelicals, that reject Catholic doctrine implicitly, I would say a case could possibly be made for heresy. Imagine, what better way to bring the Church down then to infiltrate it under the guise of pious practices and belief?

Of course it is probably unfashionable to believe that such a thing could happen or worse that some force might be interested in such a thing. It is good to remember that there have been cases within various charismatic groups where Christ has been reviled and Catholic teachings ridiculed. I am not saying these things have happened recently or even often, but they have occured.

In the end result who knows? My opinion is not going to change things and is not worth much anyway.

 

[palmas85]

I really don’t understand what you are saying.

All I really know is one thing, and that is that you **don’t like **Charismatic Masses. If you don’t like them - a simple solution - don’t go to any.

As far as i am concerned, if our Pope says they are OK, then they ARE OK FOR ALL CATHOLICS. It is a PERSONAL choice. I don’t claim to be highly educated, have not gone to Uni etc, but even i can understand that. **HEY, IT’S OK! ** Pope John Paul II loved it and if that is not good enough, then what ever could be?

As for us being the true Church - YES! But, that doesn’t mean that our fellow Christians in other denominations are not loved by God, God loves ALL OF US. And of course they have been given the gift of the Holy Spirit. I don’t believe that only Catholics go to heaven and i’m sure you don’t either. It was attitides like that which led people to not like us Catholics. We are supposed to be representatives of Christ.

I notice that you use St Padre Pio in your signature. I doubt that he would have agreed with much what you have written. No I don’t believe that only Catholics go to Heaven. Yes God loves us all, but he did provide an instrument e for our salvation, namely Christ Jesus and His bride, the Catholic Church. I would think that if one expressly rejects the teachings of the very instrument God intended us to use for our salvation then it could and probably would hinder them in their quest for salvation.

The late Holy Father was a good and decent man with a vision. He saw spiritual value in **EVERY ** faith Christian or not. The Catholic church has never taught that. He was not right in everything that he did and his approval of the charismatic issue was far from a desire that it become a normative practice of the Church.

 

[Deidre]

The late Holy Father was a good and decent man with a vision. He saw spiritual value in **EVERY ** faith Christian or not. The Catholic church has never taught that. He was not right in everything that he did and his approval of the charismatic issue was far from a desire that it become a normative practice of the Church.

FROM THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
The Church and non-Christians

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325

842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

It seems like the Church does teach spiritual value in all religions. Of course that doesn’t mean that all religions are equal. The Catholic Church contains the fullness of the truth but many other religions, when properly understood, also contain partial truths of God’s love - and that’s got to be of some spiritual value.

 

[Rykell]

Palmas:

One: since speaking in tongues and the accompanying prophecies and interpretations were integral parts of the Montanists worship services the two movements are indeed similar. Not in every regard to be sure, but then no two heresies were ever exactly the same.

What differentiates a movement as heretical is deviation from Church teaching and disobedience – which is unfortunately what the Montanists did. There has been no evidence that the CCR has done this.

two: the Montanists developed an attitude that they were the spiritual elite, much the same as Gnostics did. Montanists apparently believed that they had discovered the proper way to worship and had been singularly blessed by God by receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit manifested in the speaking of tongues and other ways. They placed themselves in a superior position spiritually then mainstream Christians of the time. Sad to say, many of those involved in the Charismatic movement today do exactly the same thing. I find this to be highly offensive and even insulting to non charismatics.

This strikes me as very amusing, Palmas, for isn’t that exactly what many traditionists do?
I, too, find the traditionists’ elitism to be highly offensive and insulting to mainstream Catholics.

By the above I’m not saying that the charismatic movement is heretical. Not at all. All I’m saying is that the support of clergy members is no absolute guarantee as to the orthodoxy of any position.

Every diocese has a direct liaison (clergy) to the CCR. In today’s society with instant communication, it seems highly unlikely that the Holy See would not have investigated a world-wide movement such as this. They did, and they approved. Until they excommunicate or forbid as they did with Lefebvre’s movement, the participants are in communion with the church.

 

[palmas85]

What differentiates a movement as heretical is deviation from Church teaching and disobedience – which is unfortunately what the Montanists did. There has been no evidence that the CCR has done this.

This strikes me as very amusing, Palmas, for isn’t that exactly what many traditionists do?
I, too, find the traditionists’ elitism to be highly offensive and insulting to mainstream Catholics.

Every diocese has a direct liaison (clergy) to the CCR. In today’s society with instant communication, it seems highly unlikely that the Holy See would not have investigated a world-wide movement such as this. They did, and they approved. Until they excommunicate or forbid as they did with Lefebvre’s movement, the participants are in communion with the church.

I never said they weren’t in communion with the Church. I agree, many traditionalists are indeed elitists, and that is sad, but at least they are engaging in the Mass the way it has been done for centuries. It is not a new, improved way of worship as the Charismatic renewal presents itself to be.

 

[palmas85]

FROM THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
The Church and non-Christians

839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325

842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

It seems like the Church does teach spiritual value in all religions. Of course that doesn’t mean that all religions are equal. The Catholic Church contains the fullness of the truth but many other religions, when properly understood, also contain partial truths of God’s love - and that’s got to be of some spiritual value.

It says that the truth found in those religions is a “preparation” for the Gospel. It does not say it is in any way sufficient for salvation.

 

[japhy]

I was recently to a “Charismatic Mass” and our Bishop was the celebrant. During the Mass, people were speaking in tongues, and people even came up to speak prophetic words. Although people seemed more free to “move” in the Holy Spirit, there was a good deal of structure.

What did they prophesy? How does it “measure up”? Has it come to pass?

 

[Rykell]

What did they prophesy? How does it “measure up”? Has it come to pass?

Your understanding of prophecy is not that of foretelling events. Rather, it is that which St. Paul exhorted the early christians to use (1 Cor. 14:4), to speak a word under the anointing of the Holy Spirit for the edification of the assembly. It often lifts the minds and hearts of the listeners, and is sometimes a deeper understanding of scripture, or an encouragement toward greater virtue.

The type you may be referring to is rare, and in that case, it must be tested within the entire assembly. Here is an example in Acts 11:27.

1. And in these days there came prophets from Jerusalem to Antioch: 28. And one of them named Agabus, rising up, signified by the Spirit, that there should be a great famine over the whole world, which came to pass under Claudius. 29. And the disciples, every man according to his ability, purposed to send relief to the brethren who dwelt in Judea: 30. Which also they did, sending it to the ancients, by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.

While it is not clear that the word which came to Agabus was “tested,” it would be foolish of the disciples to be sending relief if they did not believe and sense that God sent that word.

 

[japhy]

Your understanding of prophecy is not that of foretelling events. Rather, it is that which St. Paul exhorted the early christians to use (1 Cor. 14:4), to speak a word under the anointing of the Holy Spirit for the edification of the assembly. It often lifts the minds and hearts of the listeners, and is sometimes a deeper understanding of scripture, or an encouragement toward greater virtue.

The type you may be referring to is rare, and in that case, it must be tested within the entire assembly. Here is an example in Acts 11:27.

While it is not clear that the word which came to Agabus was “tested,” it would be foolish of the disciples to be sending relief if they did not believe and sense that God sent that word.

Yes, I admit I was considering solely the foretelling type of prophecy. I am still curious as to what they spoke. Such utterances should certainly not supplant or replace the homily, which is to be given by an ordained minister only. (Not that this happens, I’m just stating the liturgical norms.)

 

[Rykell]

Palmas:

I never said they weren’t in communion with the Church. I agree, many traditionalists are indeed elitists, and that is sad, but at least they are engaging in the Mass the way it has been done for centuries. It is not a new, improved way of worship as the Charismatic renewal presents itself to be.

Well, not a “new, improved way of worship,” Palmas, but from what I see in these threads, it is a deeper attentiveness and openness to the Holy Spirit in their lives. Nothing changes in the liturgy, for the mass is the mass, and as such, is lawfully celebrated. I get the impression that folks are objecting to the “additions” that are added after the homily, and the extended praise that sometimes takes place at the Great Amen or the Gloria. One of the threads I read did say this was authorized by the bishop. (I forget which one, as there are 5 below)

VOCI MIKE:

You apparently believe the music should be solid gregorian chant in charismatic worship. Not for these people as they celebrate in their own particular style of mass, which is much more praise-filled and joyful, than somber and reflective. Each musical setting has its own flavor depending upon who is worshipping, and that is the job of the music ministry together with the priest to arrange.

Similarly, in a children’s liturgy, it seems strange that someone would think a youngster would be attracted to chant - especially in our day when the cultural music is highly upbeat (putting it mildly!) In our youth masses, the children’s choir has blessed me a number of times with precious simplistic hymns that have a child’s orientation. Even we adults can find joy in music that is not native to us!

And what bride and groom would want chant in their nuptial mass? It would be better to select hymns that fit the occasion, no?

 

[romanholiday]

VOCI MIKE:

You apparently believe the music should be solid gregorian chant in charismatic worship. Not for these people as they celebrate in their own particular style of mass, which is much more praise-filled and joyful, than somber and reflective. Each musical setting has its own flavor depending upon who is worshipping, and that is the job of the music ministry together with the priest to arrange.

Similarly, in a children’s liturgy, it seems strange that someone would think a youngster would be attracted to chant - especially in our day when the cultural music is highly upbeat (putting it mildly!) In our youth masses, the children’s choir has blessed me a number of times with precious simplistic hymns that have a child’s orientation. Even we adults can find joy in music that is not native to us!

And what bride and groom would want chant in their nuptial mass? It would be better to select hymns that fit the occasion, no?

I think what VociMike is saying (and VociMike, please correct me if I’m wrong) is that the Church says that Gregorian Chant should have pride of place in the liturgy and is the supreme model for all sacred music, so where is Gregorian Chant given pride of place in Charismatic Masses? Chant is considered the supreme model for sacred music. The closer a music piece comes to matching chant in meter and flow, the better suited it is for Mass and the further away it is in meter and flow, the less suited it is for Mass.
This is not my opinion, but the teachings of multiple Popes from Pius X up to Benedict XVI. Does praise and worship music with guitars, drum, tambourines and the like approach the meter, flow and simplicity of chant? The answer, I think is fairly obvious.

If you want to check my sources on Church teaching, please feel free to see the following:

adoremus.org/TraLeSollecitudini.html (2-6 and 15-16)

adoremus.org/MusicaeSacrae1955.html
(12,14,15,17,21.30,41,42,44,58,59)

adoremus.org/SacrosanctumConcilium.html
(116,117,120)

adoremus.org/MusicamSacram.html (4,47,50,52)

adoremus.org/Chirograph-SacredMusic.html (4,7,12)

adoremus.org/SacramentumCaritatis.html (42)

 

[Walking_Home]

Well, not a “new, improved way of worship,” Palmas, but from what I see in these threads, it is a deeper attentiveness and openness to the Holy Spirit in their lives. Nothing changes in the liturgy, for the mass is the mass, and as such, is lawfully celebrated. I get the impression that folks are objecting to the “additions” that are added after the homily, and the extended praise that sometimes takes place at the Great Amen or the Gloria. One of the threads I read did say this was authorized by the bishop. (I forget which one, as there are 5 below)

Did some of us not receive the memo. Were the Charimatics granted their own rite.

Last I heard the Charismatic are within the Latin rite—therefore—bound to the liturgical norms of the Latin (Roman) rite—not exempt from them. The “additions” do not fall within the liturgical norms.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

It is not at all the intention here to prepare a compendium of the norms regarding the Most Holy Eucharist, but rather, to take up within this Instruction some elements of liturgical norms that have been previously expounded or laid down and even today remain in force in order to assure a deeper appreciation of the liturgical norms;[9] to establish certain norms by which those earlier ones are explained and complemented; and also to set forth for Bishops, as well as for Priests, Deacons and all the lay Christian faithful, how each should carry them out in accordance with his own responsibilities and the means at his disposal.

[3.] The norms contained in the present Instruction are to be understood as pertaining to liturgical matters in the Roman Rite, and, mutatis mutandis, in the other Rites of the Latin Church that are duly acknowledged by law.

[114.] “At Sunday Masses in parishes, insofar as parishes are ‘Eucharistic communities’, it is customary to find different groups, movements, associations, and even the smaller religious communities present in the parish.”[202] While it is permissible that Mass should be celebrated for particular groups according to the norm of law,[203] these groups are nevertheless not exempt from the faithful observance of the liturgical norms.

 

[Rykell]

I think what VociMike is saying (and VociMike, please correct me if I’m wrong) is that the Church says that Gregorian Chant should have pride of place in the liturgy and is the supreme model for all sacred music, so where is Gregorian Chant given pride of place in Charismatic Masses?

I think you are saying the Pauline mass is errant, therefore, since it does not regularly use G.C.? The key word is liturgy, as in regular Sunday mass for the people. The mass under discussion is not the regular Sunday liturgy, nor is it a separate rite whatsoever. It is the regular Pauline mass celebrated with orientation toward the partipants. Same privileges of orientation as with a funeral mass, nuptial mass, teen mass, etc. The prayers, music, homilies, are the Pauline mass with variations that are permitted in the Sacramentary and by the bishops.

 

[Rykell]

Hello Walking_Home,

I have been watching for you to appear.

And as usual, with no understanding of what is allowed or what is taking place, you take some documents out of context and apply your own misunderstanding. It’s getting rather ho-hum.

Let me say it once again. The charismatic mass is NOT a separate rite. It is the Pauline mass, latin rite. Period. End of discussion. Check with your bishop, please, and then come back and tell the rest of us what we are doing wrong.

And while your learning, try reading the five threads Marian Carroll supplied and bring yourself up to date.

 

[Rykell]

It is really a joyless process debating with people who have rigid fixated opinions and have not truly participated in this liturgy on a regular basis, nor obtained official word from the local diocesan bishop as to what is permitted — yet continue to press these private opinions as documentary church teaching.

Bottom line, these opinions will not thwart or hinder the movement, and those for whom God intends to partake in it will do so in spite of opposition on this forum. It is futile to spend my time in this effort. God bless, and good day.

 

[Walking_Home]

Hello Walking_Home,

I have been watching for you to appear.

And as usual, with no understanding of what is allowed or what is taking place, you take some documents out of context and apply your own misunderstanding. It’s getting rather ho-hum.

Let me say it once again. The charismatic mass is NOT a separate rite. It is the Pauline mass, latin rite. Period. End of discussion. Check with your bishop, please, and then come back and tell the rest of us what we are doing wrong.

And while your learning, try reading the five threads Marian Carroll supplied and bring yourself up to date.

---

I see that you are using a most common tool (saying that one does not understand of what is allowed) to try and discredit what I posted. It would seem—some of you took the same form of instruction.

As to the bishop—well—it would be better if they started checking with Rome themselves. Seems—that what Rome instructs—is flying over there heads.

 

[Walking_Home]

Oh dear!

But seriously, charismatics, are you open to adopting the music given pride of place by the Holy Spirit in your worship? Will you be forming scholas soon? Why or why not?

---

You have brought up an interesting observation. From what has been written—the Church’s spirituality (the indwelling of the Holy Spirit within Her) is leading the Latin rite to re-incorporate more traditional forms —music, some latin etc.—into our worship.

Now take a movement or group—who say their “spirituality” leads them in another direction—and this direction is in contrast to where the Holy Spirit is leading the Church over-all.

What is wrong with this picture.

 

[romanholiday]

I think you are saying the Pauline mass is errant, therefore, since it does not regularly use G.C.? The key word is liturgy, as in regular Sunday mass for the people. The mass under discussion is not the regular Sunday liturgy, nor is it a separate rite whatsoever. It is the regular Pauline mass celebrated with orientation toward the partipants. Same privileges of orientation as with a funeral mass, nuptial mass, teen mass, etc. The prayers, music, homilies, are the Pauline mass with variations that are permitted in the Sacramentary and by the bishops.

I am not saying the Pauline rite is errant or invalid. Please don’t imply that I reject a legitimate and valid rite within the Church. I’m saying that in practice, many of the liturgical directives of the Church are either disregarded either on purpose or out of ignorance. The liturgy is not “just” for regular Sunday Mass. Please read the sections of the Church documents I cited for further information.

 

[Walking_Home]

I am not saying the Pauline rite is errant or invalid. Please don’t imply that I reject a legitimate and valid rite within the Church. I’m saying that in practice, many of the liturgical directives of the Church are either disregarded either on purpose or out of ignorance. The liturgy is not “just” for regular Sunday Mass. Please read the sections of the Church documents I cited for further information.

---

Bingo—the liturgical norms are not just for Sunday Mass—but for each and every Mass—7 days a week.