Charismatic Renewal

[po18guy]

Dear po 18guy,

Hello again.

Yes, my dear friend, it is possible that I could be sincerely mistaken, but then so could the Catholic charismatic. However, it is my conviction that I am not mistaken and that my position respecting the extraordinary sign gifts is consonant with the teaching of the Church down through the ages, which has always held that these sign gifts petered out once the Church was fully established in the world. Scaffolding is no longer needed once an edifice has been erected.

God bless and goodbye for now.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

I Googled the catechsim and nowhere did I find the phrase “petered out”

 

[po18guy]

Dear arkwright,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou kindly for your response.

To say that the Baltimore Catechism is wrong is merely your opinion, dear friend, and not necessarily an actual fact. On the contrary, the BC accurately states what has been the consistent teaching of the Church throughout the years respecting the extraordinary gifts, which were given to the Church in its very infancy.

The charisms of the Holy Spirit are certainly “to be accepted with gratitude by the person who receives them, and by all members of the Church as well. They are a wonderfully rich grace for the apostolic vitality and for the holiness of the entire Body of Christ, provided they really are genuine gifts of the Holy Spirit and are used in full conformity with authentic promptings of this same Spirit, that is, in keeping with charity, the true measure of all charisms” (CCC, para. 800). However, we read nothing here of Christians being encouraged to seek those special extraordinary gifts, such as prophecy, tongues or miraculous healings, all of which were the “signs of an apostle” and which accompanied the Apostles very unique and necessarily temporary ministry in the early days of Christianity.

Moreover, as regards the CCR movement, it is not a doctrine or de fide and no Catholic man, as I understand it, is required to accept or believe it to be a genuine work of God in our times. As for papal statements/addresses, dear friend, these do not constitute part of the magisterium and thus Catholic charismatics should not make the claim that they constitute an official and authoritative endorsement of the movement by the ordinary magisterium. Clearly, speeches and statements are not encyclicals.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

You have made some unusual assertions in your posts. Do you:

1. State unequivocally that the Holy Spirit does not work through the charismatic movement?
2. Reject the Holy Spirit as He works through whichever movement He chooses?
3. Oppose the Church, which has approved the charismatic renewal?

 

[po18guy]

Can you kindly point me, dear friend, to the source of official Church teaching, that forms part of the ordinary magisterium, which you think that my beliefs run counter to.

What you have apparently done is developed your own beliefs. Where does any magisterial document or teaching instruct the faithful that any form or manifestation of charisms ceased with the Apostles? If you assert that anything ceased with the Apostles, do you not undermine the very foundation of the Church?

Moreover, where am I, or others, officially required to accept as genuine the CCR movement and its erroneous claims?

I must point out that your sentence is dichotomous.

Is the charismatic renewal approved by the Church? Yes.

Are you required to accept it? No.

Does the Church teach that the charisms of the Holy Spirit, however they manifest themselves, have ceased at some point? No.

Don’t like the charismatic renewal? Do not join it!

What spirit impels opposition to the working of the Holy Spirit as He sees fit?

 

[curlycool89]

I Googled the catechsim and nowhere did I find the phrase “petered out”

I think I know where Portrait’s error is.

From what I’ve heard (this could could be wrong, I haven’t researched this), the first generation of the Church was graced with the charism of miracles (maybe not the correct name/phrase), that is the apostles and some others were able to perform great miracles of healing or resurrection or other great and wondrous miracles on command.

Miracles do happen in this day and age, but priests or bishops do not receive this charism at their ordination.

That’s a separate thing from the Gifts of the Holy Spirt though (listed in the CCC #1831-1832). The Holy Spirit still absolutely works through the Church and through the children of God. I have seen and felt Him working in my life and in other’s lives.

 

[po18guy]

I think I know where Portrait’s error is.

From what I’ve heard (this could could be wrong, I haven’t researched this), the first generation of the Church was graced with the charism of miracles (maybe not the correct name/phrase), that is the apostles and some others were able to perform great miracles of healing or resurrection or other great and wondrous miracles on command.

Miracles do happen in this day and age, but priests or bishops do not receive this charism at their ordination.

That’s a separate thing from the Gifts of the Holy Spirt though (listed in the CCC #1831-1832). The Holy Spirit still absolutely works through the Church and through the children of God. I have seen and felt Him working in my life and in other’s lives.

Despite all of the technicalities, what truly bothers me is the blanket condemnation of the charismatic renewal (and, by inference the manifestations of the charisms) by those who do not know the movement, combined with the assumption that God somehow desires His Church to be completely staid, somber, controlled, regimented and devoid of perceptible spirit.

 

[TrueLight]

Despite all of the technicalities, what truly bothers me is the blanket condemnation of the charismatic renewal (and, by inference the manifestations of the charisms) by those who do not know the movement, combined with the assumption that God somehow desires His Church to be completely staid, somber, controlled, regimented and devoid of perceptible spirit.

The blanket condemnation may be a reaction to the fact that some in the Charismatic movement sees everyone else as “taid, somber, controlled, regimented and devoid of perceptible spirit.”

Hmm.

So if non-charismatics feel that they are being told they are missing something, then they won’t be too keen about it.

Unfortunately, as in the Protestant church, denominations who are charismatic, such as the pentecostals also tend to see non-charismatics as lacking the Spirit or holiness.

 

[po18guy]

The blanket condemnation may be a reaction to the fact that some in the Charismatic movement sees everyone else as “taid, somber, controlled, regimented and devoid of perceptible spirit.”

Hmm.

So if non-charismatics feel that they are being told they are missing something, then they won’t be too keen about it.

Unfortunately, as in the Protestant church, denominations who are charismatic, such as the pentecostals also tend to see non-charismatics as lacking the Spirit or holiness.

You are kidding, right? Oh, you’re not? Hmm.

 

[TrueLight]

You are kidding, right? Oh, you’re not? Hmm.

 

[Melchior_1]

The blanket condemnation may be a reaction to the fact that some in the Charismatic movement sees everyone else as “taid, somber, controlled, regimented and devoid of perceptible spirit.”

Hmm.

So if non-charismatics feel that they are being told they are missing something, then they won’t be too keen about it.

Unfortunately, as in the Protestant church, denominations who are charismatic, such as the pentecostals also tend to see non-charismatics as lacking the Spirit or holiness.

And of course, there’s others who see charismatics as pseudo protestants (I’ve been called this, on this board even), heretics (I’ve also been called this, including on this board), not real Catholics (I’ve been called this, again, even here), against Tradition (I’ve been accused of this, even here), leading people away from the Church (I’ve been accused of this, and wouldn’t you know, that also happened here), and generally shunned and cast aside, with their opinions treated as no more than someone in a remedial class.

Sadly, it works both ways.

 

[TrueLight]

Sadly, it works both ways.

Yep. That’s my point.

 

[po18guy]

Point is, just try to name another group, association or devotion in the entire Church that falls under such withering criticism upon the mere mention of its name! And, I have yet to hear condemnation from a solitary soul that has any actual experience with it! The worst I have heard from anyone who has been involved with it is, “Ah, it just wasn’t for me”

I truly think that a spirit is driving this blind opposition to the manifestation of the charisms. You might also think that I am a charter member of the movement, or hold an office within it, or frequently jump up during mass waving my arms and praying in a tongue or…

Truth is, I am none of the above. I have never uttered a single syllable in a tongue, as that is not my charism. But, I very well know the value of discerning your charism and putting it to use in building up the Church.

 

[TrueLight]

Point is, just try to name another group, association or devotion in the entire Church that falls under such withering criticism upon the mere mention of its name!

Traditionalists.

And, I have yet to hear condemnation from a solitary soul that has any actual experience with it! The worst I have heard from anyone who has been involved with it is, “Ah, it just wasn’t for me”

Well, with Youtube, it is easy to see what a charismatic service is like. I knew what a TLM would be like before even attending one. Granted, it was ten times as wonderful in person, but I had an idea.

And I know charismatics hate to hear this, but most of my family is Pentecostal and there is not a lot of difference in worship style.

Truth is, I am none of the above. I have never uttered a single syllable in a tongue, as that is not my charism. But, I very well know the value of discerning your charism and putting it to use in building up the Church.

I believe in discerning one’s charism too, but I don’t think it has to happen within the Charismatic movement, which although you try really hard to to say, it is clear with statements like the above, you do believe that is something unique to the charismatic movement.

I want to say right now that I see that you are hurting from past experience, and I don’t ever want to be partially a cause for anyone’s pain, when they are sincere and not trying to be mean, so I will bow out of this thread.

 

[Indyann]

Traditionalists.

Well, with Youtube, it is easy to see what a charismatic service is like. I knew what a TLM would be like before even attending one. Granted, it was ten times as wonderful in person, but I had an idea.

And I know charismatics hate to hear this, but most of my family is Pentecostal and there is not a lot of difference in worship style.

I believe in discerning one’s charism too, but I don’t think it has to happen within the Charismatic movement, which although you try really hard to to say, it is clear with statements like the above, you do believe that is something unique to the charismatic movement.

I want to say right now that I see that you are hurting from past experience, and I don’t ever want to be partially a cause for anyone’s pain, when they are sincere and not trying to be mean, so I will bow out of this thread.

Before you bow out, please watch this video. The charismatic movement did not come from protestantism, as many “traditionalists” would have you believe. It was born in 1962 when Pope John XXIII called for a New Pentecost.

youtube.com/watch?v=J-QDOcDGDWA&feature=context&context=C423bac3ADvjVQa1PpcFORrK0wh7LKXzO2ocLbH-u38uxF3AevJYU=

It is Catholic through and through. Of course, if you are offended by raising of the arms, in order to praise God and to embrace Him, don’t do it.

But DO NOT compare the New Pentecost to a Protestant service. The
Real Presence is the definitive difference.

I am not charismatic, but I and many others are offended by anyone who denies the workings of the Holy Spirit.

 

[po18guy]

Traditionalists.

Now, this is an interesting point. The most vocal of them would do away with the charismatic movement in a heartbeat. Here is the salient point: they disagree with the Bishops in this regard. Do you see a potential problem here?

Well, with Youtube, it is easy to see what a charismatic service is like. I knew what a TLM would be like before even attending one. Granted, it was ten times as wonderful in person, but I had an idea.

Rather than YouTube, why not attend a charismatic prayer function?

And I know charismatics hate to hear this, but most of my family is Pentecostal and there is not a lot of difference in worship style.

So? There should not be a big difference, if the Holy Spirit is involved. Protestantism, for its manifold errors, is not completely wrong in all things all of the time. How can it be, and still claim Christ?

I believe in discerning one’s charism too, but I don’t think it has to happen within the Charismatic movement, which although you try really hard to to say, it is clear with statements like the above, you do believe that is something unique to the charismatic movement.

I try only to defend something within the Catholic Church that the Bishops have approved, and which I have some limited experience with.

I want to say right now that I see that you are hurting from past experience, and I don’t ever want to be partially a cause for anyone’s pain, when they are sincere and not trying to be mean, so I will bow out of this thread.

If I am hurting from anything, it is from the seemingly relentless attacks against something that the Church has approved of. I object to “friendly fire” against our own Church! If that is hard-line, then I am guilty.

Like I have said before, fear is driving opposition to the action of the Holy Spirit. Fear that the Spirit would erase if only given the chance.

 

[Portrait]

You have made some unusual assertions in your posts. Do you:

1. State unequivocally that the Holy Spirit does not work through the charismatic movement?
2. Reject the Holy Spirit as He works through whichever movement He chooses?
3. Oppose the Church, which has approved the charismatic renewal?

Dear po18guy,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for the above response.

Re. 1/ It depends on what you mean by “work through”, my dear friend. That there are sincere thoroughgoing Catholics who are, for one reason or another, caught up in the CCR, admits of no doubt. However, from a doctrinal standpoint the entire movement is in fundamental error, especially with regards to its false claim that the extraordinary operations of the Spirit, or ‘sign gifts’, are the property of the Church today. Notwithstanding, God’s grace is not limited and He is in the habit of working through even that which is doctrinally unsound, as he has done so in the case of the churches of the Reformation, for example. However, that does not automatically render such bodies acceptable or orthodox. At length, one can only pray that the good and earnest people within this superficially appealing movement will come to see the error of their ways and depart from it and return to the “ancient paths”, wherein is reverence and order.

Re. 2/ However, dear friend, if we are to know whether or not the Holy Spirit is genuinely working through some movement, its claims must needs be carefully examined to discover if they stand up to scrutiny. Sacred Scripture teaches us that we are to “test everything” (I Thess 5: 21) and “not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God” (I Jhn. 4: 1). Thus it is incumbent upon the faithful to exercise their powers of spiritual discernment and to fully satisfy themselves that something claiming to be an authentic movement of God, is indeed that. If they remain unconvinced, then they have no option but to reject its pretences. There is, dear friend, always a very real possibility that pseudo-prophecy/tongues could be received as a genuine utterance of the Spirit, especially given the reality of satanic deception.

Re. 3/ Church approval or support is not, as I have remarked previously #52, synonymous with official and authoritative magisterial teaching to which the faithful must give their submissive assent. You yourself, dear friend, acknowledge that a Catholic is not obliged to accept the CCR. if they are not convinced as to its authenticity.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Portrait]

What you have apparently done is developed your own beliefs. Where does any magisterial document or teaching instruct the faithful that any form or manifestation of charisms ceased with the Apostles? If you assert that anything ceased with the Apostles, do you not undermine the very foundation of the Church?

I must point out that your sentence is dichotomous.

Is the charismatic renewal approved by the Church? Yes.

Are you required to accept it? No.

Does the Church teach that the charisms of the Holy Spirit, however they manifest themselves, have ceased at some point? No.

Don’t like the charismatic renewal? Do not join it!

What spirit impels opposition to the working of the Holy Spirit as He sees fit?

Dear po18guy,

Hello again and thankyou kindly for the above.

My beliefs regarding the claims of the CCR are the result of exercising my powers of spiritual discernment in addittion to theological study.

The CCR is of alien growth within the Catholic Church and is essentially derivative, emerging as it does from Protestant fundamentalism. Generally it revolts against traditional Catholicism because it regards it, quite wrongly, as steeped in clericalism, stuffy formalism and a dead barren orthodoxy. This is precisely what its Protestant counterpart believes respecting traditional reformed Protestantism.

There can be no doubt that manywithin the Renewal have a religious fervour and are frequently orthodox as regards faith and morals and in this I would rejoice. Nevertheless, they are seriously misguided, if not deluded, in their bold claim to be in possession of the extraordinary charismata. One can charitably say that they are sincere in this belief, but, like Protestant Pentecostalists, they have a zeal “but not according to knowledge”. Like Protestant Pentecostalists they have formulated their own distinctive beliefs and passed them off as Christian orthodoxy and many have been sadly duped.

People often remark that if this movement is so unorthodox and unsound, then why has it gained in popularity and respect among the Catholic hierarchy? This is a perfectly reasonable question and I will endeavour to answer it. In the Western world especially we live in times of unprecedented spiritual declension and apathy, thus a movement that has grown numerically and whose adherents are in earnest as regards their religion, is clearly not the norm today, where nominalism is all too prevalent. Thus it is hardly surprising that the CCR has been warmly received and why many cannot sing its praises enough. However, it is surely a grave error to equate the numerical strength of a new movement with the authentic orthodoxy of Catholicism, as the example of Arianism clearly evinces. The truth is that when things are at a very low ebb, anythingthat displays some signs of life and enthusiasm will be eagerly welcomed, if that is what is needed to awaken the allegedly ‘formalistic’ and “lifeless” Church out of its spiritual torpor. Indeed, this is why so many extoll Protestant Pentecostolism, for it did really appear to breathe new life into the churches and revive their fortunes. To many it seem like a return to the spiritual fervour of the primitive Church and ‘saints alive’, that is to say men living out the Gospel in their lives and ‘moving in the gifts’. However, the Protestant Pentecostal movement has been a divisive force that has done anything but revive the churches of the Reformation. Moreover, it has certainly not resulted in a greater quest for sanctity and separation from the godless world - the true mark of any authentic movement inspired by God’s Holy Spirit. What is problematic for the CCR is that many traditional groupings within Catholicism are starting to experience numerical growth, yet these firmly reject Catholic Charismatic claims and do not believe it to be something essential to the traditional movement. Moreover, they are of the opinion that their parishes are very much ‘alive’ and would strenuously deny that all they have is a barren lifeless orthodoxy.

We do not, my dear friend, need to have some specific magisterial teaching informing us that the unique ‘signs of an apostle’ were gradually withdrawn from the Church, as that is something that has always been tacitly assumed, owing to the very nature and purpose of those extraordinary gifts. The sign gifts were necessary at the first proclamation of the Gospel because it needed, since it was new, to be authenticated in a world where there was ‘lord’s many’. However, by the very nature of things this situation would not persist indefinetley and with the passing of the Apostles the extraordinary gifts would obviously pass with them, Christianity having now been firmly established. Indeed, there is biblical support for this position, for we are told by the writer to the Hebrews who, just prior to the sacking of Jerusalem (70 AD), said, looking back to the early days, “how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and was attested to us by thoses that heard him, while God, also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit, distributed according to his own will” (Heb. 2: 3,4 emphasis mine). This is no mere literary device, but the straightforward prose of a man looking back from his own time in 70 AD to a state of affairs that was simply no longer a normative part of church life. The fundamental error with all Pentecostalism is that it insists on making the narrative portions of the Book of Acts normative for church life today, which is bad theology because it treats Sacred Scripture in a Fundamentalist fashion.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Portrait]

Despite all of the technicalities, what truly bothers me is the blanket condemnation of the charismatic renewal (and, by inference the manifestations of the charisms) by those who do not know the movement, combined with the assumption that God somehow desires His Church to be completely staid, somber, controlled, regimented and devoid of perceptible spirit.

Dear po18guy,

Hello again.

To denounce the CCR is not to denounce the charisms of the Holy Spirit, dear friend, if one is fully persuaded in their own mind that what passes for manifestations of the Spirit in the Renewal movement are not the genuine charisms.

What God desires is surely a spirit of reverence in our public worship, not a spirit of disorder or frivolousness. In I Cor. 14: 40 - “all things should be done decently and in order” - St. Paul enunciates an axiom which should be ever present in the conduct of all Catholic worship - a precept which precludes all slovenliness, worldly excitement and all want of solemnity before the altar. We should be careful, my dear friend, concerning our approaches to the One Whom we should regard with such profound reverence. St. Paul’s words contain the spirit of such words as “Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness”; “Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice unto him wi**th reverence”; “I am a great King, says the Lord of hosts, and my name is feared among the nations”. God is not to be dishonoured, nor public worship disgraced, by any irreverence or “happy clappy” frivolity. In any case it is important to remember that not every man who has a smile on his face has a smile in his heart.

Incidently, that text comes at the end of a long passage in which St. Paul has discussed the whole isssue of spiritual gifts in the early Church.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Jegudiel]

What are your thoughts on Charismatic Renewal? Does it betray our Catholic identity and heritage? Is it irreverent? Or do you see it as a good way to revive the relevance of Catholicism and bring more people into the Church? What are your personal thoughts?

A link if you don’t know what I’m talking about:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Charismatic_Renewal

It’s a officially recognized and supported charism in the Catholic Church. That alone says a lot of good.

 

[po18guy]

Re. 1/ It depends on what you mean by “work through”…You yourself, dear friend, acknowledge that a Catholic is not obliged to accept the CCR. if they are not convinced as to its authenticity.

Do you also reject the Rosary, since we are not obliged to accept or practice it?

Even more important: Are you a sedevacantist?

 

[po18guy]

Dear po18guy,

To denounce the CCR is not to denounce the charisms of the Holy Spirit, dear friend, if one is fully persuaded in their own mind that what passes for manifestations of the Spirit in the Renewal movement are not the genuine charisms.

Your personal opinion is noted. You do realize that the Apostles locked the doors until the Holy Spirit fell upon them? Afterward, they preached the Gospel boldly, without fear, in the public arena.

To me, you clearly express fear. What do you fear that the Bishops do not? Is not the solution to your perceived fear a making of yourself submissive to the Holy Spirit?