Charismatic Roman Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hello_Operator
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Deacon_Ed_B said:
What I am pointing out to you is that the “modern popes” have been staying faithful to the traditions of the Church. Please re read your own post that I responded to
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
No, I think you need to reread my post sir.
But we are trusting of the opinion of Peter, especially those Pope’s who were faithful to the traditions of the Church. ** There is only a problem with a modern pope when a modern pope conflicts with a previous pope.**
Click to expand...
Drawing the distinction between the various types of tradition was unnecessary and didn’t address what my concern was. I’m not concerned with the kind of tradition that is being disputed, I’m concerned with the fact that tradition, whether it be doctrinal/dogmatic in nature or a mere custom/practice is being disputed.

When such a dispute arises, I side with the traditions that were upheld and preserved ny holy men rather than the constructs of modern popes.
 
Today’s sermon was about much that has been posted on this thread. We are Church. Church is not a building, it is a community of people. Each of us is called to give of our gifts and talents to the upbuilding of this community. A person does not need to wear the title of “charismatic” to offer to serve as lector, EMCH, usher, sacrastan, or even altar boy.
When Pope John XXIII was elevated to the papacey, nobody expected much of him. Instead he said, “I have been obedient to you all my life. Now I answer only to God.” He called Vatican II to address issues that the Catholic Church in the modern world faced. He prayed for a “New Pentecost,” a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Vatican II was a gathering of the full magisterium of the Church. It was not simply a matter of decisions made by a single person or pope. Many who object to the reforms that took place as a result of Vatican II have not read the documents that came out of that Council. It is true that in some places the reforms were poorly implemented and this has caused great distress among God’s people.
The document on the religious life talks about how some communities prayed all the prayers of the Liturgy of the Hours at one time rather than giving honor to each hour of the day as originally intended. A retired priest who was pastor of my current parish is about as traditional as they come. In one of his homilies he spoke of how when Vespers were prayed in Latin there simply was not enough time to translate the prayers, to understand exactly what he was praying. During Mass if making the sign of the cross three times was good, then five times was better. Vatican II called for the fuller participation of the laity in the liturgy. I am happy that the magisterium had the wisdom to make these changes. I like reading the testimonies of priests who were ordained before Vatican II and the changes that have taken place in their lives as a result.
Another moverment in which I am involved is Cursillo. Cursillo stands for Little Course. During the 1930’s a group of lay men in Spain became aware of the lack of cathecheses and sought permission to present weekend workshops to aid in the faith development of other lay men. WWII put the beginning of this movement on hold. Cursillo does not end with the weekend course. Rather cursillistas meet weekly for the rest of their lives in order to continue to learn from each other and to grow in faith Cursillo is not synomous with the Charismatic Renewal. It is one more way that the Holy Spirit works to form his people. Those who make Cursillo come from the most traditional background to more liberal. Again, Cursillo calls for each of us to submit to the workings of the Holy Spirit.
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
As a Charismatic, I have to say, you truly do not know what you are talking about with the first part of your sentence. For the last part, what in heaven do you mean, unfortunately he is already present. Fortunately God is present for all of us as you said in the Eucharist and as you described in the things WE the Church treasured since Jesus walked among us.

After 28 years in the Charismatic movement, I must humbly confess that the only one of these I have ever seen was speaking in tongues. The things you describe have never been part of anything I have ever seen, except speaking in tongues. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit we ALL receive in Baptism and Confirmation. This was told to me today by a priest I know who has been Charismatic since 1970± when the Charismatic movement first started. I discussed these issues of the barking, etc with him and all he did was roll his eyes and said, "don’t waste your time trying to defend untruths like that but simply pray for them They will believe whatever they choose to believe. So I can say with firmness, YOU ARE IN MY PRAYERS.

Are you saying that the Novus Ordo is not a valid mass, that only the Latin Mass is valid. If that is the case sonny boy, let me tell you that I will listen to you when you are a member of the Magisterium and are under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Until, then, I wont call this the barking of a dog, but it sounds like one howling at the moon.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
PS. If I sound angry, believe me I am. I get so tired of seeing misinformation put out like this, with the air of authority, when people do not know what they are talking about. Oh yes, and If you know Church History, you would know that the Latin mass was not universal until Trent, only 500 years ago, not 2000
Click to expand...
ok 1. the first part was bad word choice, sorry my mistake, and i dont doubt your faith in the Eucharist, I just wonder why people always want more, when that is the only sign we ill ever need
  1. Ok if you say so. I was not makin a generalization i was simply saying that there have been reports of this so i brought it up. Sorry i apologize if sounded differently.
  2. Im not saying The Novus Ordo is invalid, i m just saying that if the saints got all of their grace and faith from the older, more traditional worship, why do we think the Charismatic movement is needed? Thousands of Saints have recieved the Holy Spirit without all the excess. And sorry to dissapoint you but no, the Latin Mass existed in one form or another throughout the entire Western Church from the very beggining of the Church in Rome by Peter and Paul. At Trent thay simply made a hybrid of the fifferent forms existing so thaey could bring more cohesion to the faith and keep orthodoxy safe from the new Protestant preachings.
 
When it comes to tradition (t), I like the story of the woman who always cut off two inches from her roast before she baked it. When asked why, she said “because my mother always did.” When she asked her mother why, her mother said “because my mother always did.” When they finally asked the grandmother, she said, “I needed the roast to fit the pan.”
In other words we need to look at the reason these traditions were implemented. We know that the rosary brings great graces. Reading Louis de Montfort, we find that it is not prayed exactly as it was in his time. I like adding scriptural verse to the beginning of each decade, as recommended by Pope John Paul II. I also like the addition of the Luminous mysteries.
True, the rosary is a popular devotion and not the liturgy. The point being made is that tradition develops and changes over time. The essentials of the Mass from Greek to Latin to the vernacular have remained intact from the time of the Apostles. This too is the work of the Holy Spirit guiding the Church.
The pastor of an earlier parish to which I belonged would point to the many changes that have taken place in our own life times. We do not read by candlelight. Microphones are more sensitive allowing each member in the pews to hear the sermon. We sit here typing on computers communicating across distances never thought possible before. There continue to be changes throughout our lives. We each need to decide what is and is not important.
Do we still need to cut 2 inches from the roast?
 
DebChris said:
When it comes to tradition (t), I like the story of the woman who always cut off two inches from her roast before she baked it. When asked why, she said “because my mother always did.” When she asked her mother why, her mother said “because my mother always did.” When they finally asked the grandmother, she said, “I needed the roast to fit the pan.”
In other words we need to look at the reason these traditions were implemented. We know that the rosary brings great graces. Reading Louis de Montfort, we find that it is not prayed exactly as it was in his time. I like adding scriptural verse to the beginning of each decade, as recommended by Pope John Paul II. I also like the addition of the Luminous mysteries.
True, the rosary is a popular devotion and not the liturgy. The point being made is that tradition develops and changes over time. The essentials of the Mass from Greek to Latin to the vernacular have remained intact from the time of the Apostles. This too is the work of the Holy Spirit guiding the Church.
The pastor of an earlier parish to which I belonged would point to the many changes that have taken place in our own life times. We do not read by candlelight. Microphones are more sensitive allowing each member in the pews to hear the sermon. We sit here typing on computers communicating across distances never thought possible before. There continue to be changes throughout our lives. We each need to decide what is and is not important.
Do we still need to cut 2 inches from the roast?
Click to expand...
Whenever someone uses an example like that to shut down tradition i always love to remind them that we are talking about Sacred Tradition, the Traditions of Faith handed down by the apostles and their successors the Bishops. Now do we need this tradition, or that tradition, because we dont have the need it was originally thought up for anymore? Thats the wrong question. The spiritual needs are always there and will always be there. Therefore every Tradition in the Church is untouchable.
 
Brian777 said:
Whenever someone uses an example like that to shut down tradition i always love to remind them that we are talking about Sacred Tradition, the Traditions of Faith handed down by the apostles and their successors the Bishops. Now do we need this tradition, or that tradition, because we dont have the need it was originally thought up for anymore? Thats the wrong question. The spiritual needs are always there and will always be there. Therefore every Tradition in the Church is untouchable.
Click to expand...
I am not sure if you would agree with what you said. After all, teh CCR is now a tradition kept over the whole church. In fact, in nearly every diocese, we now have a charismatic liason to the bishop. This helps the movement stay connected with the universal church.

So if the CCR has become a tradition of the church, why is it not untouchable?

I think people have prejudice that they cannot let go of. Ask the popes!
 
Freshman88 said:
No, I think you need to reread my post sir.

Drawing the distinction between the various types of tradition was unnecessary and didn’t address what my concern was. I’m not concerned with the kind of tradition that is being disputed, I’m concerned with the fact that tradition, whether it be doctrinal/dogmatic in nature or a mere custom/practice is being disputed.

When such a dispute arises, I side with the traditions that were upheld and preserved ny holy men rather than the constructs of modern popes.
Click to expand...
SSPX?
 
Freshman88 said:
I’m not concerned with the kind of tradition that is being disputed, I’m concerned with the fact that tradition, whether it be doctrinal/dogmatic in nature or a mere custom/practice is being disputed. When such a dispute arises, I side with the traditions that were upheld and preserved ny holy men rather than the constructs of modern popes.
Click to expand...
To use your identification of custom and practice, this is only binding discipline where the Church is concerned. This is where the popes can loose and or bind, which is where it involves us. They do not and cannot loose and bind on TRADITION that has to do with revelation. You are still confusing the two, whether you see it or not. If you do not believe that what you call the modern popes, (and I am taking this as our last several popes) have this authority, then you totally misunderstand what and where their authority comes from and what it involves. They do have the full authority given by Jesus himself to loose and bind. Do you or do you not believe this???
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
Brian777 said:
Whenever someone uses an example like that to shut down tradition i always love to remind them that we are talking about Sacred Tradition, the Traditions of Faith handed down by the apostles and their successors the Bishops. Now do we need this tradition, or that tradition, because we dont have the need it was originally thought up for anymore? Thats the wrong question. The spiritual needs are always there and will always be there. Therefore every Tradition in the Church is untouchable.
Click to expand...
Tradition (T), the teaching of the Apostles that has been handed down through the generations intact under the guidance of the Holy Spirit is indeed untouchable. These are the essentials of our faith and include the truth that when we receive Communion we are indeed receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.
It is only tradition (t), the regional customs that have developed over time that can be changed. There will always be elements of worship unique to the different areas to which the gossip message is brought from Africa to Asia to Europe to the United States. At the same time, I know that regardless of where I attend Mass any place in the world the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is celebrated. I can be in Tokyo or Tucson and I will still hear the Word of God proclaimed in the Readings and in the Gospel. I will still receive the Precious Body and Blood in Timbuktu or Shanghai. I do not think that changing Tradition (T) is something that any of us want to see happen.
I do not however want to be the cause of this thread straying from its original focus. The Charismatic Renewal is only one of many within the Catholic Church in which the Holy Spirit has touched the lives of His people.
 
Brian777 said:
Whenever someone uses an example like that to shut down tradition i always love to remind them that we are talking about Sacred Tradition, the Traditions of Faith handed down by the apostles and their successors the Bishops. Now do we need this tradition, or that tradition, because we dont have the need it was originally thought up for anymore? Thats the wrong question. The spiritual needs are always there and will always be there. Therefore every Tradition in the Church is untouchable.
Click to expand...
This is totally incorrect. Tradition as a source of revelation defined by the Magisterium is untouchable. Tradition as it has to do with discipline imposed by the church, as long as it does not involve teaching on faith and morals, can be changed by any pope under the authority of the keys given to Peter in loosing and binding. If you do not believe this, re take catechism 101.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
This is totally incorrect. Tradition as a source of revelation defined by the Magisterium is untouchable. Tradition as it has to do with discipline imposed by the church, as long as it does not involve teaching on faith and morals, can be changed by any pope under the authority of the keys given to Peter in loosing and binding. If you do not believe this, re take catechism 101.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
Amen! Jesus knew what was to come. That must be specifically why He gave them the power to bind and loose! How does just one church encompass every culture and civilization on earth through every age? There are the inflexibles and the flexibles. Catholics are taught this and called to believe it.

We are hearing all kinds of disobedience!

To follow Christ:
  1. Deny yourself (the ego must suffer)
  2. Take up your cross (maybe the inclination to disobedience, maybe lots of other things)
  3. Only then follow Him.
Why is the order so often reversed?

Christ’s peace to all.
 
This is such a great thread, I get excited while reading 🙂
Deacon, DebChirs, Flame of Christ, what great witnesses to the power of the Holy Spirit in the renewal you are! You have my utmost respect and love as genuine brethren in Christ who seek a full life in the power and grace of the Lord.

God bless you with all the graces you need to live in Him perfectly.
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
To use your identification of custom and practice, this is only binding discipline where the Church is concerned. This is where the popes can loose and or bind, which is where it involves us. They do not and cannot loose and bind on TRADITION that has to do with revelation. You are still confusing the two, whether you see it or not. If you do not believe that what you call the modern popes, (and I am taking this as our last several popes) have this authority, then you totally misunderstand what and where their authority comes from and what it involves. They do have the full authority given by Jesus himself to loose and bind. Do you or do you not believe this???
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
I am not confused as to what the Pope can or can’t do nor am I confused about what kind of authority the Pope has.

What I am concerned about is the blatant disregard some folks have for various traditions, especially with respect to ecumenicalism and the liturgy. Indeed such practices may be changed, and they have, but over the centuries and with respect to the general Ordo of our particular liturgical heritage. Not every change (as licit as they might be) has been faithful to traditions of the faith. When this happens, we no longer treat the liturgy as some sort of plant which needs to nourished with love and care in order to grow, but rather we end up treating the liturgy as a sort of artificial plant which we can shape to our own will.
When we become unfaithful to our tradition, when the Church waves her authority over the mass, we lose all that was preserved in the mass by the love and care of the saints and Magesterium of the Church and our rite for the last 2000 years. The Church may do something, but that does not mean that the Church should do it.
 
Freshman88 said:
I am not confused as to what the Pope can or can’t do nor am I confused about what kind of authority the Pope has.

What I am concerned about is the blatant disregard some folks have for various traditions, especially with respect to ecumenicalism and the liturgy. Indeed such practices may be changed, and they have, but over the centuries and with respect to the general Ordo of our particular liturgical heritage. Not every change (as licit as they might be) has been faithful to traditions of the faith. When this happens, we no longer treat the liturgy as some sort of plant which needs to nourished with love and care in order to grow, but rather we end up treating the liturgy as a sort of artificial plant which we can shape to our own will.
Code: 
When we become unfaithful to our tradition, when the Church waves her authority over the mass, we lose all that was preserved in the mass by the love and care of the saints and Magesterium of the Church and our rite for the last 2000 years. The Church may do something, but that does not mean that they should do it.
Click to expand...
The Latin rite as we know it came about from the holy council of Trent.
That’s not 2000 years.
If you subscribe to the idea that we can’t change the rite for the sake of conserving tradition, then you must argue in favor of the primitive (as in original) Greek liturgy of the apostolic and early post apostolic age.

All in the spirit of charity, brother.
 
po18guy said:
We are hearing all kinds of disobedience!

To follow Christ:
  1. Deny yourself (the ego must suffer)
  2. Take up your cross (maybe the inclination to disobedience, maybe lots of other things)
  3. Only then follow Him.
Why is the order so often reversed?

Christ’s peace to all.
Click to expand...
There’s a wonderful story about a local priest in the diocese where my school is. This priest was active during the liturgical reforms and obediently accepted the changes as they came. Eventually however, he began to notice that the general attitudes of his flock were changing and that the new rite was not fostering the kind of spiritual growth that he once had at his parish. He came into contact with another priest who then began to convince him as to why the new rite was flawed. He then returned to the old mass. Parisohners from all over the diocese came to his parish because of their love of the old rite. Several months later, the Canadian congress of bishops banned the old mass, and this priest was told he would have to stop. He refused. He made his case to the bishop and pointed out exactly what our Holy Father had just pointed out in the MP, that the Church cannot turn around and say what was once holy is now no longer holy. He was forced to celebrate mass secretly, and attended to traditionalist across the nation.

The point? This priest could not blindly bow down to authority. Sometimes it is right and proper to fight, and for fighting for the liturgy of the last two thousand years, he was proven right in the end. Sometimes authority can be wrong, misguided, and in such cases we must take extra precautions not to be fooled, else we become schismatics. This priest was able to resist the SSPX and the violent reforms of his bishop, may God bless him for it!
 
Hrvoje said:
The Latin rite as we know it came about from the holy council of Trent.
That’s not 2000 years.
Click to expand...
The Roman missal did not drop from the sky at the council of Trent.The missal that came about from the council was made out of all the local liturgies that dotted the contintent. All the liturgies were very similar in the first place. In any case, the Latin rite is not 500 years old.
If you subscribe to the idea that we can’t change the rite for the sake of conserving tradition, then you must argue in favor of the primitive (as in original) Greek liturgy of the apostolic and early post apostolic age.
.
Click to expand...
Traditionalists believe in organic growth as much as anyone else. Where we differ is in our understanding of organic growth.

Also, the idea that the primitive mass is a more superior form, is a notion not supported by traditionalists, for the very reason that it denies organic growth and tradition. On the contrary, support for a return to a more primitive mass seems to be quite popular in liberal circles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top