Charismatic Traditionalist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mordocai
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Open minded and accepting of new ideas. Always a good idea?

Read 2 Peter Chapter 2. This chapter is often overlooked and almost never preached Or read Corinthians for that matter. Paul wasn’t particularly happy with their open minded acceptance of new ideas. Open minded inclusiveness doesn’t always produce good results and in fact can and will cause disunity, confusion and departure from the true teachings of the Church.

We were warned about this in scripture yet few seem to be listening.

Heretics don’t come in and loudly proclaim to be heretics. They creep in alongside and pretend to be orthodox until their infection spreads and you have entire groups who believe they are orthodox when in fact they have departed from the faith.
 
I feel as though some have maybe not read my posts all the way through? Or at least I feel that the conversation is only going on this one stream (openness to the Holy Spirit) because individuals might feel I was attacking them personally. I truly wasn’t.

One of the thrusts of my end of the discussion is that we must obey Holy Mother Church and we know that she has supported the Charismatic Movement and even called it one of the fruits of Vatican II.

As you celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the beginning of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, I willingly join you in giving praise to God for the many fruits which it has borne in the life of the Church. The emergence of the Renewal following the Second Vatican Council was a particular gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church.
**-
Audience of Pope John Paul II with the ICCRO Council, Rome 14 March 1992​


continued…​
**
 
And so, to say that the Charismatic Renewal is something that comes from heretical protestant circles is to not be in line with what our late Holy Father has said. Even the Pope Paul VI had audiences and approved their work, I dont recall him ever scolding the Charismatics for praying in tongues or anything like that haha If it weren’t real, or if what the Charismatics are doing were wrong, I would like to see an official Church document stating so, rather than us particular laymen giving our opinions and views about the matter.

however
 
o wow, it just decided to delete the second half of that last post lol

i basically said I did read 2 Peter 2 and i am not sure what the poster was getting at, if he was referring to the Charismatic Renewal (which i do not see any of that) or just the dangers of openmindedness in general. i went on to say we need to be Christ-minded, to put on the Mind of Christ, which Frank Sheed says can only be done if we look through the lens of the Church (theology and sanity! read it! its a great book!)

so, those who can call the charismatic renewal something that comes from “heretics” or that it is a “pseudo-spirituality” are not thinking as the Church does as it has been approved over and over by the Church.
now, to be fair, i am not sure if the posters who used those words were referring to the Charismatic Renewal or just other things.

God Bless, Mary Keep
Mordocai
 
one other thing
one poster listed the Fruits and Gifts of the Holy Spirit and asked which of these the traditionalists arent open to.

I would ask if they are indeed open to the Charismata of the Holy Spirit?

newadvent.org/cathen/03588e.htm
and then the most controversial it seems of them all! newadvent.org/cathen/14776c.htm
but yes, the it lists them as these

the first category:

  1. *]the Apostolate;
    *]the cognate office of prophecy;
    *]the discerning of spirits;
    *]the office of teacher;
    *]the word of wisdom and science;
    *]helps;
    *]the gift of governing.
    Five belong to the second category:

    1. *]increased faith;
      *]the power of miracles;
      *]in specie the healing of the sick;
      *]the gift of tongues;
      *]the interpretation of tongues.
      thanks!
      God Bless, Mary Keep
      Mordocai
 
Mordocai said:
o wow, it just decided to delete the second half of that last post lol

i basically said I did read 2 Peter 2 and i am not sure what the poster was getting at, if he was referring to the Charismatic Renewal (which i do not see any of that) or just the dangers of openmindedness in general. i went on to say we need to be Christ-minded, to put on the Mind of Christ, which Frank Sheed says can only be done if we look through the lens of the Church (theology and sanity! read it! its a great book!)

so, those who can call the charismatic renewal something that comes from “heretics” or that it is a “pseudo-spirituality” are not thinking as the Church does as it has been approved over and over by the Church.
now, to be fair, i am not sure if the posters who used those words were referring to the Charismatic Renewal or just other things.

God Bless, Mary Keep
Mordocai
Click to expand...
What I am getting at is this. Not every idea that comes along is good, even if it was approved by the Church at its particular time. If you take a balanced study of Church history you will realize that.

If you did read 2 Peter, then you know what was being discussed. False teaching,and the inevitable entry of error into the Church. As I said false teachers and heretics don’t say hey, I’m false and a heretic. No, they say that they are orthodox and true believers. that is what makes them so dangerous. You really can’t see them and differentiate between them and the rest of the Church.

I look at the Charismatic renewal in just that light. Evey time after the Apostolic Age, when a group basing itself as the Charismatics do on divine special intervention of the Holy Spirit manifested in many ways, usually including the speaking in tongues, that they alone have access to, that group has been heretical.

The current fad of Charismatics grew from protestant based activities and practices. Protestants as you know separated themselves from the Holy Mother Church many years ago, so I truly doubt that any of their activities could be construed as being faithful to the Church and Her teaching.

While I think it true that many Charismatics do feel as if they are orthodox it in no way means that they are. As an example, the Baptism of the Holy Spirit that is so glowingly referred to. Every Charismatic that I have ever spoken to feels that this experience is necessary and indeed vital to ones attaining true Catholic spirituality. Those that have not yet attained this level are not complete, they are lacking as it were. I see no correlation with that mindset to any Catholic teaching anywhere at any time. So how do you explain it?

Error. Pure and simple. If any idea or practice that in any way conflicts with true Catholic teaching is introduced into the Church, that idea must be viewed with suspicion and not accepted with open arms. That was exactly the problem with the Church at Corinth. They accepted ideas that conflicted with what the Church taught.

Yes, the Church may approve this practice now. It in no way means that in fifty years they still will.
 
is that we must obey Holy Mother Church and we know that she has supported the Charismatic Movement and even called it one of the fruits of Vatican II
Click to expand...
Some recent popes have been in favor of it in personal writings. They’ve not written anything infallible, haven’t put anything in doctrine, haven’t made anything charismatic mandatory. Holy Mother Church is not the pope. All of Sacred Revelation in accordance with the traditional understanding presented by the Magisterium in allegiance with the sheparding of our Holy Father as practiced by the faithful is Holy Mother Church. Does the Charismatic movement fit in there somewhere? Perhaps, but what one or two popes may have written is not Holy Mother Church.

2 Peter Chapter 2 deals with false prophets and false teachers. In other words the poster is dubious as to the authenticity of the teachings and prophecies of the charismatic movement. This is fair enough. Technically one may be suspicious towards any prayer, novena, spirtuality or practice as long as it is not a mandatory part of Catholic teaching. One could evern feel this way towards the Holy Rosary if they wished, but would have difficulty in presenting this message because of the long held reliability and use of the rosary. Indeed I am always suspicious and wary of those who go searching for gifts from the Spirit, especially prophesy. It puts one in a dangerous vulnerability to demonic forces passing themselves off as servants of Our Lord, and prophecy is best left to those who don’t ask for it, in my opinion, so I understand the hesitancy of palmas.

The Charismatic movement does not have a good track record, in my opinion. If you want to be 'baptized in the Holy Spirit" or whatever else, fine, just don’t try and convince me that I need to be or I’m not a true Catholic, and don’t try and force this into the Holy Mass either (Novus Ordo or Tridentine). The Masses exist as they are, and there is no room for creativity. A ‘Charismatic Mass’ should never take place. A charismatic meeting? Sure, but not a Mass.

I still believe that the charismatic movment comes from heretics (protestants). The Church may eventually absorb this into herself, as she has occasionally done in the past, but even so in it’s current form it is too protestant for me to want to dabble in. We may find that the Church was wrong about this down the road, and it is not compatible with Catholicism. In the meantime I won’t partake in this, as I can be a perfectly good practicing Catholic without it, and I don’t feel that I am missing something from my faith that I need Charismaticism to fill.

It is, however, your right to do this if you so wish, as I will admit that from what I’ve seen the spirituality is not incompatible with Catholicism. We are not going to change each other’s minds, so I’ll leave you to your thread. My final word of advice will be this; Traditionalists do not accept new and inovation. We prefer the practices and traditions that have sustained The Church for thousands of years. Since we feel nothing is missing from our deposit of faith right now, we’re highly unlikely to come running to a new spirituality that is not a direct growth off of something pre-existant. You may feel this is our loss, but we don’t.

I’ve been blunt and possibly verged on rude, (I’m sorry if I’ve offended you) but be warned that what I’ve written would be considered polite by what some hardcore Traditionalists would say if you were to suggest Charismaticism to them. At fisheaters they would rip you apart. God bless.
 
Actually, Mordocai, anything related to the charismatic renewal must be weighed, with great care, against the ancient teachings and traditions of the Church. I would not be quick to disqualify this “movement” altogether as there is something to be gleaned from it. But one must be careful due to the fact that there seems to be some kind of abuse taking place somewhere to every facet of our Holy Catholic Faith. We are under attack from within and without and the enemy is relentless. We need to make sure we pray and trust that God will protect us from error at every curve. I don’t mean to startle or offend anyone, I am just very concerned about those who are following people who really could care less about what the Church teaches and expects of us. This is not meant to imply that you are following those people.

Holiness is our goal and the Church has been giving birth to saints since day 1, even during great moral low points in history. I agree that Church reform begins with each members interior reflection as well as basking in God’s presence and seeking His will for each of our lives. The neglect of this is why the Church is so divided today. But I do see some very good things happening and I have hope for the future. We should pray that God will give us saintly guides who will lead the way to a proper reform. I believe every one of us needs to find a good spiritual director and get assistance from them on what part God wants each of us to play within the Body of Christ. This is bound to bring about healthy liturgical reform and spiritual restoration to the mission of The Mystical Body of Christ on earth. So spread the word and let’s do it!

P.S. I apologize Rawb. I couldn’t resist the piranha play on words. Hope I did not upset you. God bless you!
 
Walking_Home said:
The Church existed before the “new”-- “current”-- “open-mindedness”. This new wave —well see my prior post.

Is all that eye rolling indicative of some eye condition.
Click to expand...
:hypno: Comes from reading endless posts from those who think they know more than the Church, and engage in Cafeteria Catholicism.
 
Rawb said:
Some recent popes have been in favor of it in personal writings. They’ve not written anything infallible, haven’t put anything in doctrine, haven’t made anything charismatic mandatory. Holy Mother Church is not the pope.
Click to expand...
If only the traditionalist camp was so cavalier when the Pope’s commentary favored the things they like from the Catholic Cafeteria. :cool:
 
ethelzguy said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post
The Church existed before the “new”-- “current”-- “open-mindedness”. This new wave —well see my prior post.

Is all that eye rolling indicative of some eye condition.

:hypno: Comes from reading endless posts from those who think they know more than the Church, and engage in Cafeteria Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Really – That would mean you’d be a prime example.
 
ethelzguy said:
If only the traditionalist camp was so cavalier when the Pope’s commentary favored the things they like from the Catholic Cafeteria. :cool:
Click to expand...
Wow --:eek: --this is the first I hear our Pope is pushing cafeteria Catholicism.
 
If only the traditionalist camp was so cavalier when the Pope’s commentary favored the things they like from the Catholic Cafeteria.
Click to expand...
I don’t recall ever telling someone that the Mass HAD to be in Latin, or of the Tridentine Rite. I’ve never said the daily rosary is required to be a good Catholic. I’ve never told someone that it was only a pope’s opinion that they could fast for an hour before Mass, but that true teaching mandates the three (or twelve!) hour fast. I do not claim that meatless Fridays are the only true penance for Fridays. I would never tell someone that they are obliged to celebrate Rogation days or prefer the Douhey-Rheims.

I do know the difference between mandatory Catholic teaching that is doctrine or dogma, and what is my personal opinion. I happen to prefer (as do all Traditionalists) those practices that are ‘tried and true’ and fed the faithful for hundreds of years.

I gave my traditionalist opinion of the Charismatic movement. Nowhere did I claim it was any more authoritative or binding than the OP’s opinion. Perhaps you’ve met with those traditionalists who say otherwise, in which case you need to differentiate between us, and not be so quick to condemn those who hold to a traditionalist opinion as a Cafeteria Catholic. :mad:
 
I have to admit, I cherished a tiny, audacious hope that “charismatic traditionalist” referred to an excellent, well spoken priest.

😦
 
Hey everyone! Thanks for the polite replies, I understand it wouldn’t be so in some other places, phisheaters was mentioned. Believe me charity builds an opposing opinion more than anything, so thank you!

Well, I guess I’ll take a shift in the discussion and say this.

If there’s going to be continued, hurried, authentic growth in terms of unity in our Church, those who label themselves “charismatic” or “traditionalist” must be lovingly accepting of what the other camp embraces (with respoect to submission to the Church.) So what I am getting at is we need to look at what the Church is saying is good and say 'That is good!"
We can’t rip on eachother or say this or that, we must present the Church in a good light when questioned.

I do not remember who said it, but again I would be very hesitant in saying the Charismatic Renewal grew from heretics. Those who originally experienced the Baptism in the Holy Spirit have been very public in saying that they have been, are, and will continue to be loyal and obedient to the Magisterium. They experienced this at Dusquene University in the early 60’s. You can youtube it for videos or google it for info. Now, somewho came after them may not have been obedient to what the local ordinary asked for and this is very unfortunate, but what I am driving at is that we CAN’T dismiss it all together and say “well there’s nothing for me in there” If that’s the case, why was it given to the Church at all? Because some “need” it or something?

If the “charismatics” are the only ones open to the charismata, this makes my alarm go off! Hence my post, since, as I personally have experienced, the traditionalists i know are so weary of the charismatic renewal they tend to dismiss some of the charisms! Saying that tongues and prophecy or words of knowledge don’t happen anymore is incorrect!

So again, what I’m saying is we all need to be open to everything the Spirit has to offer in the Church even if we aren’t directly and routintely involved in it (like going to a Latin Mass) So this is why I propose all ought to be Charismatic Traditionalists in the sense of upholding the dignity of the traditions passed on but also be able to receive, for example, a prophetic utterance from the Lord and speak that out or be willing to lay hands on someone if they are ill. I think all charismatic means is being open to the charismata and being submissive to the Church.

But ask yourself “Am I truly open to the charismata? Honestly?”

I’ve heard people tell me they don’t want the gifts of tongues. Why? Are you afraid? ‘Well I don’t need the gift’ Well says who? If the Holy Ghosts wants to pour it out, He IS God after all. I’m using this as an example.

When I experienced Baptism in the Holy Spirit, I initially experienced a severe increase in the gift of faith and for the first time heard the Lord speaking directly to my heart, it was a new intimacy that led me deeper into prayer (especially Eucharistic Adoration) and I thirsted more for God However, I was also praying in tongues 3 weeks prior to this, so this has always kept me in check. A stronger gift of discernment of spirits came from that experience as well as words of knowledge for example. I believe God opens our soul up in many different ways when we let Him and honestly pray for things to go His way.

Again, the books of Acts is great but a lot of it I don’t see, for example, in my surrounding area of Churches. Not many people being accused of their drunkness in the Spirit! 😉

Docility to the Holy Spirit.

Question for personal consideration. Are we docile enough to the Holy Spirit to where if we felt the Lord calling us to a “Charismatic” prayer meeting, would we go? And I’m talking an honest reflection on this. I wouldn’t have gone to one at one point, it freaked me out! We might think ‘O God would never do this’ but who knows. Anyway, to close my post I would say we should all pray to be totally open to the Holy Spirit in whatever way this means to HIM and let Him take care of the rest.

To emphasize that I love the traditons, if I had a preference I’d be going to the Latin Mass all the time, but we don’t have that arround here anywhere near. Closest is like 45 mins away or something like that. Maybe a little less.

God Bless, Mary Keep
Mordocai

p.s. we can learn a LOT from eachother is what im saying (I say this representing the “charismatic” side. i could equally say this on a “charismatic” board and represent the “traditionalists” just as heartily and fervently.
 
I’m a convert from the Assemblies of God ‘denomination thing’ - very charismatic/Pentecostal. I remember in great detail their idea of speaking in tongues and being slain in the Spirit. One of my friends looked like he was having a seizure at some revival service. When I heard there was a similar movement in Catholicism, that kinda surprised me. All the histories I’ve read said that it originated amongst the Pentecostals, and when they brought it onto college campuses, some of the Catholic youth took up the movement. So I’ve seen in some charismatic Catholic circles laypeople laying hands on people (ha- that was fun typing that) and other funny business.

And doesn’t it say somewhere in the Scriptures that anytime someone speaks in tongues, there must be an interpretation? It seems like, even if it were truly of the Holy Ghost, that it would be so open to abuses. I can’t corroborate this story, but a friend told me that some charismatics were having a prayer meeting, and a priest happened in on them speaking in tongues. He was from some African country and understood what they were saying- praising the Devil. Again, can’t corroborate that story, but that’s what I heard and it scared me to death.
 
I honestly don’t see how there can be any sort of cooperation between trads and charismatics.

I’ve been to charismatic meetings, I’ve read charismatics literature, studied the history somewhat, had family and friends involved in it.

While the people in it are often well-intentioned and honest, I’ve heard several priests point out some problem areas.

The main problem is it can be a veiled attack on the priesthood. “I have the Holy Spirit directly speaking to me,therefore, I really don’t have to listen to the priest.” And if the priest is involved, liturgical abuse often results.

Second, being “slain” in the Spirit is treated like a Sacrament. What happened to water Baptism (the laver of regeneration) in the name of the Trinity and the Holy Sacrament of Confirmation where the seal of the Holy Ghost comes down and makes you a soldier for Christ?

Are we supposed to believe that at an inter-denominational meeting a Pentecostal who does not have consecrated hands nor is necessarily in the Ark of Salvation nor is even validly Baptised is conferring something totally unregulated by Christ’s own Church?

Another aspect of these meetings is that often the Catholic aspects get dropped so as to not offend the non-Catholics.

The Church has always taught that all grace of the Holy Ghost that operates outside His Church is only for the purpose of bringing the non-Catholic into the Church.

Another lamentable problem is that many people fake their charisms. Gerry Matatics famously got up at a charismatic meeting and started praying a psalm in Hebrew in order to test the spirits. And as it was stated, the Holy Ghost didn’t recognize his own words because someone got up and started “translating” it for him and they were completely wrong.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia referring to the Corinthian abuses:
The charism had deteriorated into a mixture of **meaningless inarticulate gabble **(9, 10) with an element of uncertain sounds (7, 8), which sometimes might be construed as **little short of blasphemous **(12:3). The Divine praises were recognized now and then, but the general effect was one of confusion and disedification for the very unbelievers for whom the normal gift was intended (14:22, 23, 26). The Corinthians, misled not by insincerity but by simplicity and ignorance (20), were actuated by an undisciplined religious spirit (pneuma), or rather by frenzied emotions and not by the understanding (nous) of the Spirit of God (15). **What today purports to be the “gift of tongues” at certain Protestant **revivals is a fair reproduction of Corinthian glossolaly, and shows the need there was in the primitive Church of the Apostle’s counsel to do all things “decently, and according to order” (40).
Click to expand...
Glossilalia as it is commonly seen, heard and experienced today is not the same as the “tongues” spoken of in Scripture.

St. Franci Xavier had the gift of “tongues” and when he would preach, everyone would hear the preaching in their native language.

Over the course of three decades, the charismatic movement often goes to further and further extremes in the whole “experience” thing. Behaviors like “Holy Laughter” and such just gets to be too much. I heard a priest say, “It’s a good way to blow off steam. But he didn’t think it was anything Divinely inspired.” And he was an Exorcist.

Plenty of traditional Catholics do recieve the special gifts from the Holy Ghost. But they do not join a “movement” since Traditionalism isn’t a movement. It’s a stance.

There are many trad Catholics who discern spirits and help Exorcists (Exorcism is not the same as “deliverance prayers” by the way)

There are trads that have close relationships with their angels and get special helps for themselves and others.

There are many trad Catholics who can heal (St. Pius X for one, Padre Pio for another)

Which brings up the stigmata, Suffering can be a gift but I don’t see too many Charismatics jumping to open themselves up to it on the level of the traditional mystics.

It is the humility of those particular catholics that allowed them to be willing vessels for gifts and those gifts were intended for the salvation of souls, nothing more. Least of all to write books making absurd new “rules” that have no Church authority behind them like how many “days” by “our time” is one day in Purgatory, or who is going to last to get out of Purgatory, Pontius Pilate, Martin Luther or Adam and Eve. (which is really interesting since Adam and Eve are saints. )

This has even lead some charismatics I know to virtually abandon the Catholic faith, deny the dogma of outside the Church there is no salvation and even go so far as to embrace the spiritualists like John Edward and James van Praagh. And if those guys aren’t charlatans, they are talking to demons.

There is a Catholic manifestation of the charismata that is traditional. It is not similar in its practice or manifestations to the Pentecostal movement. The Charismatic Renewal has more in common with the Pentecostals than the traditional understanding of charisms.

The interest in the Charismatics by the recent Popes is more due to their philosophical leanings. They are almost obsessed with “creating an experience” of God rather than simply laying out the methods that have been handed down.

The second aspect is that the Novus Ordo has cut people off from the sense of intimacy with the Divine that is so palpable in the prayers and sacred moments of the Traditional Liturgy.

Does anyone know if there is a thriving Charismatic Renewal in the Eastern Rites or the Orthodox?
 
Mordocai said:
Hey everyone! Thanks for the polite replies, I understand it wouldn’t be so in some other places, phisheaters was mentioned. Believe me charity builds an opposing opinion more than anything, so thank you!

Well, I guess I’ll take a shift in the discussion and say this.

If there’s going to be continued, hurried, authentic growth in terms of unity in our Church, those who label themselves “charismatic” or “traditionalist” must be lovingly accepting of what the other camp embraces (with respoect to submission to the Church.) So what I am getting at is we need to look at what the Church is saying is good and say 'That is good!"
We can’t rip on eachother or say this or that, we must present the Church in a good light when questioned.

I do not remember who said it, but again I would be very hesitant in saying the Charismatic Renewal grew from heretics. Those who originally experienced the Baptism in the Holy Spirit have been very public in saying that they have been, are, and will continue to be loyal and obedient to the Magisterium. They experienced this at Dusquene University in the early 60’s. You can youtube it for videos or google it for info. Now, somewho came after them may not have been obedient to what the local ordinary asked for and this is very unfortunate, but what I am driving at is that we CAN’T dismiss it all together and say “well there’s nothing for me in there” If that’s the case, why was it given to the Church at all? Because some “need” it or something?

If the “charismatics” are the only ones open to the charismata, this makes my alarm go off! Hence my post, since, as I personally have experienced, the traditionalists i know are so weary of the charismatic renewal they tend to dismiss some of the charisms! Saying that tongues and prophecy or words of knowledge don’t happen anymore is incorrect!

So again, what I’m saying is we all need to be open to everything the Spirit has to offer in the Church even if we aren’t directly and routintely involved in it (like going to a Latin Mass) So this is why I propose all ought to be Charismatic Traditionalists in the sense of upholding the dignity of the traditions passed on but also be able to receive, for example, a prophetic utterance from the Lord and speak that out or be willing to lay hands on someone if they are ill. I think all charismatic means is being open to the charismata and being submissive to the Church.

But ask yourself “Am I truly open to the charismata? Honestly?”

I’ve heard people tell me they don’t want the gifts of tongues. Why? Are you afraid? ‘Well I don’t need the gift’ Well says who? If the Holy Ghosts wants to pour it out, He IS God after all. I’m using this as an example.

When I experienced Baptism in the Holy Spirit, I initially experienced a severe increase in the gift of faith and for the first time heard the Lord speaking directly to my heart, it was a new intimacy that led me deeper into prayer (especially Eucharistic Adoration) and I thirsted more for God However, I was also praying in tongues 3 weeks prior to this, so this has always kept me in check. A stronger gift of discernment of spirits came from that experience as well as words of knowledge for example. I believe God opens our soul up in many different ways when we let Him and honestly pray for things to go His way.

Again, the books of Acts is great but a lot of it I don’t see, for example, in my surrounding area of Churches. Not many people being accused of their drunkness in the Spirit! 😉

Docility to the Holy Spirit.

Question for personal consideration. Are we docile enough to the Holy Spirit to where if we felt the Lord calling us to a “Charismatic” prayer meeting, would we go? And I’m talking an honest reflection on this. I wouldn’t have gone to one at one point, it freaked me out! We might think ‘O God would never do this’ but who knows. Anyway, to close my post I would say we should all pray to be totally open to the Holy Spirit in whatever way this means to HIM and let Him take care of the rest.

To emphasize that I love the traditons, if I had a preference I’d be going to the Latin Mass all the time, but we don’t have that arround here anywhere near. Closest is like 45 mins away or something like that. Maybe a little less.

God Bless, Mary Keep
Mordocai

p.s. we can learn a LOT from eachother is what im saying (I say this representing the “charismatic” side. i could equally say this on a “charismatic” board and represent the “traditionalists” just as heartily and fervently.
Click to expand...
One of my main objections among many to the movement is the apparent belief by many of the members of the movement is that there is no way for the Holy Spirit to work through us unless we join the movement and allow him to do so…

I don’t know how many times I have heard that the movement is responsible for enabling the gifts of the Holy Spirit to be brought to fruition and without it these gifts would remain dormant, apparently forever…

I don’t believe that for a second, It is not part of established Church teaching and there is absolutely nothing in Catholic teaching that even comes close to giving validity to the so called Baptism of the Holy Spirit as a separate, special event only for the initiated as it were.

This movement scares me because it divides the Church into the haves and the have nots. And there is noting in Catholic history, Catholic teachings Catholic doctrine and Catholic dogma that supports that concept.

I’m sorry, but there isn’t.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top