Charismatics---continued

[Dj_Roy_Albert]

***1 Cor 12: 3 Therefore, I tell you that nobody speaking by the spirit of God says, “Jesus be accursed.” And no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the holy Spirit. ***That is the major test I was speaking of in another post. But without an interpretation how do we know what is being said?

Why do you think it necessary to know what is being said? If someone is praising God, why do we need to pick apart everything that hteir praising God for? St. Paul said in that passage that no one can curse God & then say Jesus is Lord. Why can’t we just rejoice with the person praising God, for we know that this person can’t curse God & then praise him at the same time.
If you need to know if someones gift in genine then you should pray for the gift of Discerment.

**1 Cor 12: *****8 ******To one is given through the Spirit the expression of wisdom; to another the expression of knowledge according to the same Spirit; ******9 ******to another faith by the same Spirit; to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit; ******10 ***to another mighty deeds; to another prophecy; to another discernment of spirits; to another varieties of tongues; to another interpretation of tongues. Why is it those other gifts get skipped over?

Not so, tongues is just more commonly recognized & as we have found out is often given by the Holy Spirit quite abundantly. The other gifts are given, God knows what he’s doing.

Or these verses;**1 Cor 14: *****2 ******For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God, for no one listens; he utters mysteries in spirit. ******3 ******On the other hand, one who prophesies does speak to human beings, for their building up, encouragement, and solace. ******4 ******Whoever speaks in a tongue builds himself up, but whoever prophesies builds up the church. ******5 ******Now I should like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. One who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be built up. ******6 ******Now, brothers, if I should come to you speaking in tongues, what good will I do you if I do not speak to you by way of revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or instruction? ******7 ******Likewise, if inanimate things that produce sound, such as flute or harp, do not give out the tones distinctly, how will what is being played on flute or harp be recognized? ******8 ******And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? ******9 ***Similarly, if you, because of speaking in tongues, do not utter intelligible speech, how will anyone know what is being said? For you will be talking to the air. Those of us that do not have the gift of tongues would like to hear what is being said. Is St. Paul out of line here?

So pray for the gift to interpret. What is so hard about that?

Is St. Paul out of line here?

I’d say no, but did God reveal every little aspect of the workings of His Spirit to St. Paul? Did St. Paul have all the answers or does Jesus?

 

[Dj_Roy_Albert]

Les Richardson:

On praying in tongues;***1 Cor 14: ******14 ******(For) if I pray in a tongue, my spirit is at prayer but my mind is unproductive. ******15 ******So what is to be done? I will pray with the spirit, but I will also pray with the mind. I will sing praise with the spirit, but I will also sing praise with the mind. ******16 ******Otherwise, if you pronounce a blessing (with) the spirit, how shall one who holds the place of the uninstructed say the “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? ******17 ******For you may be giving thanks very well, but the other is not built up. ******18 ******I give thanks to God that I speak in tongues more than any of you, ******19 ***but in the church I would rather speak five words with my mind, so as to instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue. Seems pretty clear to me.

Is it really? So praying in tongues is ok by you? or no? Does it have to be done in public exactly to the letter as St. Paul prescribed? How about all other aspects of worship? How about St. Pauls stance on women in church? Shouldn’t we follow his exapmle to the letter on that aswell, or is that too touchy a subject in this age with the “female priesthood” on the rise?

The only question is what “in a church” means in verse 19. I would suggest that it means in any parish or diocese, any meeting or function that is sanctioned or approved by that parish or diocese, and open to any and all of the faithful.

I laugh when I hear someone say, “I go to church” or “let’s go to this church” without realizing that WE ARE THE CHURCH, the bulidings used for prayer & worship are of little importance.

Sanction or approval can be as simple as advertising it in the Church bulletin, admittedly a broad definition, but one which is in line with the spirit of approval that most charismatics would attribute to the Pope for the movement itself.

So we don’t have approval to work in the gifts from Vatican II? That’s strange because I could have sworn that you claimed to know the documants very well.

 

[1_Maria]

Mysty101:

One very important point you didn’t mention. Follow the laws of the Church, especially the obligation to attend Mass on Sunday, whether or not we agree with the way it is celebrated.
Yes, I do post the quote from St Teresa because it is what I believe.

whether or not we agree with the way it is celebrated.

Good point, especially since so many people feel free to ignore what the Church prescribes for the Liturgy and instead substitute their own personal preferences.

Ignoring the teachings of the Magisterium is no small matter.

Actually there is much, much more that the Pope is asking of all the movements. For instance, he has asked all of us to promote justice, peace and harmony in society.

And since he wants all parishes to live the spirituality of communion, fraternal communion among all those who make up the parish is also somethig he asks of us.

It would surely bring joy to the Pope if he were to see more people choosing to follow the Holy Spirit’s call to repentance and holiness.

Maria

 

[Mysty101]

1 Maria:

…It would surely bring joy to the Pope if he were to see more people choosing to follow the Holy Spirit’s call to repentance and holiness.

Maria

…and obedience.

 

[gnome]

Dj Roy Albert:

Why do you think it necessary to know what is being said? If someone is praising God, why do we need to pick apart everything that hteir praising God for? St. Paul said in that passage that no one can curse God & then say Jesus is Lord. Why can’t we just rejoice with the person praising God, for we know that this person can’t curse God & then praise him at the same time.
If you need to know if someones gift in genine then you should pray for the gift of Discerment.

It’s necessary to know what’s being said because tongue is not for self edification. St Paul said in the spirit of building up the Church, one is to speak in tongue only if an interpreter is there to interpret the tongue. Obviously this is not possible if more than 2 or 3 people speak tongues at the same time.

You can’t speak tongue AND say “Jesus is Lord” at the same time. It’s either you speak tongue then the interpreter says it means “Jesus is Lord”, or you simply say the words “Jesus is Lord”. Either case the people present can join you to praise God. But if the people don’t understand your tongue, they can be deceived. And if even you don’t understand what you say, there’s a chance you could be cursing instead of praising. Talk to charismatic Priests and they’ll tell you yes it happened.

 

[Les_Richardson]

Dj Roy Albert:

The unfaithfll masses of “catholics” that fear anything that they don’t understnd or can’t disect under a microscope? Or some pedophile or gay priest that wants to drag the church to hell with him? or do you have the right to judge what others experience? I believe in putting all things to the test, that is where the gift of Discerment of spirits comes in.

I am not as willing to attack the faith of other Catholics I guess. Some sins are obvious, and God will see that justice is done. The Church teaches there is still hope for the souls of abusers if they truly repent. I agree precisely that I cannot, do not and will not judge the experience of another. They are responsible before God for their experiences, as am I for mine. But if they want to speak, praise or pray in a public setting in my presence in tongues without any interpretation, they force me to make that judgement, because they are saying, “this is of the Holy Spirit because I say it is, and if you don’t like it you are not spiritual.” Excuse me? So rather than fight, I am out of there.

Jesus said “a tree is know by the fruit it bares” & “a bad tree cannot bare good fruit”, so I would think that the evience would be clear as to whether or not the fruits of the gifts are genuine & coming from the Lord or not, but that’s just me.

St. Paul also elaborates on those fruits in his letter to the Corinthians. Are you willing to take his word for those, or is there a newer revelation on the fruits of the Holy Spirit as well?

I’m not saying that there are not excesses or errors in individual persons in the charsmatic movement, but as a whole the good far outweighs the bad.

I would say there is a systemic doctrinal problem as well. Not overly serious in some respects, but a Gospel under a false pretence and leading to real problems down the road.

I understand, & if you did know me you’d know that I’d only want to share the great gifts that God has given me with you.

I appreciate that, and I’ll take your word for it, although I must admit, some of your attacks on my spirituality leave your charity in some doubt. Perhaps it is your exuberant style? I have a friend who is a talk-show host on a large metropolitan radio station and he comes across very harshly but upon reflection he modifies the tone while maintaining the position just as effectively.

Just to let you know that my username is Dj Roy Albert because I am a radio Dj, an oldies Dj, so everytime I see you post CCR I think of Creedence Clearwater Revival.

I am a part of your target market I guess, born in the late fifties, I’ve stepped through the mess the boomers have left behind for most of my life but I was raised on Fogerty and the boys, or should I say Willie and the Poorboys?

I will not argue that there are abuses in the charmatic renewal, but there are just as many in every other “movement” in the church, be it Marian, or cursillo, or what have you. Individuals do strange things, but that shouldn’t condemn the entire movement now should it?

Not at all. But my point was, and is, I’ve tried valiantly to get those most involved in the CCR to tell me what they think those abuses are and what causes them. I just get generalities. I thought someone like yourself, stepping into the conversation just recently might have something to add.

1 Cor 14: 1 “Pursue love, but strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, above all that you may prophesy.”
Is God’s love not universal? Does He not give His gifts to whom He wishes? Could this not be seen as a universal love, God giving his gifts worldwide to any he wishes?

You keep making my point, and St. Paul’s point too for that matter.

 

[Les_Richardson]

Dj Roy Albert:

Why do you think it necessary to know what is being said? If someone is praising God, why do we need to pick apart everything that hteir praising God for? St. Paul said in that passage that no one can curse God & then say Jesus is Lord. Why can’t we just rejoice with the person praising God, for we know that this person can’t curse God & then praise him at the same time.

How do you know they are praising God if you don’t understand their language? You are making an assumption I’m not willing to make.

If you need to know if someones gift in genine then you should pray for the gift of Discerment.

It is not my responsibility, if I do not have the gift of discernment or interpretation. Don’t you think that is a little selfish on the part of the person speaking, praising, praying in tongues, particularly when they have the power of the will to speak clearly in a common language if they wish to? Is it all about them and nuts to anybody that doesn’t know or trust what is going on?

Not so, tongues is just more commonly recognized & as we have found out is often given by the Holy Spirit quite abundantly. The other gifts are given, God knows what he’s doing.

Have you ever thought about what the CCR would look like today if on page 25 of Catholic Team Manual “Finding New Life in the Spirit”, the candidate was instructed to say “I ask you to baptize me in the Holy Spirit and give me the gift of wisdom?” I’m not being even the least bit facetious by that question. Think very hard about that.

So pray for the gift to interpret. What is so hard about that?

Again, it is my responsibility because there is a petulant resistance on the part of many in the CCR to proffer to all of us the evidence of their personal experience, while manifesting this experience publically? I don’t think so.

I’d say no, but did God reveal every little aspect of the workings of His Spirit to St. Paul? Did St. Paul have all the answers or does Jesus?

St. Paul was an apostle, he came face to face with Jesus on the Damascus Road, the Church has affirmed from the fourth century onward when the Canon was settled upon that St. Paul’s writings are divinely (Holy Spirit)inspired. I tend to trust him over someone’s recent experience particularly when it parallels the experience of the Church at Corinth to whom he was writing. If you read the USCCB footnotes on those chapters we have been quoting you will see that the Bishops agree that, to this point, the letter to the Corinthian Church is the best, most direct and detailed, on point discussion the Church has on the issue of speaking, praising, or praying in tongues. Personally, I hope that JPII will add to it soon, as he has done magnificently on the issue of the role of women.

 

[Les_Richardson]

Dj Roy Albert:

Is it really? So praying in tongues is ok by you? or no? Does it have to be done in public exactly to the letter as St. Paul prescribed? How about all other aspects of worship? How about St. Pauls stance on women in church? Shouldn’t we follow his exapmle to the letter on that aswell, or is that too touchy a subject in this age with the “female priesthood” on the rise?

I have said before and say again, I have no need or reason to judge another’s personal experience. That is between them and God. If they, however, want to bring that personal experience into the public setting, whether they want to admit it or not, if I am there, they include me, and it is their responsibility to me, as well any one else there, to demonstrate clearly that what they are doing, saying is of the Holy Spirit. Because it bears a resemblance to the “gift of tongues” from the scripture is not proof, your say so is not proof. A good start in that direction would be to *yield *(a popular word in this discussion) to the instructions contained in the Scripture until an amplification of that is forth-coming from the Church. Why are charismatics so resistant to yield? By their own admission it would not diminish their own spiritual growth one iota. Does it have more to do with group dynamics than spiritual growth?

I laugh when I hear someone say, “I go to church” or “let’s go to this church” without realizing that WE ARE THE CHURCH, the bulidings used for prayer & worship are of little importance.

Good point, although we don’t go as far in the doctrine of “the mystical body of believers” as do the Protestants. Catholicism is very well balanced wouldn’t you say?

So we don’t have approval to work in the gifts from Vatican II? That’s strange because I could have sworn that you claimed to know the documants very well.

You’ll have to explain to me how you draw that conclusion from my comments. Sorry, call me thick, by I can’t see the connection from my comments to your questions here.

 

[Les_Richardson]

Dj Roy Albert:

Really? I could have sworn that the teaching of the church were “public revelations”. Hmph…silly me. :whacky:

I guess we are differing over a definition. In the broad sense of the term I would agree with you that Church teachings through the Magesterium are divinely revealed through the Holy Spirit. If we are talking about the more common narrow sense of Public Revelation or Divine Revelation as opposed to Private Revelation, I think you will find the most widely accepted view in the Catholic Church is that Public Revelation, ie. Old Testament Scripture, Jesus Christ Himself, divinely inspired New Testament Scripture, Jesus’ direct instructions to the Apostles (Holy Tradition) are complete. CCC #66 - 67;
There will be no further Revelation *
[66](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/66.htm’) "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries. *
[67](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/67.htm’)* Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. *
Christian faith cannot accept “revelations” that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such “revelations”.

The voluminous writings of the fathers, the theologians and doctors of the Church have explained, illuminated, applied to every time and culture the Public Revelation that we have. But the message stays the same. As I pointed out many times here, if we do not like the specifics of St. Paul’s epistle, look at the overall message and it is consistent. Because charismatics don’t like it doesn’t mean it is out of date. But even then, if we want more illumination, it is to the magesterium that we must look for the exegesis. Meanwhile we satisfy ourselves with St. Paul and the opinions of theologians on St. Paul. When they resist this, I think it is the charismatics that throw the baby out with the bath-water.

 

[Mysty101]

Les,

You are still giving your own interpretation of scripture. I have given many instances of approval by Bishops and Priests. The interpretation was from authentic Catholic source. What are your credentials?

In “Authenticity", on pg 175, Dubay states, “In both testaments God identifies himself with his representatives, and that is why cooperation with them is a sure sign of compliance with God’s will." I have said many times that the leadership and affiliation of a group is a sign of authenticity.

You may not like to pray in tongues, but have you ever attended an authentic Catholic gathering? It is very inauthentic to condemn something you have never experienced, especially on your own interpretation of scripture.

 

[Les_Richardson]

Mysty101:

Les,

You are still giving your own interpretation of scripture. I have given many instances of approval by Bishops and Priests. The interpretation was from authentic Catholic source. What are your credentials?

In “Authenticity", on pg 175, Dubay states, “In both testaments God identifies himself with his representatives, and that is why cooperation with them is a sure sign of compliance with God’s will." I have said many times that the leadership and affiliation of a group is a sign of authenticity.

You may not like to pray in tongues, but have you ever attended an authentic Catholic gathering? It is very inauthentic to condemn something you have never experienced, especially on your own interpretation of scripture.

You know what is ironic about all of this? St. Paul was being very gentle and forebearing with the Corinthian Church. He himself was the original charismatic. You talk about authentic. That was St. Paul. If you read his epistles he was constantly encouraging the churches to become free of the Law, in and by the power of the Holy Spirit, living and acting as Christ, a common theme with him. That is no new discovery to the Church, although it may be to some Christians, and praise God they have found the transforming power of Christ through His Holy Spirit. I have spent considerable time pointing out that the Holy Spirit works in lives, transforming them, giving them gifts, drawing them close to Christ, inspiring them with zeal for the souls of men, inspiring them to total radical commitment to Jesus Christ and evangelization, all without any reference or need for the manifestation of tongues. Your response? “Do you honestly think anyone will read all that?” Well, I more or less assumed that you wouldn’t. Condemn? Are we back to the either/or scenario? Either I am a mindless supporter or I condemn the entire movement. I guess you stopped reading my posts a long time ago. Oh well, I still read yours. Would you like to trade quotes, Dubay for Fr. Most? It is fruitless but ironic nevertheless.
Tongues is really a side issue in the big picture yet the CCR puts it front and centre and draws a huge =sign between tongues and the Holy Spirit, between tongues and spiritual growth. It is classic Protestant Pentecostalism and yet you speak of Catholic authenticity? Don’t you see the irony in that? The entire CCR got its start from Protestant Pentecostals yet St. Paul is irrelevant today, when he is the original authentic Catholic charismatic? You just don’t like what he has to say, not my interpretation. Tell me how you, or any of the authentic Catholic authorities you rely upon interpret the 14th Chapter of 1 Corinthians. Verse 9 for example, *** Similarly, if you, because of speaking in tongues, do not utter intelligible speech, how will anyone know what is being said? For you will be talking to the air.*** What about that is not clear? And if you read the other verses does he not say the same thing over and over in different ways? Do those verses, the entire chapter not add up to one theme? This is not obscure exegesis.
Mysty101, there are no credentials that would satisfy you because you don’t want to think about this. So God bless you and have a very joyful Christmas.

 

[Mysty101]

Les,
Paul was speaking to the Church in Corinth, but I am not going to debate interpretation of scripture with you. He gave different instructions to different Churches.

I will accept the interpretation of the Pastors of today, who do not agree with you. We went through all this before, how the needs for those times may be different than today, and also that praying in tongues is not speaking in tongues—no teaching involved just praise and petition.

Years ago Catholics were not encouraged to read the bible without guidance of an authentic source—and it was stated that free interpretation was forbidden. As with the fast and abstinance rules, just because the ban was relaxed, it does not mean that we should totally ignore the instruction.

A Blessed and Joyful Christmas to you!!! It was a true pleasure to discuss this subject with you–I really appreciate your sincerety and civil manner of discussion.

Love & Prayers,

 

[Les_Richardson]

Thank you Mysty101,

It is clear where our disagreement is, and you have been consistent throughout, and I do admire your loyalty to those set in authority. That is a virtue we can all take note of and learn from.

As to this debate, if there is more to add we can take it up again. For now I want to say sincerely to all that have joined this discussion, not for one minute have I doubted that your love for our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is as deep as my own. Perhaps that is a blessing that I take for granted, that committed Catholics in love with Jesus can come together and discuss and debate, even with some heat at times. So I say Praise the Lord Jesus Christ! To each and every one that has posted here, may He give you a joyful and blessed Christmas, to you and your families as well.

Merry Christmas.

 

[bones_IV]

Keith Strohm:

What is “special” or nontraditional about the charisms ‘found’ in the Charismatic Movement? They are a traditional part of the Church’s lived experience. They are rooted in both scripture and tradition, and they have the approval of the Pope.

Personally, I do not in any way consider myself a member of the Charismatic Movement. I am, however, a Roman Catholic who strives to live out my baptismal calling with dignity–and that includes the discernment and use of the charisms I received at my Baptism.

Keith Strohm

I’m kind of sceptical about the charismatic movement in general cause I know nothing about them. I don’t remember the Pope himself giving approval to this. Where is your documentation? What are their chief beliefs are they loyal to Rome or not.

Padre Pio “Don’t worry, work and pray.”

 

[1_Maria]

Les Richardson:

Thank you Mysty101,

It is clear where our disagreement is, and you have been consistent throughout, and I do admire your loyalty to those set in authority. That is a virtue we can all take note of and learn from.

While I basically agree with what you said here, I admire far more, your charity and perseverance in faithfully presenting Truth in accordance with the Teaching Authority of the Church.

Maria

 

[Exporter]

Dj Roy Albert http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/statusicon_cad/user_offline.gif vbmenu_register(“postmenu_366164”, true);
Regular Member
Join Date: December 8, 2004
Location: El Centro, CA
Posts: 75

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: Charismatics—continued
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exporter
1 Cor14:v 2 "For he that speaketh in a tongue, speaketh not to men, but to God: for no man heareth. But by the Spirit he speaketh mysteries."

*This is St. Paul speaking.He said not to speak in tongues before other men, but to do that in private. In fact he did not say for all men to do this.
Dj says,That is exactly what St. Paul WAS NOT SAYING. The exact quote is 1 Cor 12: 27-29 “*If anyone speaks in a tongue, let it be two or at most three, and each in turn, and one should interpret. But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God. **Two or three prophets should speak, and the others discern.”.*Nowhere in that quote does St. Paul say “pray in tongues only in private”. He was telling them to have someone to interpret, if no one of the people present had the gift of interpretation then the person with the gift of tongues should pray silently, not “don’t pray in tongues in public period.”

Originally Posted by Exporter
1 Cor14:v 2 "For he that speaketh in a tongue, speaketh not to men, but to God: for no man heareth. But by the Spirit he speaketh mysteries."

---

Exporter says
***Dj, you are mixing apples and oranges! I quoted 1Cor14:v2. Then I used my Douay-Rheims Bible Commentary to explain. This Bible I use is an exact reproduction of the 1588 printing.Bishops and a few priests wrote the Commentaries. ***

In the King James Version we find 1Cor14:v2 to read,"For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue, speaketh not unto man, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

*You don’t address my verse, 1Cor14:v2. You quoted 1Cor 12:27 - 29. You quoted thusly:"1 Cor 12: 27-29 "If anyone speaks in a tongue, let it be two or at most three, and each in turn, and one should interpret. But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God. Two or three prophets should speak, and the others discern.". I checked this verse in the Douay-Rheims and the NIV plus the King James Version and they do NOT agree with you.*They begin with…:"Wherefore, whosoever shall eat of this bread and derink the Chalice of the Lord unworthily…

***Dj, before you start to critique a post you should at least determine what that post is discussing. I wrote about 1Cor14:v2 then you misquoted a different verse. I would welcome a discussion but you have to talk about the same thing that I was discussing. From your profile I see you are a guital-playing singer of 33. I was surprised to notice that you said Catholic was your religion, I really was. ***

 

[Mysty101]

1 Maria:

While I basically agree with what you said here, I admire far more, your charity and perseverance in faithfully presenting Truth in accordance with the Teaching Authority of the Church.
Maria

Mary,
Where has Les shown the teaching authority of the Church? This is his interpretation of St Paul, with which you obviously agree. Fr Angel did not.

Are you saying that the interpretation of a lay person should be taken over the interpretation of an authentic Priest?

 

[Exporter]

Tongues is really a side issue in the big picture yet the CCR puts it front and centre and draws a huge =sign between tongues and the Holy Spirit, between tongues and spiritual growth. It is classic Protestant Pentecostalism and yet you speak of Catholic authenticity? Don’t you see the irony in that? The entire CCR got its start from Protestant Pentecostals yet St. Paul is irrelevant today, when he is the original authentic Catholic charismatic? You just don’t like what he has to say, not my interpretation. Tell me how you, or any of the authentic Catholic authorities you rely upon interpret the 14th Chapter of 1 Corinthians. Verse 9 for example, Similarly, if you, because of speaking in tongues, do not utter intelligible speech, how will anyone know what is being said? For you will be talking to the air. What about that is not clear?

---

1st Cor XIV:2…“For he that speaketh in a tongue, speaketh not to men, but to God: for no man heareth. But by the Spirit he speaketh mysteries.”( Meaning that if a man speaketh in a tongue, he shall be speaking to God, not to men. Other men should not hear it.)

I have almost completed reading a book by the name of “Amazing Grace”. The life of John Newton the Sea Captain who wrote Amazing Grace.

Thje author of Amazing Grace is Steve Turner. On page 77 Capt. John Newton is discussing the several denominations with two of his aquaintances. Newton was to become a priest of the Church of England. They said ( the year is 1768- setting is England, the village of Olney) there was an off-shoot of the Church of England called Evangelicals. The Church of England was deeply suspicious of them because of the emphasis on a free style of worship and that their ministers didn’t have to have a University education.

As stated in the first paragraph, it was the American Pentacostals who grew out of the English Evangelical Church that gave rise to the Protestant Charismatic phenomenon- starting in the late 1800s. Now there are many divisions of that species of religion. They have matured in the past 30 years, but still aren’t accepted by the majority & even today many, many of their ministers are not educated men. They just “pop up”.

 

[1_Maria]

Exporter:

Tongues is really a side issue in the big picture yet the CCR puts it front and centre and draws a huge =sign between tongues and the Holy Spirit, between tongues and spiritual growth.

Exporter, I honestly believe it is not the CCR that continuously draws a huge =sign between tongues and the Holy Spirit, between tongues and spiritual growth.

Rather it is only those members of the CCR who have yet to understand the vision of Pope on the scale of the Universal Church who cling to tongues, etc.

The Pope is asking the CCR to promote the Eucharist and the Rosary as well as social programs etc.

Many do focus on what he asks of them, but others still remain focused on that huge =sign between tongues and the Holy Spirit, between tongues and spiritual growth and sadly others are led astray.

Maria

 

[Exporter]

1 Maria, I am sorry that I didn’t make it clear who said the following. I didn’t say it. I had copied and pasted from a post by Les R. here it is, partially."Tongues is really a side issue in the big picture yet the CCR puts it front and centre and draws a huge =sign between tongues and the Holy Spirit, between tongues and spiritual growth. It is classic Protestant Pentecostalism and yet you speak of Catholic authenticity? Don’t you see the irony in that? The entire CCR got its start from Protestant Pentecostals yet "

---

I was actually in agreement with Les R. and gave examples. 1 Maria, there has not been one person so far picked up on one of my major concerns.

What kind of person is attracted to spiritual shortcuts. Some are stable but quite a few are people either in trouble or they are mentally unstable. If we throw a cross section of these people into a group let by a well-meaning but unprofessional enthusiast some of the attendees can suffer mentally. There is no screening, it’s come one, come all. A enthusiastic but untrained leader can be detremental. For those who say this is of no value. Go sit in the waiting room of a psychiatrist for two hours and observe. It is free, you can go there at no charge. You will learn a bit about those who try to hide their mental problems. My heart goes out to them.