Confused about speaking in tongues

[vardaquinn]

@ Portrait:

Though on a widespread scale, many of the gifts did diminish, I can’t totally agree with your explanation of why this was so. Firstly, though some of the more extraordinary flashy gifts became less common, the charisms in 1 Corinthians 12 never died out. Throughout history, we read of many saints and holy men and women who exercised these charisms. Since St. Paul is so specific that the manifestation of the Spirit (the word for manifestation in Greek being something that cannot be hidden, like the light of the sun) is given to EVERYONE for the up-building of the Church, through the charisms, it is ridiculous to conclude that they simply died out for a long period of time. They didn’t. I am sure the overwhelming majority of faithful Christians, even if they are totally unaware of what the charisms are, have used one or more of these gifts of the Spirit. I have seen this often with people who may even be against the charismatic movement. However, some of the more obvious charisms - especially tongues, miracles, healing, and to a slighter lesser extent prophecy in my opinion - became less common. I do not think this was so much because the Church no longer had need of miracles to validate what they were preaching.

In the first few hundred years, the Church was very heavily persecuted. To be a Christian was a serious decision, one that could very possibly cost you your life, or at least destroy your reputation and make things very difficult for you. So, the only reason someone would become a Christian were for all the right reasons: it’s the Truth, and because they had encountered Christ, and believed. Well, then later you had Constantine not only legalize Christianity, but make it the state religion. Which is a shift to the absolute other extreme. Though this was good on many levels, it also served to stagnate the faith of many Christians. Being a Christian was no longer so serious a decision. It did not demand a radical change in your life, a genuine conversion. It became more of a cultural phenomena. You had other motives for being a Christian besides the right ones - you needed to be Christian to have certain jobs, to be able to move in society. Then you had rulers of other nations converting, and then simply marching their nation down to the river and having them all baptized - no evangelization, no catechesis, no conversion.

So not every Christian was a committed one. Not every Christian was living a full, active, conscious participation in the Body of Christ. Not every Christian knew Christ. But there were still plenty of people who did, and who were living a full, active, conscious participation. Often in these people’s lives were manifested miracles and extraordinary phenomena. This became the capital S saint. St. Paul, in his letters, addresses them to the “saints in Corinth” or to “the saints in Ephesus” or wherever (often translated “holy one” which is the same thing). He simply presumed, by virtue of their being Christian, these people were saints. The Saints took Jesus seriously, when He says they would perform even greater miracles than He would, that the Holy Spirit would give witness to Christ through them. Then you had the monastic movement. You had the super holy ones going off into the desert. There was a decrease in the understanding that ALL are called to live lives of holiness, to be saints, and it was limited (if not in teaching, then at least in how people understood things) to some specific individuals - particularly religious or clergy. There was a huge downplay in the role of the laity. This was something Vatican II specifically addressed.

So there was a huge misunderstanding of what the charisms were. They were often lumped in with other extraordinary phenomena, such as visions, locutions, etc. or special consolations that are given to only some individuals in prayer. The charisms are not on the same level as these, especially because they are usually given for service. The teaching on such extraordinary phenomena is rightly that we should not seek them, and be wary of it. So people, understanding the charisms to be these, did not seek these gifts, even though it clearly says in Scripture “seek eagerly the greatest spiritual gifts, especially prophecy” and “pray in the Spirit every chance you get” and “how I would like all of you to speak in tongues” and Paul’s injunctions TO seek these gifts. Also, many heretical movements displayed phenomena like the charisms, and sometimes the charisms, and so people were further driven away from it. For a detailed look at these heretical movements, see Enthusiasm by Ronald Knox.

What’s happening now is especially huge, and the charismatic movement is truly the fruit of the Second Vatican Council, which re-affirmed the universal call to sanctity. It also brought back the understanding of the role of the charisms in the Church (see LG 12). The charismatic movement is not rightly considered as a “movement”, and its purpose is not to be one. It’s supposed to vanish, and diffuse among the Church. It’s purpose is to renew the understanding of the charismatic dimension, and then vanish. It cannot become its own entity, or the sort of thing one joins or doesn’t join. It must be “I am a faithful Catholics - therefore the charismatic dimension is essential in my life”.

Your quote from Hebrews really doesn’t seem to indicate that the extraordinary gifts were meant to die out, and I don’t see it as specific enough to suggest that they had. The use of the past tense could simply be a rhetorical device, referring back to the Apostles who were dying out. The gifts of the Spirit weren’t meant to be exhausted with them.

 

[vardaquinn]

We don’t take Jesus at His word. We don’t believe Him when He says: if you had faith the size of a mustard seed… you could move trees, mountains. Anything you ask in my name will be given to you. How much more will a good Father give good gifts to those who ask, will give the Holy Spirit? The ones who come after me will do greater miracles than these. Go forth and preach the Gospel, heal the sick, cast out demons, raise the dead. The Advocate will testify for me. Then what actually happens - read the Acts of the Apostles. In Greek, the word for this book is “praxis” from where we get the word “practice” or “practical”. We need to be living New Testament Christianity. The Acts of the Apostles is the model. We read the Bible, the instruction book, and then we live it. We see Jesus does this, the Apostles do this. The early Christians were first named Christians by the Gentiles because Christ was all they ever talked about! And what does the name Christ mean? Anointed! We are anointed in the Spirit to go out and bring Christ to the nations. It’s not a question of God maybe wanting to do these things. God has given us this great power, He has anointed us with the Holy Spirit. What’s in the way is our own pride, our own cowardice, our lack of trust in Him. We’re afraid to leave everything and follow Him. Once you start living a life of radical surrender to Jesus, you can’t go back to leading an ordinary regular life like the rest of the world. We’re afraid to renounce the world, follow Christ, and go out and bring the Gospel to everyone we meet. We’re too prideful to think we have to do this. We don’t trust Him that He will really do what He says He will.

 

[vardaquinn]

I don’t want to split hairs about what constitutes self-control, but what just came out of your mouth is why I know the whole gibberish thing has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. Sorry, but that’s my considered opinion after years of experience.

Well you can have your own opinion sure, but since I know my own judgments aren’t always perfect, I think I would just stick with what the Church (and especially the Scripture) says.

 

[Portrait]

F.A.O. vardaquinn

Dear vardaquinn,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your response to my post.

The fundamental error of the Charismatic Renewal is to assume that the life of the apostolic Church is normative for the Church in every age. The claim that the extraordinary charismata, possessed by the apostles, should be the property of the Church today, simply cannot be sustained. That claim must be related to the concept of miracle in Sacred Scripture* as a *whole. If we look at the subject we observe that miracles did not occur in all ages, either in the Old Testament of the New, rather we find that they cluster like stars in the night sky in the biblical revelation. There are in fact four principle constellations; they cluster first around Moses (the plagues of Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the manna and the water etc.), next around Elijah, Elisha and the prophets, thirdly around our Lord Himself and fourthly around the apostles. Now these periods correspond to the four main epochs of revelation - the Law, the Prophets and our Lord and His apostles. The major purpose of miraculous phenomena was to verify each fresh stage of revelation. Thus, for example, the uniqueness of Moses as a prophet (‘whom the Lord knew face to face’) was confirmed by the uniqueness of his miracles. Similarly, the public ministry of our Blessed Saviour was attested ‘by God with mighty works and wonders and signs which God did though him’ (Acts 2: 22), while God also bore witness to the message of the apostolic eyewitnesses ‘by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own wil’ (Heb. 2: 3,4). When we come to ‘the signs of a true apostle’, we discover that the very same principle controls the significance of what they did. The miracles that accompanied their sacred ministry, whether it was speaking in foreign languages, healing the sick, or raising the dead, were meant to authenticate the preaching of the krygma in a pagan world in which their were ‘many “gods” and many “lords”’ (I Cor. 8: 5). These were the very early days of Christianity and the fledgling Church and so it was necessary at that time that the Gospel be divinely confirmed - and this is precisely what happened; ‘And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it’ (St. Mark 16: 20). Tongues and healings etc. were the sort of ‘fireworks’ to initially launch the Church and Christ’s holy religion, but it is an error to assert that these evidential manifestations were intended to be continuous in the life of the Church. As with other sproradic periods of divine revelation, as discussed above, they were necessarily restricted to this unique time.

In all Pentecostal type movements in the past there have been deviations from the mainstream of Church history and, sadly, from orthodoxy. Even if they have not always shown themselves to be heterodox immediately, this characteristic has manifested itself at length. Montanism, the Anabaptists, the Quakers and the in the celebrated Irvingites - all have claimed fresh outpourings of the Holy Spirit and a renewal of long neglected apostolic gifts, yet all have been heterodox parentheses in the history of Christianity. Therefore, however, large and important a contemporary movement may be, if it stands in line with such a pedigree, then it must be viewed with grave suspicion.

If the extraordinary gifts are not the property of the Church today, as many believe, then such a view does necessarily shut one in to the dismissal as counterfeit of some of the experiences of sincere and devout Christians. However, the sad fact is that sincere and devout Christians can be sincerely mistaken. Moreover, all of our experiences must be evaluated in the light of sound theological principles and biblical exegesis, not vice-versa.

As regards the Hebrews passage (Heb. 2: 3,4), given the time of the writing of the Epistle (c. A.D. 70), the author is unquestionably looking back on the past miraculous ministry of the apostles, which even then had probably already all but ended, and not using some “rehtorical device”. Indeed, this verse is parallel to St. Mark’s words (already previously cited) at the conclusion of his Gospel, written a few years prior to the Hebrew Epistle (c. A.D. 65). St. Mark likewise is also looking back on the miraculous ministry and would have surely avoided any use of a rehetorical device in the simplest, shortest and baldest of all the Gospels. As with the writer to the Hebrews, St. Mark is saying that *at the first *there was a clear need for extraordinary signs in order to move a sceptical and hostile world to which the Gospel and Church were still new. Obviously, that situation would not prevail indefinetely and after the passage of time the Church would gain a foothold in the pagan Roman Empire and the revelatory gifts would have fulfilled their function and hence be no longer be required.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[DianaCC]

Well you can have your own opinion sure, but since I know my own judgments aren’t always perfect, I think I would just stick with what the Church (and especially the Scripture) says.

Well said. And that’s why 1 John 4 is so important.

 

[Portrait]

F.A.O. vardaquinn

Dear vardaquinn,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your response to my post.

The fundamental error of the Charismatic Renewal is to assume that the life of the apostolic Church is normative for the Church in every age. The claim that the extraordinary charismata, possessed by the apostles, should be the property of the Church today, simply cannot be sustained. That claim must be related to the concept of miracle in Sacred Scripture* as a *whole. If we look at the subject we observe that miracles did not occur in all ages, either in the Old Testament of the New, rather we find that they cluster like stars in the night sky in the biblical revelation. There are in fact four principle constellations; they cluster first around Moses (the plagues of Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea, the manna and the water etc.), next around Elijah, Elisha and the prophets, thirdly around our Lord Himself and fourthly around the apostles. Now these periods correspond to the four main epochs of revelation - the Law, the Prophets and our Lord and His apostles. The major purpose of miraculous phenomena was to verify each fresh stage of revelation. Thus, for example, the uniqueness of Moses as a prophet (‘whom the Lord knew face to face’) was confirmed by the uniqueness of his miracles. Similarly, the public ministry of our Blessed Saviour was attested ‘by God with mighty works and wonders and signs which God did though him’ (Acts 2: 22), while God also bore witness to the message of the apostolic eyewitnesses ‘by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own wil’ (Heb. 2: 3,4). When we come to ‘the signs of a true apostle’, we discover that the very same principle controls the significance of what they did. The miracles that accompanied their sacred ministry, whether it was speaking in foreign languages, healing the sick, or raising the dead, were meant to authenticate the preaching of the krygma in a pagan world in which their were ‘many “gods” and many “lords”’ (I Cor. 8: 5). These were the very early days of Christianity and the fledgling Church and so it was necessary at that time that the Gospel be divinely confirmed - and this is precisely what happened; ‘And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it’ (St. Mark 16: 20). Tongues and healings etc. were the sort of ‘fireworks’ to initially launch the Church and Christ’s holy religion, but it is an error to assert that these evidential manifestations were intended to be continuous in the life of the Church. As with other sproradic periods of divine revelation, as discussed above, they were necessarily restricted to this unique time.

In all Pentecostal type movements in the past there have been deviations from the mainstream of Church history and, sadly, from orthodoxy. Even if they have not always shown themselves to be heterodox immediately, this characteristic has manifested itself at length. Montanism, the Anabaptists, the Quakers and the in the celebrated Irvingites - all have claimed fresh outpourings of the Holy Spirit and a renewal of long neglected apostolic gifts, yet all have been heterodox parentheses in the history of Christianity. Therefore, however, large and important a contemporary movement may be, if it stands in line with such a pedigree, then it must be viewed with grave suspicion.

If the extraordinary gifts are not the property of the Church today, as many believe, then such a view does necessarily shut one in to the dismissal as counterfeit of some of the experiences of sincere and devout Christians. However, the sad fact is that sincere and devout Christians can be sincerely mistaken. Moreover, all of our experiences must be evaluated in the light of sound theological principles and biblical exegesis, not vice-versa.

As regards the Hebrews passage (Heb. 2: 3,4), given the time of the writing of the Epistle (c. A.D. 70), the author is unquestionably looking back on the past miraculous ministry of the apostles, which even then had probably already all but ended, and not using some “rehtorical device”. Indeed, this verse is parallel to St. Mark’s words (already previously cited) at the conclusion of his Gospel, written a few years prior to the Hebrew Epistle (c. A.D. 65). St. Mark likewise is also looking back on the miraculous ministry and would have surely avoided any use of a rehetorical device in the simplest, shortest and baldest of all the Gospels. As with the writer to the Hebrews, St. Mark is saying that *at the first *there was a clear need for extraordinary signs in order to move a sceptical and hostile world to which the Gospel and Church were still new. Obviously, that situation would not prevail indefinetely and after the passage of time the Church would gain a foothold in the pagan Roman Empire and the revelatory gifts would have fulfilled their function and hence be no longer be required.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Portrait]

Well said. And that’s why 1 John 4 is so important.

Dear DianaCC,

Codial greetings and a very good day.

Indeed, and St. Paul exhorts us to “test everything; hold fast what is good” (I Thess. 5: 21). We should not accept the claims of the Charismatic Renewal with an uncritical acceptance. This “eccclesial movement” of interdenominational congregations, frequently gathers in sports arenas and other large venues to be thrilled and ‘lifted’ by raucous music and the ministry of “anointed” preachers, many of them Protestant clerics. The whole movement is, as with Pentecostal groupings of the past, founded on a clearly heterodox pneumatological conception of the Church, which regards the institution of the Catholic Church as but a visible manifestation, however admirable, of a pre-existent pan-denominational “union in the Holy Spirit” with objective heretics. Alas, this grotesquerie has penetrated many parts of the Western Catholic Church and has been the occasion of much deep division among the faithful.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[roveau]

I think we should all encourage each other to read the Gospels and the Epistles, and believe them. They have been marvellously preserved for nearly 2000 years to the present day, the messages therin are meant to be believed to this day. To argue that the gifts of the Holy Spirit have been diminished or negated is dangerous, because it goes against what the Scriptures actually say and what the Pope and magisterium have been saying especially since Vatican II - these sources (Scriptures and Pope)when speaking in unison can’t be in error.

That the gift of tongues has not been brought to the fore for many centuries does not mean that it was somehow cancelled for all time. Why has it come to the fore since Vatican II?, we don’t know because it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. It’s a sacred mystery. Perhaps because we may be in the last times, the time prophesied when there would be a great ‘falling away’ (and guess what’s been happening on a grand scale since the 1960s?).

I haven’t personally experienced this gift but I have no problem with others experiencing this gift, especially since our Holy Church speaks favourably of it.

 

[DianaCC]

Why has it come to the fore since Vatican II?, we don’t know because it is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

Well, yes, we can know. The history of charismatism settles it for me.

 

[vardaquinn]

@ Portrait: Well, it depends what you mean by the apostolic Church being normative. A handful of fishermen, tax collectors, and Pharisees, with very little established structure, obviously not. Obviously elements of the apostolic Church aren’t meant to be normative. The charisms, and the charismatic dimension evident in the life of the early Christians, absolutely definitely is. And you will find this supported by the Popes, the bishops, the Church documents, especially Lumen Gentium, the CCC and above all Sacred Scripture. To make a claim that this is not the case is directly contrary to Church teaching.

The idea of their being an “age of miracles” is absolutely ridiculous. Miracles have happened all throughout time. On the contrary, miracles accompanied all of God’s doings. Definitely those places you highlighted, of course, being occasions of a great many miracles. But what would happen was that when the Israelites were unfaithful, and turned to worship pagan gods, or neglected the law, and angered the Holy One, then he would often allow the pagan countries around them to conquer them. Then He would raise up judges, prophets, kings, etc. to rally the people, and during all of this performed miracles. There are so many countless miracles that have occurred! Your argument is totally unsustainable.

In fact, the charisms as described in 1 Corinthians are a fundamental part of the Church. That’s HOW the Church works. People are given different roles (eyes, hands, etc. in the Body) and given different charisms to accompany their roles.

See CCC 797 to 801.

These play off of each other and contribute to the upbuilding of the Church. They are especially evangelical.

Our primary role, you must understand, is primarily evangelical. There is a reason why we weren’t just beamed up to heaven at our baptisms: we are ALL called to evangelize. How are we going to evangelize without the gifts of the Holy Spirit? That’s what they’re meant for! There are a billion different religious groups out there with a billion different messages. Why should they pay Christians any special attention? Because they’re just a whole lot nicer than everyone else? Well, because they go around walking in the presence and power of God the Holy Spirit, backing up what they say with miracles, healing the sick, raising the dead… As St. Justin Martyr said: “If you want proof that the Spirit of God, who was with your people and left you to come to us, come into our assemblies and there you will see Him cast out demons, heal the sick, and hear Him speak in tongues and prophesy.” Especially, they are given the words to say by the Holy Spirit that will open hearts. These are manifested in a whole bunch of charismatic gifts, which Paul outlines in 1 Corinthians 12. He makes it absolutely crystal clear: these are given to each individual for the upbuilding of the Church. If this was meant merely for the Apostolic Church, then why is it in the Sacred Scripture? Obviously, as the teaching of the Church clearly shows, because it isn’t meant for just the Apostolic Church.

At Vatican II, according to Bl. Pope John Paul II, “the Church rediscovered the charismatic dimension as one of her constitutive elements: “It is not only through the sacraments and the ministrations of the Church that the Holy Spirit makes holy the people, leads them and enriches them with his virtues. Allotting his gifts according as he wills (cf. 1 Cor 12:11), he also distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank… He makes them fit and ready to undertake various tasks and offices for the renewal and building up of the Church” (Lumen gentium, n. 12).
**
The institutional and charismatic dimensions are co-essential as it were to the Church’s constitution. **They contribute, although differently, to the life, renewal and sanctification of God’s People. It is from this providential rediscovery of the Church’s charismatic dimension that, before and after the Council, a remarkable pattern of growth has been established for ecclesial movements and new communities.” (Pentecost May 30, 1998)

He is clear: the charismatic dimension, along with the institutional, are co-essential to the very nature of the Church. Meaning: wherever “Church” is, and the charismatic dimension is missing, a fundamental aspect of Church life is missing.

Lumen Gentium in particular notes that these charisms (speaking specifically within the context of those described in 1 Corinthinans) are either more extraordinary (and these should not be rashly sought after: meaning, if you’re going to use them, know what you’re doing) or more simple.

It is crucial to note that Bl. Pope John XXIII called Vatican II with the intention of bringing about a “new Pentecost”. He had the entire church (particularly the sick and children) pray his prayer to the Holy Spirit to “Renew in your Church your miracles as of a second Pentecost”. Obviously that was what he thought the Church needed. Obviously, that’s what the Holy Spirit thought the Church needed - as that is what is happening today.

Vatican II reemphasized our call to evangelism, and the charisms are tools for that purpose. To claim that they are “not for this age” simply contradicts the facts: they ARE, because they are active in the Church today. The Biblical charisms, according to Pope Benedict XVI (see the Ratzinger Report) are becoming a burning reality today! To claim that they were simply for the apostolic age clearly contradicts all levels of Church teaching. Our mission remains the same as the Apostles: to go and bring the truth to everyone. To think we don’t need the charisms today is a very grave mistake. We need them just as much, perhaps more, as the Apostles needed them. They were by no means exhausted by the Apostles.

 

[vardaquinn]

Dear DianaCC,
Indeed, and St. Paul exhorts us to “test everything; hold fast what is good” (I Thess. 5: 21). We should not accept the claims of the Charismatic Renewal with an uncritical acceptance. This “eccclesial movement” of interdenominational congregations, frequently gathers in sports arenas and other large venues to be thrilled and ‘lifted’ by raucous music and the ministry of “anointed” preachers, many of them Protestant clerics. The whole movement is, as with Pentecostal groupings of the past, founded on a clearly heterodox pneumatological conception of the Church, which regards the institution of the Catholic Church as but a visible manifestation, however admirable, of a pre-existent pan-denominational “union in the Holy Spirit” with objective heretics. Alas, this grotesquerie has penetrated many parts of the Western Catholic Church and has been the occasion of much deep division among the faithful.

Well, that’s really not what the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is doing. I don’t see anything wrong with being lifted by music or the ministry of anointed preachers - though one’s faith shouldn’t be based on emotional experiences. It has made real progress in ecumenical unity, but obviously not rejecting the institutional dimension of the Church. If some charismatics do this, then I strongly object. But that is not how the Church itself perceives these new ecclesial movements, and that is why they have given them such strong support.

 

[vardaquinn]

Well, yes, we can know. The history of charismatism settles it for me.

Right. Bl. John XXIII prayed for an increase in miracles as of a new Pentecost, calling Vatican II with that intention of igniting a “new Pentecost”. The Council re-emphasized the role of the charisms in the Church. A few years later: the Catholic Charismatic Renewal begins. Pretty simple.

 

[MatthewCaligari]

My flatmates who are Pentecostal seem to live for this “speaking in tongues” “gibberish” that they do. Having been to a Protestant church its really sad to see they believe that if you can do that you have been baptized in The Holy Spirit…My flatmate who has done 3 years of Bible College at a Protestant College tells me that scripture supports , speaking in “Gibberish”. Also I went to a Catholic Charismatic group and they did it there, whats with that??

I have to be real careful how I word this considering the Holy See has backed the Catholic Charismatic Group, BUT… Your picture tells a thousands words!
(although from the movie the passion) Christ holding himself in his hands THIS IS MY BODY sadly for some Catholic`s is not enough to sustain there faith and there souls…
having once joined a Pentecostal movement where speaking in tongues was the number one focus… The most BLESSED HOLY EUCHARIST is what EVERY Catholic should be boasting about and reaching out to others about… It is Jesus Christ!
Why speak a unknown gibberish language that is only a couple hundred years old, when Authentic Scripture tells us quote clearly that each man heard the Gospel preached in there own native tongue (language) …
that is my opinion…Personally I feel no need to attend a Catholic Charismatic group, because the most Blessed Eucharist is all I need God Bless you.

 

[vardaquinn]

I have to be real careful how I word this considering the Holy See has backed the Catholic Charismatic Group, BUT… Your picture tells a thousands words!
(although from the movie the passion) Christ holding himself in his hands THIS IS MY BODY sadly for some Catholic`s is not enough to sustain there faith and there souls…
having once joined a Pentecostal movement where speaking in tongues was the number one focus… The most BLESSED HOLY EUCHARIST is what EVERY Catholic should be boasting about and reaching out to others about… It is Jesus Christ!
Why speak a unknown gibberish language that is only a couple hundred years old, when Authentic Scripture tells us quote clearly that each man heard the Gospel preached in there own native tongue (language) …
that is my opinion…Personally I feel no need to attend a Catholic Charismatic group, because the most Blessed Eucharist is all I need God Bless you.

Why pray the rosary then? Why do a novena? Why have a regular prayer life? Why read the Scripture? Because, as Sacrosanctum Concilum points out: the entire activity of the Church is not exhausted with the celebration of Mass. Mass is the source, summit, and center - but it’s not all there is. These aren’t two opposing things. I go to daily Mass. I also pray in tongues daily.

Why not pray in an unknown language? Why not? What grace do you stand to gain from turning aside from it? Paul encourages this many times. And the Bible clearly says that when a person prays in a tongue, his mind is unfruitful: he doesn’t understand what he is praying. See 1 Corinthians 14.

 

[Portrait]

F.A.O. vardaquinn

Dear vardaquinn,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Apologies for the delay in responding to your posts, dear friend, but I have only just returned from being on Retreat.

The special manifestations of the Spirit would cease to be special if they were normative for the Church all the time. It is true that the extraordinary gifts continued after the initial Pentecostal outpouring, both in the experience of the apostles themselves, and in the lives of the Chistians to whom they ministered. Nevertheless, their primary function was to authenticate the apostles as true messengers, and the Gospel which they proclaimed a true message and their converts true members the new covenant Church. Thus just as the our Lord’s healings were ‘signs’ of His messiahship (see St. Matt. 11: 2-6), so these special manifestations granted in connection with the apostles’ ministry were signs of the present reality of the realm of grace and spiritual renewal which Jesus had called ‘the kingdom of God’, the realm of which the apostles were heralds, their Gospel was the charter, and all Christians became citizens.

Those who maintain that there has been a revival of the special manifestations of the Spirit today, should weigh the following facts: 1) So far as can be ascertained from the N.T., these manifestations were always given in connection with the apostles’ personal minsistry - hence they are refered to as the “signs of an apostle”. Certainly, they petered out rapidly at the end of the first century. 2) The N.T. contains no specific promise either of their continuance or of their renewal in any post-pentecostal situation. 3) Nowhere in the N.T. are such special manifestations regarded as indispensable for the spiritual health of the Church. In I Corinthians 12-14, St. Paul insists that in the congregation spiritual endowments must be used for edification and, in particular, the gift of tongues should be restrained in public worship where no interpreter is forthcoming (this is far removed from the ‘singing in toungues’ meetings of modern Pentecostalism). 4) Nowhere in the N.T. are these more sensational manifestations of the Spirit’s presence regarded as harbingers of some spiritual renewal, following a period of spiritual declension and ‘formalism’, in either individuals or communities. 5) Nowhere does the N.T. give us direct encouragement to seek the gift of tongues, or to regard ourselves as spiritually inferior and sub-standard if lack it, or imagine that our possession of it will aid us in the pursuit of holiness. The Corinthians who evidently took an inordinate interest in these particular manifestations (not unlike some modern day Pentecostalists), seem to have been the most disorderly, immoral, worldly and spiritually immature church to which St. Paul ever wrote.

The spiritual life of the Church is not impeded by the withdrawing or withholding of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. Their primary purpose, according to the N.T., was dispensational rather than personal; that is to say, they were granted in the early days of the infant Church as witness to the divine origin of our most holy religion an to mark the transition from the era of the old covenant to that of the new. The need for them ended when the apostles’ unique ministry was finished and the Church was firmly established in the world. They provided that special supernatural confirmation of the divine origin “of the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (S. Jude 3). However, such a period of God’s special intervention in history can no more be reproduced now than the Incarnation itself can occur a second time. Please do not misunderstand me, old chap, I am not wishing to deny that this class of gifts, when given, may in certain cases have served under God to further the Christians’ communion with Christ or even to advance the work of grace in their hearts. However, be that as it may, it does not alter the fact that this was not their chief function, nor were they actually required for this purpose. To contend, as many Pentecostalists do, that any subjective spiritual enrichment is necessarily dependent now upon the fresh granting of such manifestations would be a very serious error indeed.

Thus, at the initial stage in the establishment of the Church the special sign gifts served effectively to confirm Christ’s religion and inform the conviction of the fledgling Church. They were helped by such evidence to appreciate the reality and the range - reaching Samaritans and Gentiles, as wel as the Jews - of a crucified and exalted Christ. “That the first communication of divine power which was to renovate the world should be accompanied by unmistakable proofs of its presence, that the invisible Spirit should make himself seen in the brightness of fire, heard in the sound of a mighty wind, felt in the shaking of the earth; that the Apostles themselves, and also the first members of the infant Church, should exhibit to the world outward and manifest signs (the gift of tongues, the working of wonders, the cast out of devils as proofs of the Spirit that worked with them - all this appears natural and appropriate when we we remember that Pentecost is not only the “confirmation” of the Apostles but also the first solemn promulgation of the Christian Church; and it would be strange if these phenomena did not assume great prominence in the story” (The Teaching of the Catholic Church, Vol 2, p. 811, Canon George D. Smith, Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1948). But even stranger to assume that such supernatural phenomena should continue to assume great prominence in the contemporary Church.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Portrait]

Well, that’s really not what the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is doing. I don’t see anything wrong with being lifted by music or the ministry of anointed preachers - though one’s faith shouldn’t be based on emotional experiences. It has made real progress in ecumenical unity, but obviously not rejecting the institutional dimension of the Church. If some charismatics do this, then I strongly object. But that is not how the Church itself perceives these new ecclesial movements, and that is why they have given them such strong support.

Dear vardaquinn,

Hello again, dear friend.

The problem is that the ‘faith’ of many in the charismatic renewal movement is based upon their subjective experience because of undue attention to emotional feelings and outward manifestations. Indeed, it would not be an overstatement to say that their whole lives revolve around euphoric experiences and the singing of rousing repetitive ditties.

Abnormal phenomena are as ambiguous as they are fascinating. As our Lord Himself taught, it is “by their fruits”, and not by signs and wonders, that a genuine faith is to be distinguished from a false one. “On that day”, Jesus said, “many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers” (St. Matt. 7: 22-23).

Signs and wonders, even were they the property of the Church today, and though accompanying a Christian profession, are not proof that a man is a true Christian or even that he is advancing in sanctity and keeping himself “unstained from the world” (S. Jam. 1: 27). It should be remembered that the phenomena of healings, visions, ‘voices’, prophetic utterance, and ‘glossolalia’ - speaking in tongues - have all appeard from time to time in pagan and non-religious contexts, where they admit only of psychological, psychosomatic, or demonic explanation. There are those men who are of the opinion that it is not impossible that many instances of these phenomena within the Church (Catholicism & Protestantism) ought to be explained in the same terms.

The pious Christian ought to be pre-occupied with the pursuit of holiness, not with supernatural phenomena or ecstatic experiences. Alas, so many charismatic type Christians are unmortified and worldly-minded, which I find very telling indeed. Thus, for example, they have no problem with listening to that debased sensory material, rock/pop music and will defend to the death culturally unhealthy reading material such as Harry Potter It is sanctity and separation from the godless world that our all-holy God looks for in those who name the name of Christ and cultivation of the ‘fruit of the Spirit’ (cf. Gal. 5: 22f). It is this ‘fruit’ that is both God’s permanent requirement of all his children and His own distinctive product in them. Moreover, the authentic mark of being ‘filled with the Spirit’ is that this fruit is appearing in a man ever more prolifically. Thus the decisive test for the devout life is not the experiential but the ethical one.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[vardaquinn]

The problem is that the ‘faith’ of many in the charismatic renewal movement is based upon their subjective experience because of undue attention to emotional feelings and outward manifestations. Indeed, it would not be an overstatement to say that their whole lives revolve around euphoric experiences and the singing of rousing repetitive ditties.

You can’t judge that for yourself. Undoubtedly, that may be the case with some individuals. But none of us have the right or ability to judge someone’s faith. Outward appearances are often deceiving. How often have I been astonished to find people, who I had by my own prideful judgments thought to have a very weak faith, to be in fact incredibly holy people - far holier than myself.

 

[DianaCC]

You can’t judge that for yourself. Undoubtedly, that may be the case with some individuals. But none of us have the right or ability to judge someone’s faith. Outward appearances are often deceiving. How often have I been astonished to find people, who I had by my own prideful judgments thought to have a very weak faith, to be in fact incredibly holy people - far holier than myself.

In my opinion, yes you can. You need to look at the big picture.

 

[vardaquinn]

In my opinion, yes you can. You need to look at the big picture.

openbible.info/topics/only_god_can_judge

You really can’t. You don’t know the details of people’s spiritual lives, and you don’t have a right to know. It may well be the case - but none of us has either the right or the ability to make such a statement.

 

[vardaquinn]

@ Portrait: Thank you for your polite replies!

The charismatic gifts are not limited to special manifestations of the Holy Spirit. They are meant to be normative in the experience of every Christian life. This is clear from Church teaching.

Bl. Pope John Paul the Great has some useful things to say here vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19920624en.html

You misunderstand exactly what Paul is talking about with the speaking in tongues. When he says “if someone is to speak in tongues, let it be two or three”, he is referring specifically to people who have an instruction to give in tongues. He’s trying to realign the Corinthians evangelical focus and redirect them towards prophecy and interpretation that edify the other people there. And keep in mind his directives would also be subject to change. He gives other sort of liturgical directives in 1 Corinthians, such as that women’s heads must be covered, which ecclesiastical authorities have the ability to change. So that doesn’t necessarily knock out praying in tongues as a congregation, especially since that’s really not what Paul’s speaking against.

I think the idea that special manifestations were limited to the “Apostolic Age” is very silly. Because they have happened all through out the Church’s history, and they are really happening today - and they were called for by the Church! This was one of Bl. John XXIII’s main intentions in calling the Second Vatican Council! And you know… one of those people who believe the charisms are for this age is the current Pope, who said: “What the New Testament describes, with reference to the charisms, as visible signs of the coming of the Spirit is no longer merely ancient, past history: this history is becoming a burning reality today.”

The N.T. says they will remain until ‘all things are fulfilled’. I don’t see that as having happened yet… In fact, Eusebius who is considered the father of Church history, claimed that: “The prophetic charisms must exist in the church until the final coming.”

It’s really unfounded to say they don’t happen any more. They do. They are happening right now. They’re supposed to. St. Paul is very clear: to each is given some manifestation of the Spirit for the upbuilding of the Church. Everyone, without exception! And actually, the Greek word he uses there is a specific sort of word for “manifestation”. It indicates something very obvious, as obvious and clear as the light of the sun.

The gifts of the Holy Spirit were by no means exhausted in the Upper Room at Pentecost! That’s not their point. The whole point is Pentecost empowers us with the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, manifested primarily through charisms (whether simple or extraordinary, but really preferably both - St. Paul is pretty clear about seeking the greatest spiritual gifts, especially prophecy, and seeking to have an abundance of charisms for the upbuilding of the Church). We are ALL apostles in the sense that the apostolic mission of the Apostles, to preach the Gospel, is still our mission. That is the primary reason you are still on this earth. To do this without the Holy Spirit, and without the charisms, is not only a very useless but it is also impossible - the Holy Spirit will use charisms to spread the faith. I am sure that He has given you charisms and you have used them to bring people to Christ.

What the Church is saying about the charisms and the charismatic life is clear: this is something essential in the life of the Church.