Defending the Holy Spirit, Defending the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement

[jmj1984]

Maybe I missed it, but where did he say all Christians had to speak in tongues or prophesy? I think the point is that you are thinking that the Charismatic movement narrows the charismatic gifts down to the ones like tongues, prophecy, and healing. It does not. It, by its nature, affirms the continuing presence of all the gifts.

That link indicates that Charismata are the spiritual graces and qualifications granted to every Christian to perform his task in the Church.

As for your latter claim, seeing as thats what the founders of the movement believed a ‘spirit filled life’ to consist of, its an entirely fair comment to make.

 

[ltwin]

As for your latter claim, seeing as thats what the founders of the movement believed a ‘spirit filled life’ to consist of, its an entirely fair comment to make.

Because Paul says that every Christian is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the Common Good. It seems you want to limit the charismata to tongues and prophecy. That was never the definition of the spirit filled life.

. . . speaking in tongues could be accepted as the Bible evidence of a person’s baptism in the Spirit only if it were accompanied by divinely-given love. Without evidence of this “fruit” of the Holy Spirit in the claimant’s life, [William J.] Seymour was not convinced that the tongue had been divinely given.

(Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., The Azusa Street Mission and Revival: The Birth of the Global Pentecostal Movement, page 178)

 

[jmj1984]

Because Paul says that every Christian is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the Common Good. It seems you want to limit the charismata to tongues and prophecy. That was never the definition of the spirit filled life.

(Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., The Azusa Street Mission and Revival: The Birth of the Global Pentecostal Movement, page 178)

You know this is just going to turn into a rehash of the previous 20 pages of arguments? I am criticising the catholic charasmatic movement not the movement in general, the movement in general condemns itself as it embraces all the errors of protestantism amongst several of its own.

 

[guanophore]

So you are claiming tongues and prophecy arent extraordinary consolations?

They are extraordinary in the sense that they have their origin in the Divine, but they are not “consolations” the way the Saints and Dr.'s of the Church use that term. Perhaps it would help the discussion if we could agree on a definition of “consolation”? You seem to reject the one that is in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Do you have an alternative definition to offer? (Other than your own opinion that “differs” from what the Church teaches?

Thats self evidently absurd, they are extraordinary consolations, they are extraordinary gifts to claim otherwise is simply dishonest.

There is nothing “dishonest” about accepting the definition provided by the Catholic Encyclopedia. Granted, it is not an infallible document, but there is no attempt in its pages to deceive the faithful!

They are clearly not ordinary as for example faith, hope or charity which though supernatural all baptised people should possess and they do console as they are a particular and rare gift from God.

You make a good point here. Although all baptized persons should/ have faith, hope and charity, we know they do not. In like manner, though all baptized persons should****unwrap and use the charisms they were given at that time to serve the Church, they likewise do not.

I am not sure how you are using the term “console” in this context. There are plenty of instances where faith, hope, and love are anything but “consoling”. I can’t imagine Mary’s suffering as she watched the life pour out of her Divine Son, but it is hard to imagine that her expression of faith, hope and charity at the foot of His Cross was “consoling” to her.

Or do you claim that all people have these gifts and that actually there is nothing special or rare about them?

The normative Christian life is to be filled with faith, hope, and love. The normative Christian life is to be filled with functioning charisms.

Speaking in tongues is sensational by its very nature. As is prophecy!

Not sure what you mean here by the word “sensational”. It does involve the senses. We had a high Mass last weekend where a lot of incense was used. It was sensational by its very nature, as it appeals to the senses in an olfactory and visual manner. People who pray in a private prayer language can do so quietly. I do this at Mass on a regular basis. Sometimes people that receive a prophesy do so in silence also. I recently spoke to a woman who reported being awakened in the night many times, finding the need to get up and write what came to her before she was able to go back to sleep. What is sensational about that? Do you think the Revelation John received on Patmos was “sensational”?

I cannot believe we are actually going to have an argument about this! It is not ordinary, it will attract attention and curiosity, it is rare and something special, it is therefore sensational.

We will have to argue about it because you have a warped perspective of what happens. It seems that you have been watching too many Pentecostal videos on You Tube, and have mistaken the frenzy portrayed as something synonymous with the CCR. There is no need to attract attention over praying in tongues or receiving a prophetic word.

Spiritual dryness does not mean something is not a consolation. St Maria Faustina, St Margaret Mary Alcoque and Sister Josefa Menendez all experienced spiritual dryness whilst receiving extraordinary visions of Our Lord, Our Lady and the saints as well as other mystical experiences. However no one would deny that they were receiving consolations.

Then we are back to defining a consolation.

As for your claim that they are for weaker souls, do you realise the illogic in this statement? Weaker souls are all the more likely to be led astray by them and unable to discern them properly, why then would Our Lord use such a dangerous method with weaker souls? The tradition of the church is clear that it is rather the stronger souls who receive these consolations or would you claim any of the Church’s great mystics were ‘weak souls’?

I have to agree with you on this point, jmj. From what I have read of the Dr.s and saints, consolations of this kind are experienced by persons very advanced in prayer. This type of mystical experience requires that a person spend many hours in devotion before the Blessed Sacrament, and in contempletive prayer. St. Teresa of Avila has quite a b it to say on this point, and maintains that these experiences are in the “latter mansions” (more advanced states of prayer). However, this being the case, it makes it much easier to distinguish them from charisms. Charisms are given to the most immature, in fact, to complete novices. Tongues and prophesy were the most immediate and visible signs of those newly confirmed by the Apostles, who had absolutely no spiritual formation whatsoever. It is also clear from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians that they were very immature in the faith.

Except that you arbitrarily reduce charisms to only the charasmatic gifts without any authority for doing so.

I don’t think this was done. It is clear from the instructions from the Popes, Lumen Gentium and the Catechism that there are many charisms, so me characterological, some hierarchical, and some for layperson to serve the Body. This is also clear in the encyclical on the HS by JPII.**

 

[guanophore]

On what basis do you argue they are not extraordinary consolations? Does anyone say this? Do they actually think they are commonplace, ordinary and not consoling?

They are extraordinary because their source is in God.

They are not the types of consolations spoken of by the saints and doctors of the Church. There are no Scriptures, Church documents, or teachings of any kind that equate the charismatic gifts with the concept of “consolation” that is used to refer to prayerful states of the soul. They are meant to be commonplace, to serve the Body. Their purpose is to minister, to build up the Body, and to evangelize.

1. I used the appropriate terminology, it may not be to your personal taste but that is not the point

One of the habits of the Reformers was to take words from the Church, and reassign new meanings to them to support their own theologies. You appear to want to equate the charismatic gifts with the concept of consolation. It is not a matter of whether it suits your personal taste. It is a matter of whether it is erroneous. Why are you a more credible authority than the Catholic Encyclopedia, for instance?

2)Have you read those books? Have you even seen their titles?

I am looking forward to your post that will identify the “heresies” in the Cross and the Switchblade.

Why not follow the church’s mystics?

I agree. If you do this, it will become clear to you that the charismatic gifts have never “ceased” in the Church.

So you draw water from a poisoned well? You had no need to be influenced by them, the church has dozens of mystics but the movement chose instead to follow and be influenced by heretics, why?

A “movement” can choose anything, as it is not a person, and does not have a will. The Popes have affirmed that the CCR is a movement of the Holy Spirit. It is for the HS to decide when and where He moves, not for you. The Holy Fathers prayed for “a New Pentecost”, and we now have one. The foundation and origin of the CCR is with the HS.

Further you make the unsubstantiated, rash and scandalous to catholic ears claim that the church has negelected something for something like 1,500 years.

The Church has always taught that we are sealed with Gift of the HS in baptism and confirmation. Were you not taugth this in your preparation for confirmation?

I agree that is it scandalous that Catholics do not unwrap and put these gifts to use. I bet most Catholics could not even name the gifts described in Isaiah, which are the ones most focused upon for confirmation.

 

[jmj1984]

They are extraordinary because their source is in God.

They are not the types of consolations spoken of by the saints and doctors of the Church. There are no Scriptures, Church documents, or teachings of any kind that equate the charismatic gifts with the concept of “consolation” that is used to refer to prayerful states of the soul. They are meant to be commonplace, to serve the Body. Their purpose is to minister, to build up the Body, and to evangelize.

One of the habits of the Reformers was to take words from the Church, and reassign new meanings to them to support their own theologies. You appear to want to equate the charismatic gifts with the concept of consolation. It is not a matter of whether it suits your personal taste. It is a matter of whether it is erroneous. Why are you a more credible authority than the Catholic Encyclopedia, for instance?

I am looking forward to your post that will identify the “heresies” in the Cross and the Switchblade.

I agree. If you do this, it will become clear to you that the charismatic gifts have never “ceased” in the Church.

A “movement” can choose anything, as it is not a person, and does not have a will. The Popes have affirmed that the CCR is a movement of the Holy Spirit. It is for the HS to decide when and where He moves, not for you. The Holy Fathers prayed for “a New Pentecost”, and we now have one. The foundation and origin of the CCR is with the HS.

The Church has always taught that we are sealed with Gift of the HS in baptism and confirmation. Were you not taugth this in your preparation for confirmation?

I agree that is it scandalous that Catholics do not unwrap and put these gifts to use. I bet most Catholics could not even name the gifts described in Isaiah, which are the ones most focused upon for confirmation.

You have failed to address any of the points I have raised, made even more unsubstantiated claims and repeated yourself. If you think I am reading heretical literature in order to elucidate what is self-evident than you are sadly mistaken

As for sensational, we can both read and write, you know what the word means and so do i.

 

[guanophore]

And yet I’ve read these works and seen nothing of this These consolations will inevitably lead weaker souls astray

This pretty much puts to rest your objection, then, jmj. If the charismatic gifts were in the same category as consolations, then God would not give them to rank amateurs, because He wants the novices to grow in faith, not get led astray.

Clearly you are confused, he is referring to extraordinary consolations and gifts which the so called charasmatic gifts most definitely are.

I know it is important that you believe this, so you can discredit the CCR as a movement of the HS, but this is not consistent with the Scriptural record, or the teachings of the Bishops. Charismatic gifts are given to rank amateurs in the faith, just like Cornelius and his household.

 This is dishonest, those present at the founding of the movement have admitted that they were seeking these gifts and that these gifts were what made them feel closer to God.

I just went back and read the page again, jmj, and I cannot find anyone saying that. They were seeking a closer relationship with God, certainly. When they found it, they found the gifts as well. This is exactly what we seen in the New Testament record. It seems hard for you to accept that sincere people would seek to be filled with the Holy Spirit, and that their lives may be in fire for God, like the disciples in the book of Acts.

Yeah, No. As the testimony of someone present at the birth of the movement and numerous others testify. Heresy will always attract souls for that is the devils work, but I am not interested in it.

I am glad that you are avoiding heresy. I hope you will also be able to take a step forward in faith, and embrace the instruction of the Bishops of the Church with regard to the CCR.

What is clear to me is that your wind is long lost in heretical views of the church and you cannot distinguish the difference betwee truth and falsehood.

It is true that I suffered from a deficient view of the Church most of my life. It was not until just recently that I fully appreciated what it meant for the Church to have an incarnational nature just as Christ does. She has a divine element, and a human element. Jesus is her Head, and she is ensouled by the HS. It is these divine elements that make her infallible, not her human elements.

There are two strands of one Divine Revelation of God to the Church. One is found in Sacred Tradition, the other in Sacred Scripture. These two strands are never in contradiction with one another because they both come from the same Source. They complement each other. If one seems to contradict the other, it is because we don’t understand one, the other, or both. This is why Varda can say your understanding of what St. Vincent is saying is erroneous. If he meant what you think he meant, then he would be directly contradicting what the Scriptures say.

 

[jmj1984]

They are extraordinary in the sense that they have their origin in the Divine, but they are not “consolations” the way the Saints and Dr.'s of the Church use that term. Perhaps it would help the discussion if we could agree on a definition of “consolation”? You seem to reject the one that is in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Do you have an alternative definition to offer? (Other than your own opinion that “differs” from what the Church teaches?

There is nothing “dishonest” about accepting the definition provided by the Catholic Encyclopedia. Granted, it is not an infallible document, but there is no attempt in its pages to deceive the faithful!

What are you on about? Seeing as I quoted it, in context so as to refute your claims I have no idea how I could be accusing it of deceiving the faithful
I am accusing YOU of being deceived and deceiving the faithful, no one else.

You make a good point here. Although all baptized persons should/ have faith, hope and charity, we know they do not. In like manner, though all baptized persons should******unwrap and use the charisms they were given at that time to serve the Church, they likewise do not.

I am not sure how you are using the term “console” in this context. There are plenty of instances where faith, hope, and love are anything but “consoling”. I can’t imagine Mary’s suffering as she watched the life pour out of her Divine Son, but it is hard to imagine that her expression of faith, hope and charity at the foot of His Cross was “consoling” to her.

Your argument is disintegreating into nonsense, the charisms include numerous things that have been present amongst the MAJORITY of The Church throughout its entire history. I showed this from the very same article you quoted. Because these gifts have always been present amongst the majority of The Church the entire supposed purpose of the Charasmatic movement falls apart, as does the motives and wishes of its founders. There is no need to speak in tongues, prophecise, heal or any of these things nor is there any evidence these things should be common some people do these things, others will be active in the** apostolate or leadership or have more faith**.
If you therefore insist that there is a need for the renewal you must either claim that the very article you are referencing is wrong or narrow the charasmatic gifts to healing, prophecy and so on. If you do not, you accept that there was and is no need for the charasmatic movement whatsoever
guanophore;8421799:

The normative Christian life is to be filled with faith, hope, and love. The normative Christian life is to be filled with functioning charisms.

They certainly are, lets look at that list of charisms again:

**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:

increased faith;
the power of miracles;
in specie the healing of the sick;
the gift of tongues;
the interpretation of tongues. '**

There has always in the history of The Church been those with 'increased faith’, 'The Apostolate’ ,'the office of teaching, 'the gift of governing’ and 'the word of wisdom and science’. These gifts have never been rare nor are they today. How exactly does the charasmatic movement help people seek these gifts? I don’t see the founders seeking or desiring 'The Apostolate’ or 'the gift of governing’ or ‘the office of teaching’. What I see them desiring and seeking are the stereotypical charasmatic gifts such as tongues and prophecy, something they have said with their own words! The movements stated purpose is to ‘renew these gifts within the church’ ‘to help rediscover the charasmatic gifts’ but these gifts were never rare therefore there was no need either to renew or rediscover these gifts! The only way their claims make any sense is if they limit the gifts to the stereotypical charasmatic gifts and if they do this they do so with no authority or support from The Church whatsoever. Therefore you in attempting to defend them by badly referencing and misquoting The Catholic Encyclopedia are at the very least engaging in intellectual dishonesty.

Not sure what you mean here by the word “sensational”.

The dictionary definition.

We will have to argue about it because you have a warped perspective of what happens. It seems that you have been watching too many Pentecostal videos on You Tube, and have mistaken the frenzy portrayed as something synonymous with the CCR. There is no need to attract attention over praying in tongues or receiving a prophetic word.

I didnt know you could remotely access my internet history! Sadly I havent done any of those things, I have based my views on what the founders and the movement itself says as well the teaching of the church, therefore this is merely another thinly veiled ad hominem attack.

However, this being the case, it makes it much easier to distinguish them from charisms. Charisms are given to the most immature, in fact, to complete novices. Tongues and prophesy were the most immediate and visible signs of those newly confirmed by the Apostles, who had absolutely no spiritual formation whatsoever. It is also clear from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians that they were very immature in the faith.

The Apostles had no spiritual formation whatsoever? Lets examine this statement. The Apostles taught by Jesus, helped by Mary Immaculate and led by St Peter had no spiritual formation whatsoever? I hope everyone can see the absurdity of that statement.

 

[guanophore]

Lets look at the whole article shall we?

In January 1967, four Catholics from Duquesne attended their first interdenominational charismatic prayer meeting – the Chapel Hill meeting – in the home of Miss Flo Dodge, a Spirit-filled Presbyterian.

Interestingly enough, a few months before these Catholics came, the Lord led Flo to read Isaiah 48 where He announces that He is about to do “a new thing”.Indeed, God was about to do a new thing among Catholics as a result of the prayer meeting. The people from Duquesne were impressed with what they witnessed there. On January 20, two of the men returned. They received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit and began to manifest charismatic gifts. They returned home to pray with the other two who had not attended that night. At this time I was a member of the Chi Rho Scripture Study group that met on the Duquesne campus. Two of these professors served as moderators of Chi Rho, and although they did not tell us outright about their charismatic experience, those who knew them well noticed that they radiated a new joy.

So where do you see in this that they were “seeking gifts”?

The persons attending clearly stated that they witnessed people who had a vibrant and life giving relationship with Jesus, and they wanted MORE JESUS!

We were planning for our retreat in February and the professors suggested a new theme: “The Holy Spirit.” In preparation for the retreat, they told us to pray expectantly, to read The Cross and the Switchblade, and to read the first four chapters of the Acts of the Apostles.

I read after this that you are refusing to read The Cross and the Switchblade. You seem to have no difficulty judging this book as full of “heresies”, yet you do not have the courage to look at it? Who is being disingenuous here?

And, for your information the Acts of the Apostles is part of the New Testament, without question a thoroughly Catholic book. I strongly recommmend it for background on the subject of the CCR.
jmj1984;8420616:

A few days before the retreat, I knelt in my room and prayed, “Lord, I believe I’ve already received your Spirit in Baptism and Confirmation. But if it’s possible for your Spirit to be more at work in my life than He’s been up until now, I WANT IT!” The dramatic answer to my prayer was soon to come. On February 17 about 25 of us left for The Ark and The Dove Retreat house on the outskirts of the city. As we gathered for each session, our professors told us to sing as a prayer the ancient hymn, Veni Creator Spiritus, “Come Creator Spirit”. On Friday night there was a meditation on Mary. Then we had a Penance Service. In John’s Gospel we read that when the Holy Spirit comes He will convict the world of sin. That’s what happened among us as we repented in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

I don’t see any one obsessing over gifts here, either. They want more of the HS at work in their lives. Do you find this desire “heretical”?

On Saturday a member of the Chapel Hill Prayer Group came to speak on Acts, chapter 2. All we were told was that she was a Protestant friend of our professors. Although her presentation was very simple, it was filled with spiritual power. She spoke about surrendering to Jesus as Lord and Master. She described the Holy Spirit as a Person who empowered her daily. Here was someone who really seemed to know Jesus intimately and personally! She knew the power of the Holy Spirit like the Apostles did. I knew I wanted what she had and I wrote in my notes, “Jesus, be real for me

.’ ccr.org.uk/duquesne.htm

Nothing about charismatic gifts here either. It seems you are projecting your own ideas into these accounts.

It is interesting how your quoting of the comments left out several salient facts:

1)That the first meeting was a prayer meeting with non-catholics at a non catholics home

I know you seem to believe that the Church forbids Catholics to pray with non-Catholics in their home.

2)That two catholic men returned from this meeting having received something called ‘baptism in the spirit’ and that they spoke of this experience to others

This is a problem because? You understand the word “baptism” means to dip or immerse, right? Do you think it is wrong for Catholics to be immersed in the HS?

3)That prior to attending the retreat those attending were told to read not the works of catholic mystics or the Church’s great treasure ‘The Spiritual Exercises’ but two heretical works pregnant with heretical charasmatic ideas.

My dear confused sibling in Christ. There are no pregnatn heresies in either of the books they were encouraged to read. And the Acts of the Apostles that you are calling a “heretical work pregnant with heretical charismatic ideas” was included in the Catholic Bible because it contains only orthodox Catholic ideas. If you believe that any of the New Testament books foster heresy, then you are really much further from Catholic faith than I thought!

 

[guanophore]

From its very beginning therefore the meeting had an agenda and was intended to further this agenda.

Yes, of course. The Christians were excited about Jesus, and the fullness of life in Christ. They wanted to share the “good news” with others. Those seeing the transformative power of God in their lives were drawn to it, just like it says in that “heretical work” the Acts of the Apostles.

4)That those present at the later retreat were ‘lectured’ by a non-catholic who had been part of the earlier non-catholic prayer meeting

For some reason you are offended by non-Catholics sharing their faith experiences.

5)That the person sought the gifts

This is simply false. There is nothing in any of the testimonies that support this erroneous assertion. You would like this to be true, so that you can discredit the whole thing, but it just is not.

and the relationship with Our Lord that this non-catholic had and believed that she had a better understanding of the holy spirit than she and indeed the catholic church did! Because this woman had the same understanding as the Apostles!

Maybe you are getting worked up, or maybe I am just having trouble following you. What is wrong with wanting a closer relationship with Jesus? Do you honestly believe that non-Catholics can’t have a closer relationship with our Lord than some Catholics? I have read some bigoted statements, but I hope this is not what you are saying.

The testimonies of Catholics involved in the CCR NEVER detract from the CC. This account does NOT say that the woman had a better understanding of a relationship with the Lord than the CC. She is speaking of her own experience, only. But yes, the woman read about the Acts of the Apostles in that Catholic book, and shared their faith.

By leaving out these salient facts the meeting sounds Orthodox but sadly that is not the full story as we can clearly see

What is clear is that you seem to perceive things about this story that others don’t see. It gives rise to concern about reality testing.

Let us be clear I disagree with the private opinions or at the very least speeches and addresses given to charasmatics by 2 or at most 3 popes, you likewise disagree with the teaching of several great saints, doctors of the church and Popes.

No, jmj. I do not disagree with the saints, doctors, or the Popes. For me there is no discontinuity between what has been taught previously, and what is currently being taught. I believe that the Bishop of Rome is the successor of Peter, and that he has been given a special charism to feed and care for the flock.

Lastly whether you like it or not, all non-catholics ARE heretics. They are not formal heretics because they were raised in heresy and did not leave the church to embrace heresy, but they are material heretics because they present the material (the beliefs) to qualify as a heretic. Any diligent student of theology would know this.

It is not a matter of my liking, or not liking, jmj. It is a matter of what the Church teaches. People that embrace heresies are not necessarily heretics, and in most cases our separated brethren are not. To qualify as a heretic, a person needs to first embrace the true faith, then willfully reject it. Most of our separated brethren have never been exposed to the fullness of the faith. Rather than your disdain and bigotry, they require catechesis and evangelization. I can assure you that you will not get very far bringing them into the fullness of faith with this kind of name calling.

[ and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276 ](Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 3 ARTICLE 9 PARAGRAPH 3)

Your position contradicts the Catechism, which affirms that such persons cannot be charged with heresy, have the right to be called our brothers, and whose ecclesial communities contain many elements of sanctification and truth. What you call the “poisoned well”, the Catechism teaches that God uses to draw people to Himself. Which position should I accept? Yours, or that of the Catechism of the Catholic Church?

 

[justtryin]

Do you honestly believe that non-Catholics can’t have a closer relationship with our Lord than some Catholics?

And non-Catholics acheive this without the Eucharist? Without the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ? They acheive this outside of the Keys of Peter? Outside of the Holy Spirit sent to the Apostltes, who by the way were the Catholic Church. Outside of the Communion of Saints? Outside of the Mother of God, who they refuse to honor as such. Outside of the Rosary? Outside of the Sacred Tradition of the Church? OUTSIDE OF THE MASS? Outside of the SEVEN Sacraments? Outside of the priesthood established by Christ? Outside of the COMPLETE canon of scripture?

 

[Indyann]

the absurdity of that statement.

Originally Posted by guanophore View Post
However, this being the case, it makes it much easier to distinguish them from charisms. Charisms are given to the most immature, in fact, to complete novices. Tongues and prophesy were the most immediate and visible signs of those newly confirmed by the Apostles, who had absolutely no spiritual formation whatsoever. It is also clear from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians that they were very immature in the faith.

Jmj, it appears that part of your confusion about this whole issue could be due to a reading comprehension problem. As you can plainly see that guanophore stated that it was those who were newly confirmed by the Apostles who had no spiritual formation, whatsoever. I hope everyone can see how poor reading comprehension skills can contribute to one’s erroneous concepts.

 

[justtryin]

If Charismatic Catholics are seeking a closer relationship with the Holy Spirit, why not go to the tabernacle.
Do they not believe in the real presence? Do they not beleive in the Trinity? He is there!!! Why seek elsewhere? Why would you participate in the prayers and practises of “seperated brethren” when God Himself is in the Tabernacle? Christ promised the Holy Spirit to guide the Church yet He promised Himself to nourish the Church in the Eucharist. It’s rather silly for charismatics to be seeking signs of a God who told us where He is to be found.

And just to make it clear to ClayPots47
Yes I am shouting…"HE IS THERE! GO TO THE TABERNACLE! HE TOLD US WHERE HE WOULD BE! WHY SEEK ELSEWHERE!

 

[AntiqueCatholic]

The CCR proposes that the Church was deficient in something that the CCR can provide; greater intercourse, in the old fashioned sense of that word, with the Third Person of the Trinity.

I submit that is an error. A Protestant one. For 1900 years we lacked X amount of Y charisms and now lay people are getting them in greater abundance.

This is the same error that was/is peddled by modernists; that the Church lost something that existed in the early days of the Church and we, who have special spiritual/literary knowledge, are going to bring it back.

In our rites, by heavily editing them, and picking what we currently like from a wide-ranging past.

In our spiritual lives, by actively seeking trivial mystical effects, in an amateur way.

This leads to scandal and confusion. Trivial mystical effects, enthusiasm, great upsurges of feeling and a movement away from the Truth. The Medjugorje people think that the local bishop is wrong (the Virgin Mary has said so!) and a person who has had these marvellous intimations think that they have what saints and the Apostles had.

Whereas, based on what I’ve read, any occultist could evoke the same.

 

[guanophore]

And non-Catholics acheive this without the Eucharist? Without the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ? They acheive this outside of the Keys of Peter? Outside of the Holy Spirit sent to the Apostltes, who by the way were the Catholic Church. Outside of the Communion of Saints? Outside of the Mother of God, who they refuse to honor as such. Outside of the Rosary? Outside of the Sacred Tradition of the Church? OUTSIDE OF THE MASS? Outside of the SEVEN Sacraments? Outside of the priesthood established by Christ? Outside of the COMPLETE canon of scripture?

Well of course they must, since they have none of these things. Use your common sense, man. The Jews had none of these things, and they were His Chosen. If you look at Heb. chap.11 you can see that this is possible. If a person is to entertain bigotry against non-Catholics, believing that the Catechism is wrong, and that they should not be received as our brethren, and that the HS does not work in and through them, then one mus maintain that same bigotry against he Jews, and all non-Christians. Heb. 11 then has to be deleted!

 

[guanophore]

Originally Posted by guanophore View Post
However, this being the case, it makes it much easier to distinguish them from charisms. Charisms are given to the most immature, in fact, to complete novices. Tongues and prophesy were the most immediate and visible signs of those newly confirmed by the Apostles, who had absolutely no spiritual formation whatsoever. It is also clear from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians that they were very immature in the faith.

Jmj, it appears that part of your confusion about this whole issue could be due to a reading comprehension problem. As you can plainly see that guanophore stated that it was those who were newly confirmed by the Apostles who had no spiritual formation, whatsoever. I hope everyone can see how poor reading comprehension skills can contribute to one’s erroneous concepts.

Thank you Indyann. I was falling into the idea that jmj is just intentionally obstinant, but I realize now that he may be disabled or unskilled in some way, so comes to these conclusions because he can’t understand what he is reading. This will help me with my attitude and my prayers.

I was baffled by this response of jmj, because I never made any mention of Apostles! I also realized that I never claimed people did not receive charimsatic gifts who have plenty of formations. I know many priests, bishops, and religious who have received them, all of whom have excellent religious formation, not to mention the Apostles. Saul of Tarsus is one who had excellent spiritual formaiton.

 

[guanophore]

If Charismatic Catholics are seeking a closer relationship with the Holy Spirit, why not go to the tabernacle.

I do this now, as do those I know that have matured in the faith, but at the time, I was unable to sit still in prayer. I could pray actively, but was distractible in silence. Over the years I was cured of this by praying in tongues. When one prays in tongues, the mind is unfruitful. It has the advantage of shutting off the barrage of distracting thoughts and worries that impinge upon the mind during prayer.

The other peice of this is walking in the Power of the Spirit. One must take the grace that one encounters in the Sacraments, or before the Tabernacle out into the world. In the beginning I had no staying power. By the time I got home from Mass I was all ready for harsh words. But undrestanding that I had the power of the HS in me to bridle my tongue, or to employ my tongue in an activity that precluded harsh words, O was eventually able to cultivate the fruit of the Spirit.

I know there are Christians like you and jmj that probably don’t struggle with these kinds of problems, and therefore, do not need the gifts as do those who are novices and poorly formed in faith.

Do they not believe in the real presence? [/quotep]

Catholics that don’t, which according to surveys are the majority, eventually fall away from the faith, whether they are charismatic or not. For myself, I would say that I believed this intellectually, but not experientially. I was able to experience the reality of the HS working in me long before I was able to sense the the real presence. Fortunately, God has cured me of this deficiency also.
justtryin;8423090:

Do they not beleive in the Trinity? He is there!!! Why seek elsewhere? Why would you participate in the prayers and practises of “seperated brethren” when God Himself is in the Tabernacle?

I grew up in a pre-Vatican II formation. My family did not pray together, and I did not know how to express myself in prayer at all. The only prayers I knew were memorized prayers. I had never learned how to pour out my heart to God, or to communicate with HIm as one person to another. I learned the art of lectio divina and conversational prayer from my separated brethren, to walk by the Spirit, and not fulfill the desires of the flesh, learned how to “pray at all times without ceasing”. I am not saying these things cannot be learned in the Catholic Church. I just did not learn them. God’s grace found a way for me to learn them anyway. This is how I know through experience what is written in the catechism about the HS working through these separated ecclesial communities to bring people to Himself.

Christ promised the Holy Spirit to guide the Church yet He promised Himself to nourish the Church in the Eucharist. It’s rather silly for charismatics to be seeking signs of a God who told us where He is to be found.

You are mistaken about Charismatics “seeking signs”. I am sure there are some people that do, but for the majority, what we are seeking is the kind of relationship with God that allows us to walk in victory over sin in our daily lives, and that enables us to serve HIm in the Church and in the world. One must have the spiritual grace to take what one received in the Sacraments home with them. I think it is hard for people who don’t understand to appreciate how those who cannot do this long for it so much.

And just to make it clear to ClayPots47
Yes I am shouting…"HE IS THERE! GO TO THE TABERNACLE! HE TOLD US WHERE HE WOULD BE! WHY SEEK ELSEWHERE!

If there is anything to shout about, that would be it!

 

[guanophore]

The CCR proposes that the Church was deficient in something that the CCR can provide; greater intercourse, in the old fashioned sense of that word, with the Third Person of the Trinity.

This is false. You will not find this in any of the instructions from the Bishops, or any material printed by and for the CCR. The deficiency, as always, lies within the PEOPLE who are not living out their faith. Granted, I don’t know the content of Blessed Elena’s communications with Pope Leo XIII, but I do know that there are plenty of Catholics that do not “live and move and have their being” in the Spirit of Jesus.

I submit that is an error.

Then I submit that it would be wise to stop propogating it.

 A Protestant one. For 1900 years we lacked X amount of  Y charisms and now lay people are getting them in greater abundance.

There has never been a lack of charisms in the Catholic Church. What is lacking is the faithul do not apprehend what has been given to them in baptism, and fail to use the charisms for the purpose they have been sealed in us. I was just reading a post about someone struggling with pornography. It is clear that this person is unable to walk by the spirit, and thus not fulfill the desires of the flesh. It is these types of situations over which we are meant to have victory by the Spirit at work within us.

This is the same error that was/is peddled by modernists; that the Church lost something that existed in the early days of the Church and we, who have special spiritual/literary knowledge, are going to bring it back.

Yes. Erroneous in both places.

In our spiritual lives, by actively seeking trivial mystical effects, in an amateur way.

I see that this does happen among our separated brethren, who lack the sacramental life, and fall into seeking the gifts, rather than the Giver. But it is commendable to ask for the Holy Spirit, and to be yielded to all that He wants to do in our lives. We live in this world, but we are to have one foot in the mystical world. We are in this world but not of it. To be present here, and dwell in the presence of God is a mystical way of being. It is what we are all called to do.

This leads to scandal and confusion. Trivial mystical effects, enthusiasm, great upsurges of feeling and a movement away from the Truth.

The Medjugorje people think that the local bishop is wrong (the Virgin Mary has said so!) and a person who has had these marvellous intimations think that they have what saints and the Apostles had.

Well, the local Bishop may be wrong, it would not be the first time. However, it is not my place (fortunately) to make that determination. This is the duty of the Magesterium. In the meantime, you will not see me on any pilgrimmages to Medjugorje.

 

[Denise1957]

I found an interesting and inspiring conversion story (or reversion, rather). It’s about a man who was raised Catholic, but he was not really taught anything about the Faith. He left the Church and became involved in Protestant Charismaticism. Eventually he came back to the Church, but he is not involved, from what I can tell, in CCR. It’s a lengthy but worthwhile read.

whyimcatholic.com/index.php/conversion-stories/catholic-reverts/item/71-catholic-revert-russ-rentler#itemCommentsAnchor

 

[AntiqueCatholic]

There has never been a lack of charisms in the Catholic Church. What is lacking is the faithul do not apprehend what has been given to them in baptism, and fail to use the charisms for the purpose they have been sealed in us.

Therefore the contention is that what the CCR does helps unleash them, for want of a better word?

This leads to scandal and confusion. Trivial mystical effects, enthusiasm, great upsurges of feeling and a movement away from the Truth.

I have discovered this objection here on CAF. It seems that some people are afraid of emotions, so try to invalidate the CCR because emotions are included in the normal Christian life. There is nothing wrong with great upsurges of feeling and having enthusiasm. I see that thousands of people can shout, and come to their feet over a football game, but cannot over the Lord of the Universe. I have always found this curious. How is it that people can get so enthusiastic and have emotional upsurges about that which has no eternal value, but cannot over things that are? I think it is a reflection of our worldliness, and that our emotions and enthusiasms are centered around that which does not necessarily glorify God.

I would say that long time ago the Catholic Church decided that upswelling emotions and enthusiasm signify nothing in themselves. What of it, if John Straw or Mary Smith has an ecstatic feeling? It means little to the greater Church, but such a person, charismatic in the modern sense, could lead thousands astray. Or just themselves, imagining that their feelings equated to a certain knowledge of the Divine.

So we don’t want to hear about your feelings unless you prophesy truthfully and consistently and in accordance with doctrine. Something more significant than what a fortune-teller usually produces or a faith-healer who heals yet the patient has a relapse.

Certainly noisy enthusiasm has no place in a sacred rite where others present are trying to commune with their god, in peace. It turns it into a vehicle for self-expression, the opposite of self-negation.

Well, the local Bishop may be wrong, it would not be the first time. However, it is not my place (fortunately) to make that determination. This is the duty of the Magesterium. In the meantime, you will not see me on any pilgrimmages to Medjugorje.

The local Bishop is properly the authority on these matters. He decides if there is something supernatural present, or not. He has said, not. Medjugorje fans ignore this and they ignore the evidence he has gathered. Because they have great enthusiam at the thought that the Queen Of Heaven is appearing and they report a marvellous atmosphere there. A great feeling.

I’m sure there is. It just doesn’t signify, in itself, that God’s hand is in it.