Defending the Holy Spirit, Defending the Catholic Charismatic Renewal Movement

[vardaquinn]

Pentecostalism, thats what.

Too vague. Were they teaching everyone should leave the Church to become Pentecostals? No. Obviously they’re not teaching straight up Pentecostalism then. But if we take that word literally, without reference to a denomination, certainly we should all be “Pentecostal”.

Again, you fail to highlight any heresies.

 

[vardaquinn]

As for the rest getting called a heretic by a someone who probably isnt even a heretic because he lacks the theological knowledge in order to be blameworthy of being a heretic.

Enough of the childishness. I’m hear to have a discussion, a debate, to promote the truth. I am not here to engage in childish name calling. Though I am not a professional theologian, I should hope I have some theological knowledge. I’m the one who has backed up what I’ve said with theology. You’ve simply called people lying ignoramuses, and barely backed up your own statements.

Are you going to do this? If not, leave the thread.

 

[jmj1984]

Too vague. Were they teaching everyone should leave the Church to become Pentecostals? No. Obviously they’re not teaching straight up Pentecostalism then. But if we take that word literally, without reference to a denomination, certainly we should all be “Pentecostal”.

Again, you fail to highlight any heresies.

And again you lack any catholic theological training or understanding whatsoever, these books encouraged them to seek a particular spirituality, a heretical spirituality that underpinned the pentecostal movement. An idea that I have dealt with in depth in earlier posts which you have read as you replied to them, you can look at those posts if you wish to see my argument. I have no intention of posting them again.

 

[jmj1984]

Enough of the childishness. I’m hear to have a discussion, a debate, to promote the truth. I am not here to engage in childish name calling. Though I am not a professional theologian, I should hope I have some theological knowledge. I’m the one who has backed up what I’ve said with theology. You’ve simply called people lying ignoramuses, and barely backed up your own statements.

Are you going to do this? If not, leave the thread.

I will leave the thread if I wish, I certainly am not going to be ordered away by someone who can’t accept church teaching, understand basic concepts regarding the magisterium or deal with anyone charitably.

 

[jmj1984]

We should examine the origins of the word “saint”. Early 12c., from O.Fr. seinte, altering O.E. sanct, both from L. sanctus “holy, consecrated”. Notice St. Paul writes his letters to the “saints” or to the “holy ones” in various cities. Holiness = sanctity. That means, if we’re called to be holy, we’re called to be saints. Obviously you have a different idea of the word saint. If you mean simply a canonized person, then fine. We don’t have a universal call to be saints, in that not all of us will be canonized. Though all of us should lead lives of such holiness that we very well could be candidates for the process.

I don’t have a different understanding of the word, I am using another but complementary meaning. There is no need to insult or complain about that.

We are not all called to be saints in the sense of canonised saints nor are we call to called to make the extraordinary sacrifices and mortifications the saints did. We are all called to save our souls however and those of others.

 

[vardaquinn]

I don’t have a different understanding of the word, I am using another but complementary meaning. There is no need to insult or complain about that.

We are not all called to be saints in the sense of canonised saints nor are we call to called to make the extraordinary sacrifices and mortifications the saints did. We are all called to save our souls however and those of others.

Then we agree (though I would amend your statements and say participate in the saving of our souls and others, because we cannot save our own souls, that’s why we have a Savior).

We are called to live out just as much the extraordinary degree of holiness as every saint did, and more - our calling is to something infinite. Mortifications and practices will differ according to different people, though all of us should practice mortifications.

 

[jmj1984]

Then we agree (though I would amend your statements and say participate in the saving of our souls and others, because we cannot save our own souls, that’s why we have a Savior).

We are called to live out just as much the extraordinary degree of holiness as every saint did, and more - our calling is to something infinite. Mortifications and practices will differ according to different people, though all of us should practice mortifications.

The Baltimore Catechism states ‘Q. 154. What must we do to save our souls?
A. To save our souls, we must worship God by faith, hope, and charity; that is, we must believe in Him, hope in Him, and love Him with all our heart.’ and again ‘Q. 1137. To which of these laws did the Ten Commandments belong?
A. The Ten Commandments belong to the moral law, because they are a compendium or short account of what we must do in order to save our souls; just as the Apostles’ Creed is a compendium of what we must believe’

The term is perfectly orthodox, it means we must endeavour to cooperate with Gods grace and in this way save our souls.

As for your latter statements I made it abundantly clear I was not getting into a debate about that.

 

[Mike30]

youtube.com/watch?v=3trTimrXdVE&feature=relatedyoutube.com/watch?v=5lvU-DislkI

This is historically what happens in charismatic/pentecostal groups. They do not usually start out this way but all too often do end up here. Now I know that thesemay be extreme examples,but the simple fact that such things even exist and are believed, deeply believed by millions of people clearly shows the danger of the rampant emotionalism involved in Charismatic/pentecostal groups.

Now if the supporters of the CCR can offer a guarantee that such things do not now and never have happened within the movement,and more importantly never will then I might modify my view of the CCR

Of course, if they are honest they will admit that similar events, being slain in the spirit, resting in the spirit and miraculous healings,apparently on demand, do happen in addition to the ever present speaking in tongues’

And they happen all the time.

 

[Portrait]

I find it troubling that the defenders of the CCR do not except the fact that gifts such as “speaking in tongues” had ceased. Again, I will present to them CLEAR teaching that this is indeed true.

These gifts had served their purpose in the apostolic age and the first centuries of the Church. The fact that the majority of these CCR prayer meetings and Masses have untested, and unauthentic charisms - that have ceased in the early Church - speaks for itself.

Dear Irish_Polock,

Cordial greetings and thankyou for the above. Jolly good post, old chap.

The quotations that you reference reflect the consistent teaching of Holy Mother Church throughout the ages, that is until the emergence of the CCR in 1967 which owes its origin to Protestant Fundamentalism which in turn was highly influenced by the hippy-culture and the so called ‘Jesus people’. It all fitted in so well with mileiu of those halcyon days of love, joy and peace. Adapting this outlook to the Christian religion which had drifted away form traditional and historical norms was not too difficult, especially given the doctrinal laxity and liberalism that was so prevalent at that period.

Pentecostalism, the Catholic and Protestant manifestations, contend that the Church has been seriously impoverished without the extra-ordinary endowments of the Holy Spirit such as prophecy and tongues speaking. However, the greatest epochs of Church history were prior to the CCR and Protestant Pentecostalism, whilst the most ineffective and worldly period of the Church has been more or less since the CCR appeared on the stage. Whilst, other factors (e.g. the secular drift of society) must take some share of the blame for this, the presence for some while now of the CCR parishes has not exactly ushered in a world-wide revival, especially in the Western world where it is so urgently needed.

Surely what is needed is a return to the the “ancient paths” (cf. Jer. 6: 16) of our forefathers in the faith, which entalis the pursuit of holiness and striving to live up to the arduous requirements of our most religion. Our forefathers acheived this without the aid of the CCR and its pretence to the apostolic charismata, and so can we today.

The extra-ordinary endowments were given to the fledgling in Church as a witness to the divine origin of the Christian religion, their end being accomplished they were gradually withdrawn. There was no need of them once our most holy faith had aquired a foothold in the then known world and was firmly established; when the buiilding has been erected the sacfolding is always removed as it is no longer required to support the edifice - the same with the charismata, gentlemen.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[ClayPots47]

Right. Exactly.

'**Messalianism, a heresy that originated in Mesopotamia in A.D. 360. The Messalians denied that the Sacraments give grace and declared that the only spiritual power is prayer leading to possession by the Holy Spirit. Such “possession” eventually led to immorality, from which they were also called “The Filthy.” Various bishops and councils of the Church condemned them.

Montanism, a heresy that claimed the Holy Spirit superseded the revelation of Christ and was supplementing the revelation of Christ, such that they were acting under a “new outpouring of the Spirit.” This heresy takes the name of its founder, Monatanus, who began to be carried away by “inspiration”, by which would fall into a sudden seizure and start raving in his speech, speaking with a strange tongue. Pope St. Zephyrinus (199-217) denied them communion with the Church. **’

'****Convulsionary Jansenists

It is not possible to enter here into the particulars of the Jansenist
controversy. Suffice it to say that during the seventeenth and early
eighteenth centruries in France, the Jansenists, although they claimed to be
the authentic and true sons and daughters of the Church, were under
increasing disfavor by the Church’s hierarchy due to their extreme “rigorist”
view of the sacraments, and their mitigated Calvinistic teaching regarding
grace, human nature, and free will.

When the dogmatic constitution “Unigenitus Deus” was issued (and confirmed
by Pope Clement XI in 1713), condemning their leading theologian’s opinions,
many Jansenists not only refused to abide by the document, but chose to
retrench their opposition by taking refuge in the “miraculous” cemetery of
St. Medard in Paris:

"The immediate occasion of all the trouble was the death of Francois de
Paris, a pronounced Jansenist in deacon’s orders who had acquired, in life, a
reputation for sanctity…it was as if he were determined, in his last moments,
that any miracles which came to be associated with his name should be
Jansenist, not merely Catholic, miracles. (Knox, op. Cit., pge 375)

"But in the summer of 1731, the cure of a paralytic…gave a different turn to
the proceedings…it began when she was placed on the tomb of M. Paris, with…
‘extremely violent movements’…the cures, from this date onwards, seem to have
been normally, if not invariably accompanied by convulsions…And now began, in
the cemetery of St. Medard, that extraordinary dance of the
convulsionaries…You saw in the cemetery, ‘men falling like epileptics, others
swallowing pebbles, glass, and even live coals, women walking feet in air…You
heard nothing but groaning, singing, shrieking, whistling, declaiming,
prophesying, caterwauling’…On the tomb itself you saw the Abbe Becheraud,
hopping incessantly on one leg, and proclaiming his other leg, which was 14
inches shorter, was growing…every three months…A Jansenist pamphlet…seems
to suggest at first that all was done in a dumb show…The author of the same
pamphlet declares that he has heard more than a hundred times a convulsionary
talking in an unknown language, and understanding any language that was spoken
to her…it must be admitted that much of the glossalay was unintelligible…
(ibid., pges. 376-378)****

**The Azusa Street Revival, as it is popularly known, that propelled the
Pentecostal movement from relative obscurity to worldwide notoriety.
It is one of the lesser known but well documented facts that Charles Parham’s
greatest pupil was, because of his race, was not allowed by the “spiritual
father” of the Pentecostal movement to enter his classroom, but obliged to
listen to Parham’s lectures in the hall.

William Seymour, a black holiness preacher, received his “Pentecostal
experience”, or “Baptism in the Spirit” in Los Angeles, and is credited with
beginning the Azusa Street revival. This “revival”, by its very nature, was
not likely to avoid becoming controversial, as evinced by an article which
appeared in the Los Angeles Times on April 18, 1906:

"…Breathing strange utterances, and mouthing a creed which it would seem no
mortal could understand, the newest religious sect has started in Los
Angeles…devotees of the weird doctrine practice the most fanatical rites,
preach the wildest theories, and work themselves into a state of mad
excitement…night is made hideous in the neighborhood by the howlings of the
worshippers who spend hours swaying back and forth in a nerve racking [sic]
attitude of prayer and supplication. They claim to have the “gift of
tongues” and be able to comprehend the babel…

An old colored exhorter (presumably Seymour), blind in one eye is the major
domo of the company. With his stony optic fixed on some luckless unbeliever,
the old man yells his defiance and challenges an answer. Anathemas are
heaped upon him who shall dare to gainsay the utterances of the preacher.
Clasped in his big fist, the colored brother holds a miniature Bible from
which he reads at intervals one or two words, never more. After an hour
spent in exhortation the brethren [sic] present are invited to join in a
‘meeting of song, prayer, and testimony.’ Then it is that pandemonium breaks
loose, and the bounds of reason are passed by the those who are ‘filled with
the spirit’, whatever that may be**."’

unitypublishing.com/Hist-of-Char.html

That all sounds quite similar to the charasmatic movement to me…

And it matters not that it ‘sounds similar’ to you, because the RCC declared those heretical, while the RCC has said no such thing, or made any such declaration regarding the CCR, Therefore that makes this another strawman fallacy. Or do you think the present-day church would not declare the CCR as a heretical and forbid Catholics from involving themselves in it, if it was (outright heresy)?

 

[guanophore]

l, how is this unwrapping taught, then? What the procedure?

It is the same as formation for confirmation. The curriculum is taken from the Life in the Spirit Seminar program.

And jmj has linked to a description that includes most of the “procedures”.

• Prayer, including Act of Consecration to the HS
• Confession
• Catechesis including Scripture study
• Studying about or mentoring by those who are livng the Spirit filled life (like learning about a saint you might choose as a patron for Confirmaton)
• Prayer in front of the Blessed Sacrament

I’m afraid this sounds a bit woolly. I meant prophesy in the common sense: foretelling the future. A standard way to spot a false prophet is if they predict something that doesn’t come true e.g. Bayside.

I recall reading in a book about exorcism that one mark of diabolic influence is people spouting hidden knowledge which, while true and interesting is useless, spiritually e.g. “You’ve lost a loved one recently. There’s 20 bucks hidden in such-and-such a place. A murder occurred here ten years ago” And so on. It also tends to have mistakes in it. Just enough truth to get people hooked and then they get diverted from the path to sanctity.

I do see your point, and I agree with what you are saying, but there is very little of the charismatic gift of prophesy that relates to “telling the future”. Most of it is speaking God’s Truth into the present.

So all people who are baptised and confirmed become saints?

It is God’s intention that we all become saints. And your question here proves Varda’s point, that baptism and confirmation are just the beginning. It remains for us to “work out salvation with fear and trembling”. To say “baptism and confirmation are it, there is nothing else” is misleading. We are given graces in these sacraments of initiation so that we can serve God, the Church, and the world. The Charismatic gifts are means by which we fulfill God’s intention for us.

Then perhaps they should just stick to those orthodox practices rather than copying those of heretics

Your continued use of this forbidden term used in reference for our separated brethren seems to indicate a rebellion against the authority of Holy Mother Church, as well as against the forum rules here.

I also noticed that you were unable to affirm any of hte “orthodox practices” that occurred over the Duquesne weekend. I wonder why that is?

I wont answer the rest of your baseless assertions because they’re not worth the effort.

I can see your point. It really would take some kind of miracle to be able to come up with respectable answers to my assertions. The truth is that there is no refutation for these assertions. They were Catholics, engaged in Catholic activities.

I posted the story in its entirity, the only one who has had to misquote it, is you. And reading the book of acts after reading two heretical books which place their own interpretation on said book is hardly prudent.

It is interesting that when I quote the references in the account about"orthodox practices" such as the Sacrament of Reconciliation, consecration to the HS, and adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, you accuse me of “misquoting”.

The understanding they had of what is written in the book of Acts has been confirmed by Lumen Gentium, instructions from the Popes, the authorities appointed by the Pope for the guidance of the Laity (Lay movements in the Church) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We are free to interpret Scripture any way we like, so long as it is consistent with Sacred Tradition (the Teaching of the Apostles infallibly preserved in the Church).

On the contrary, your assertion that these gifts have “ceased” is not consistent with any of these sources, and I am pleased to see, your own research into this matter.

The rest of your post shows your lack of knowledge of basic catholic theology, heretic as I have defined is the correct definition and that can easily be verified.

No, jmj, your use of the term “heretic” in this context is inaccurate and inappropriate.

But, I would be happy to review any evidence you can provide that the Protestants referenced in this story ever had the fullness of Catholic faith, and willfully rejected it. Same for the authors of the books referenced.

 

[ClayPots47]

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?

The Catechism is more recent, perhaps we need to go back to Vatican II, and the DECREE ON ECUMENISM (UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO), as this predates the birthday of the CCR (Given in Rome at St. Peter’s, November 21, 1964). Let us examine what the council taught in regards to our separated brethren.

1. Even in the beginnings of this one and only Church of God there arose certain rifts,(19) which the Apostle strongly condemned.(20) But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions made their appearance and quite large communities came to be separated from full communion with the Catholic Church-for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame. The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect. The differences that exist in varying degrees between them and the Catholic Church-whether in doctrine and sometimes in discipline, or concerning the structure of the Church-do indeed create many obstacles, sometimes serious ones, to full ecclesiastical communion. The ecumenical movement is striving to overcome these obstacles. But even in spite of them it remains true that all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body,(21) and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.(22)

Moreover, some and even very many of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries 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, and visible elements too. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to Christ, belong by right to the one Church of Christ.

The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.

It follows that the separated Churches(23) and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.

(Continued in next post)

 

[ClayPots47]

(Continued from last post)

Nevertheless, our separated brethren, whether considered as individuals or as Communities and Churches, are not blessed with that unity which Jesus Christ wished to bestow on all those who through Him were born again into one body, and with Him quickened to newness of life-that unity which the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the Church proclaim. For it is only through Christ’s Catholic Church, which is “the all-embracing means of salvation,” that they can benefit fully from the means of salvation. We believe that Our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, in order to establish the one Body of Christ on earth to which all should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God. This people of God, though still in its members liable to sin, is ever growing in Christ during its pilgrimage on earth, and is guided by God’s gentle wisdom, according to His hidden designs, until it shall happily arrive at the fullness of eternal glory in the heavenly Jerusalem.

4.___
On the other hand, Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brethren. It is right and salutary to recognize the riches of Christ and virtuous works in the lives of others who are bearing witness to Christ, sometimes even to the shedding of their blood. For God is always wonderful in His works and worthy of all praise.

Nor should we forget that anything wrought by the grace of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of our separated brethren can be a help to our own edification. Whatever is truly Christian is never contrary to what genuinely belongs to the faith; indeed, it can always bring a deeper realization of the mystery of Christ and the Church.

8.___
In certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers “for unity,” and during ecumenical gatherings, it is allowable, indeed desirable that Catholics should join in prayer with their separated brethren. Such prayers in common are certainly an effective means of obtaining the grace of unity, and they are a true expression of the ties which still bind Catholics to their separated brethren. “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them”.(33)

Yet worship in common (communicatio in sacris) is not to be considered as a means to be used indiscriminately for the restoration of Christian unity. There are two main principles governing the practice of such common worship: first, the bearing witness to the unity of the Church, and second, the sharing in the means of grace. Witness to the unity of the Church very generally forbids common worship to Christians, but the grace to be had from it sometimes commends this practice. The course to be adopted, with due regard to all the circumstances of time, place, and persons, is to be decided by local episcopal authority, unless otherwise provided for by the Bishops’ Conference according to its statutes, or by the Holy See.

Nowhere does this document use the words “heresy”, 'heretic" or “heretical”. And from Patti Gallagher Mansfield’s recollection of the events; nothing that occurred was in conflict with UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO. The retreat organizers even communicated with the local ordinary, informing him REDINTEGRATIO. The retreat organizers even communicated with the local ordinary, informing him of the retreat.

One of the professors walked in and exclaimed, “What is the Bishop going to say when he hears that all these kids have been baptized in the Holy Spirit!”

Here is an article with an account from another young adult who attended the retreat that Patty Mansfield did, catholic.org/diocese/diocese_story.php?id=23194

As for the bishop, he was Pittsburgh’s Bishop John Wright. He attended the Second Vatican Council (1962–65), during which he was a decisive force behind several of its documents, one of them being the DECREE ON ECUMENISM (UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO).

One likely result of the dialogue between Catholics and Protestants, in the view of Pittsburgh’s Catholic Bishop John Wright, is “immediate unity in good works and charity”—more cooperation by missionaries of both churches, common action on social issues, frequent prayer in common, even a joint Catholic-Protestant Bible

Read more: time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,834774,00.html#ixzz1ZmfYvfgc

It seems that the good bishop’s reaction to the learning of the events at Duquesne, was one of cautious support, in keeping with the Vatican II’s DECREE ON ECUMENISM; as the Renewal swept through Pittsburg, and spread beyond it’s borders.

(O)nly two years after the Renewal started, the U.S. Bishops investigated the fledgling movement and the Committee on Doctrine wrote that “theologically the movement has legitimate reasons of existence. It has a strong biblical basis. It would be difficult to inhibit the working of the Spirit which manifested itself so abundantly in the early Church.”

nsc-chariscenter.org/aboutccr.htm

 

[guanophore]

You are unable to effectively defend your movement or provide authority for it because of your fanaticism…

I think you are right, at least in your case, jmj. Since you have rejected all the confirmations of the movement I mentioned in my last popes, and the normal instruction to the movement by the successors of Peter, I don’t really think there is any source that can be provided that you can accept.

If you can’t see the pre-occupation with tongues then you have some serious deduction skill problems.

I am glad that you are able to admit that your perception about “the pre-occupation with tongues” is just your deduction. I do see something very different when I read the account.
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

The Duquesne Weekend
… the story of God’s gracious and extraordinary response to the prayer of some very ordinary people.

In Luke 11 Jesus says, “Ask and you shall receive, seek and you shall find; knock and it shall be opened to you. If you who are evil know how to give your children good things HOW MUCH MORE will the Heavenly Father GIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT to those who ASK HIM.” Here is an unfailing principle: From the first Pentecost on, the Holy Spirit has always come in response to fervent prayer… to prayer that is hungry and thirsty for more of God…to prayer that asks, seeks, and knocks. I describe in my book, As By A New Pentecost, how the entire twentieth century was dedicated to the Holy Spirit in a special way. Blessed Elena Guerra, at the turn of the twentieth century, urged Pope Leo XIII to call the entire Church to pray more fervently to the Holy Spirit…to be, as it were, a permanent Cenacle of prayer. And of course you remember the prayer to the Spirit we prayed for the Second Vatican Council: “Divine Spirit, renew Your wonders in this our day as by a new Pentecost.”

Curious…no mention or “pre-occupation” with tongues here…
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

In the Spring of 1966, two Duquesne University professors were ASKING, SEEKING, and KNOCKING. They had pledged themselves to pray daily for a greater outpouring of the Holy Spirit in their lives using the beautiful Sequence Hymn of Pentecost.

Gee…no mention of tongues here either…
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

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.

Gee…no mention of tongues here either…
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

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.

Which one of these is the “heterodox instruction” you were talking about?

How are any of these not “orthodox practices”?
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

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.”

No mention of “pre-occupation with tongues” here either. Hmmm.
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

In the discussion following her talk, David Mangan proposed that we close our retreat by renewing our Confirmation…that we, as young adults, say our personal “yes” to the Holy Spirit.

I notice that Catholics renew their baptismal vows during liturgy. Do you think doing so outside of liturgy is inappropriate?
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

I entered and knelt in the presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, I literally trembled with a sense of awe before His majesty. I knew in an overwhelming way that He is the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords. I thought, “You had better get out of here quick before something happens to you.” But overriding my fear was a much greater desire to surrender myself unconditionally to God.

No mention of tongues here either.
Patti Gallagher Mansfield:

I prayed, “Father, I give my life to you. Whatever you ask of me, I accept. And if it means suffering, I accept that too. Just teach me to follow Jesus and to love as He loves.” In the next moment, I found myself prostrate, flat on my face, and flooded with an experience of the merciful love of God…a love that is totally undeserved, yet lavishly given. Yes, it’s true what St. Paul writes, “The love of God has been poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit.” My shoes came off in the process. I was indeed on holy ground. I felt as if I wanted to die and be with God. The prayer of St. Augustine captures my experience: “O Lord, you have made us for yourself and our hearts are restless until they rest in You.” As much as I wanted to bask in His presence, I knew that if I, who am no one special, could experience the love of God in this way, that anyone across the face of the earth could do so.

Any tongues here?

No?

It may be that this “pre-occupation” is in the eye of the beholder?

 

[guanophore]

 I'm sorry having a particular experience before the blessed sacrament does not necessarily vindicate her experience or point of view. Especially not given the consistent diet of heterodoxy she was fed during the retreat.

I agree. Anyone can be in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament and have “an experience”. Fortunately, just like everything else, we can discern these “experiences” by submitting them to the authority of the Church, which was later done, and has continued to be done. they can be validated. We can also look at the fruit of the Spirit that has emanated from the lives of those present over the last 40 years.

Nowhere does the church non-catholics are on an equal footing with heretics, this is a heresy and again if you had any grasp whatsoever of catholic teaching you would know this.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Perhaps you had one too many nightcaps?

The Church says that non-Catholics are not necessarily heretics, and that the HS works through Protestant ecclesial communities to bring souls to Himself.

I agree, jmj. The Church does not teach that non-Catholics are on an equal footing at all. If memory serves, the catechism says that there are elements of truth in the Protestant communities, which I would agree with.

Yes. elements of Truth does not equate to “equal footing”. But their nature, these ecclesial communties are deficient, and are lacking the marks of the True Church.

However, I'm sure you'll agree that it is not at all accurate to state, as one advocate of CCR has recently posted, that..."The Holy Spirit is valid wherever it is found, whether in the camp, or outside the camp."

Not by any means, Denise. Perhaps I did not express myself well. What I am trying to say is that the HS is not bound by the visible boundaries of the One Church.

819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth” 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.” 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, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”

All I am saying is that the work of the HS is valid, whether it happens in these ecclesial communties, or inside the visible boundaries of the CC.

This statement presumes that anyone and everyone is qualified to judge as to whether the Holy Ghost is truly at work in Catholic or non-Catholic communities, but that's not what the Church teaches.

Maybe you can help me understand how you see that the statement presumes this. I don’t see that in what I said, or in the Catechism. The fact that the Spirit moves, and that this movement is valid says nothing about who is qualified to judge this. The Catholic Church has judged that the HS validly works among people not visibly Catholic.

Individuals, whether Catholic or not, do not have the authority to make judgements about which movements are valid, and which are not. This is why we look to our bishops, and in particular, the successor of Peter.

 

[ClayPots47]

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!

Fine, I’ll yell back: WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THEY AREN’T!!! Where do you see the retreatants were on the birthday of the movement at Duquesne? They were in the second floor Adoration Chapel praying before the Real Presence. And they were seeking from Him, and they experienced the Holy Spirit in a a way they never had. it’s rather silly to make assumptions based on personal bias or false ideas about what Charismatics seek, as it wasn’t/isn’t signs; they were seeking a deeper relationship with Him as manifested by the action of the Holy Spirit in their lives. Adorationh/Exposition is often central to Charismatic events, I’ve never been to one where there wasn’t time spent before the Blessed Sacrament. What they sought, was the experience of Pentecost, as detailed in scripture. The professors did not know how to go about it. For almost a year, they daily prayed the Sequence Hymn of Pentecost, Veni Creator Spiritus. It was only after friends had given them the books, The Cross and the Switchblade and They Speak With Other Tongues, that they understood that what they were seeking was called, “Baptism in the Holy Spirit”. They attended an interdenominational charismatic prayer meeting. Two returned and received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

They participated in the prayers and practices of “separated brethren” because they did not know how to go about receiving the experience in the RCC, The prayers and practices were based on the first four chapters of the Acts of the Apostles, from the bible which belongs to the RCC. The Protestants actually got their “prayers and practices” from a Catholic book, Holy Scripture. That is why the professors had the retreatents read Acts and also sing in prayer, Veni Creator Spiritus. From the birth of the movement, participants have sought a deeper relationship with the Trinity; and as part of the transforming power they experience, they increasingly take part in Mass, frequent reception of the Sacraments and Adoration. They do these because they know they need to in order to sustain this new relationship they have with God. It is those fruits that the Church has seen, that has led the popes and bishops to lend their support and blessing to the Renewal. We don’t just seek God in the Tabernacle; we seek Him at Mass, in the sacraments, in prayer, in Lectio Divina, the Divine Office, Meditation, Contemplative prayer, the rosary, devotion to Mary and the saints. Charismatics seek Him in the experiences of the Renewal, others seek Him through various spiritual movements and societies and apostolates.

Catholic Charismatics have the fullness of the Faith and the Real Presence, they have access to the Giver in a way Protestants do not. The Pentecostals may claim to have the gifts, but they do not have the intimacy of receiving the Giver from Whom the gifts come from, as they do not have the fullness of the faith and all of the sacraments. The professors at Duquesne, perhaps wrongly, thought that they needed he assistance of the protestants; the fact that the students received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit without the prayers and assistance of others showed them that it was possible to receive in an entirely different manner. In the case of the students, it was the Catholic Devotion to Our Eucharistic Lord that led to their being Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

 

[guanophore]

…in the second floor Adoration Chapel praying before the Real Presence.

And they were seeking from Him, and they experienced the Holy Spirit in a a way they never had. it’s rather silly to make assumptions based on personal bias or false ideas about what Charismatics seek, as it wasn’t/isn’t signs; they were seeking a deeper relationship with Him as manifested by the action of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

I think you are right, it is rather silly. But it has been admitted that it is a “deduction” based upon intentional avoiding of certain facts, and focus on personal prejudices.

Adorationh/Exposition is often central to Charismatic events, I’ve never been to one where there wasn’t time spent before the Blessed Sacrament. What they sought, was the experience of Pentecost, as detailed in scripture. The professors did not know how to go about it. For almost a year, they daily prayed the Sequence Hymn of Pentecost, Veni Creator Spiritus.

This is certainly NOT a prayer or practice of our separated brethren! Neither is the Act of consecration to the HS and the sacrament of reconciliation. Referring to these things as “heterodox” is ridiculous.

They participated in the prayers and practices of “separated brethren” because they did not know how to go about receiving the experience in the RCC, The prayers and practices were based on the first four chapters of the Acts of the Apostles, from the bible which belongs to the RCC.

I think this is not entirely accurate. The traditional hymns and prayers to the HS that were used are not found in the book of Acts. They are part of the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church.

The Protestants actually got their “prayers and practices” from a Catholic book, Holy Scripture. That is why the professors had the retreatents read Acts and also sing in prayer, Veni Creator Spiritus.

I do agree that whatever Protestants glean that has value comes from the Catholic faith, and mostly from the Bible (a Catholic book). But the Catholics were praying and singing to the HS not because they took their lead from Protestants, but they took these prayers and hymns from Catholic devotions.

From the birth of the movement, participants have sought a deeper relationship with the Trinity; and as part of the transforming power they experience, they increasingly take part in Mass, frequent reception of the Sacraments and Adoration.

I think this salient point is being ignored by some in favor of some obsession with “tongues”.

The professors at Duquesne, perhaps wrongly, thought that they needed he assistance of the protestants; the fact that the students received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit without the prayers and assistance of others showed them that it was possible to receive in an entirely different manner. In the case of the students, it was the Catholic Devotion to Our Eucharistic Lord that led to their being Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Yes. They were all lay persons and novices, and were searching for a deeper life with God, and doing it the only way they knew how.

 

[justtryin]

What they sought, was the experience of Pentecost, as detailed in scripture. The professors did not know how to go about it. For almost a year, they daily prayed the Sequence Hymn of Pentecost, Veni Creator Spiritus. It was only after friends had given them the books, The Cross and the Switchblade and They Speak With Other Tongues, that they understood that what they were seeking was called, “Baptism in the Holy Spirit”. They attended an interdenominational charismatic prayer meeting. Two returned and received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

They weren’t very bright professors if they could not look to the rich tradition of the Church. Instead they sought sources outside of the Fullness Of Truth. Why seek for something the Church never taught in the first place? Where in the rich tradition of the Church is this “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” taught prior to the 1960’s?

They participated in the prayers and practices of "separated brethren" because they did not know how to go about receiving the experience in the RCC

Again, why seek outside of the Church Christ established?

The professors at Duquesne,*** perhaps wrongly, thought that they needed he assistance of the protestants;*** the fact that the students received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit without the prayers and assistance of others showed them that it was possible to receive in an entirely different manner. In the case of the students, it was the Catholic Devotion to Our Eucharistic Lord that led to their being Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

So why continue to practice that which was in your words “perhaps wrongly” pursued?

Of course they received Baptism in the Holy Spirit "in an entirely different manner."
That’s because it did not exist in the Catholic Church prior to their introducing it in the 1960’s.

 

[Melchior_1]

All these threads can be distilled into the following:

Is the movement heretical? If yes, then we have three Popes and several documents in error. We have the Papal Preacher in error. We have hundreds of thousands of Catholics being led into heresy, including our current Pope. One could say the gates of Hell are prevailing.

Is the movement something to be embraced? If yes, then we have something which leads hundreds of thousands closer to the Sacraments and Christ Jesus. We have Popes and Cardinals who fully endorse the movement and those who practice it. We have Societies of Apostolic Life being formed around this movement.

Or it’s simply benign, which means it falls under

Which one of these is it? HINT;
*
At the heart of a world imbued with a rationalistic skepticism, a new experience of the Holy Spirit suddenly burst forth. And, since then, that experience has assumed a breadth of a worldwide Renewal movement. What the New Testament tells us about the charisms - which were seen as visible signs of the coming of the Spirit - is not just ancient history, over and done with, for it is once again becoming extremely topical.*

Should probably give you an answer.

 

[jmj1984]

It is the same as formation for confirmation. The curriculum is taken from the Life in the Spirit Seminar program.

And jmj has linked to a description that includes most of the “procedures”.

• Prayer, including Act of Consecration to the HS
• Confession
• Catechesis including Scripture study
• Studying about or mentoring by those who are livng the Spirit filled life (like learning about a saint you might choose as a patron for Confirmaton)
• Prayer in front of the Blessed Sacrament

I do see your point, and I agree with what you are saying, but there is very little of the charismatic gift of prophesy that relates to “telling the future”. Most of it is speaking God’s Truth into the present.

It is God’s intention that we all become saints. And your question here proves Varda’s point, that baptism and confirmation are just the beginning. It remains for us to “work out salvation with fear and trembling”. To say “baptism and confirmation are it, there is nothing else” is misleading. We are given graces in these sacraments of initiation so that we can serve God, the Church, and the world. The Charismatic gifts are means by which we fulfill God’s intention for us.

Your continued use of this forbidden term used in reference for our separated brethren seems to indicate a rebellion against the authority of Holy Mother Church, as well as against the forum rules here.

I also noticed that you were unable to affirm any of hte “orthodox practices” that occurred over the Duquesne weekend. I wonder why that is?

I can see your point. It really would take some kind of miracle to be able to come up with respectable answers to my assertions. The truth is that there is no refutation for these assertions. They were Catholics, engaged in Catholic activities.

It is interesting that when I quote the references in the account about"orthodox practices" such as the Sacrament of Reconciliation, consecration to the HS, and adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, you accuse me of “misquoting”.

The understanding they had of what is written in the book of Acts has been confirmed by Lumen Gentium, instructions from the Popes, the authorities appointed by the Pope for the guidance of the Laity (Lay movements in the Church) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. We are free to interpret Scripture any way we like, so long as it is consistent with Sacred Tradition (the Teaching of the Apostles infallibly preserved in the Church).

On the contrary, your assertion that these gifts have “ceased” is not consistent with any of these sources, and I am pleased to see, your own research into this matter.

No, jmj, your use of the term “heretic” in this context is inaccurate and inappropriate.

But, I would be happy to review any evidence you can provide that the Protestants referenced in this story ever had the fullness of Catholic faith, and willfully rejected it. Same for the authors of the books referenced.

I have explained the difference between ‘formal’ and ‘material’ heretic to you several times now, if you cannot grasp it perhaps you should leave the discussion. If you don’t like the term heretic you can likewise criticise all the saints up to the 20th century that have used the term as well as the 1962 missal and breviary

The rest of your post consist of the usual misquotes and calumnies and so isnt worth responding to.