Differences between the Traditional Catholics and Charismatic Catholics

[ClayPots47]

I pray we never see the day.

I don’t see this happening, for the simple fact that most charisms are manifested outside of liturgy, especially the ordinary ones. The extraordinary ones have specific purposes, and if exercised, it is typically following liturgy, not during it. Also, the EF is not the form that is used predominantly in the church; the OF is. The local ordinary of the diocese has the right to allow or disallow a Mass or Healing Liturgy that will be predominantly attended by or organized Charismatics. Approved liturgies have always been the OF, and it is possible to incorporate the expression of limited charisms being that the OF is a dialogue Mass, the EF is not. I don’t see how it would be possible, with the way the TLM is set up in the missal. When there are Charismatic liturgies, the parish or event location advertises them as such so attendees are aware that they are attending such an event. Just like TLM’s are advertised as such. They both draw particular spiritualities, and those attending expect that is what they are attending. I would be very surprised if a) there are enough individuals interested in a TLM with elements of charismatic-style prayer incorporated within, and b) there is a bishop who would find some way to approve such a liturgy.

 

[ClayPots47]

Yes. What does that have to do with the insertion of Protestant services into our parishes ?

Your statement is disingenuous for the very reason that “Protestant services” are not being inserted in your parish. The OF is a valid liturgy which is Catholic, not Protestant; the CCR is a movement with Church support. A Mass with Charismatic elements is typically the OF, and it remains the OF, with a few approved (by the pastor and bishop) charisms. The charisms are not the exclusive property of Protestants, they come from the bible and like the bible, they belong to the Catholic Church. It was within the Catholic Church that they were first manifested (As recorded in Acts, Corinthians, etc). And what is inserted must first be brought to the attention of the pastor, and then submitted to the diocese for approval. Which is a good thing, as using this route helps to keep things in line as regards the Mass and/or event. Unfortunately, some disregard the protocols, and do not go through the proper channels. If in doubt about such an event, call the Chancery Office and verify that it was approved. If not, then report it.

 

[guanophore]

I don’t think it’s a matter of what I wrote being reconcilable with scripture and Church teaching. It’s more a matter of observation that the CCR folks (for the most part) do not do what the Apostles did.

Perhaps I am not understanding what you meant by “do what the Apostles did”. We were talking about planting the Church throughout the known world, and becoming martyrs in the process.

Surely you don’t expect that the average lay person is called to plant new churches? I think we are all in agreement that we are all called to lay down our lives for our Lord, even though some of us may feel we are not up to the task. The role of an Apostle was different than any roles in the Church since. The first Deacons, for example, had a very different role than the Apostles, but they clearly were filled and animated by the same Spirit. Although Stephen did become a martryr, we dont’ have any evidence the others did.

Acts 6:2-6
“It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. 3 Therefore, brethren, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5 And what they said pleased the whole multitude, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Proch’orus, and Nica’nor, and Ti’mon, and Par’menas, and Nicola’us, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 These they set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid their hands upon them.

Clearly the Apostles needed to preach and teach, and yet, there were other duties in the Church that needed to be filled by Spirit filled persons.

They - and yourself - frequently quote the Apostles and Pentacost (the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them). But again, CCR folks aren't doing what the Apostles did, nor are they, for the most part, putting themselves in harms way to deliver the message of Christ to unbelievers, as the Apostles did.

Neither, so far as we know, did any of the others who were filled with the Spirit of Pentecost. There is no mention of Cornelius or his household becoming martryrs for the faith. Nor is there any record of the jailor and his household planting churches and getting killed because of it. Yes, there was a lot of martyrs in the first three centuries when the faith was illegal. It is written that the Church was built upon the blood of the martryrs.

I think that we all need to be willing to take up our cross and follow Him to calvary. It would not surprise me if this country becomes a new Rome, where it is illegal to be Catholic. May I never be put to such a test! But if I am, may God strengthen me!

I think you are confusing the role with the Spirit that gives to each according to His will.

1 Cor 12:27-31
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the higher gifts.

Not everyone has the same mission as the Apostles, but that does not mean they have not received the same Spirit. This is why I say that Traditionalists do not need to express these charismatic gifts to have the fullness of the faith.

Pentacost was not about feeling good about themselves, it was about being able to spread the Faith in an extraordinary manner. The extraordinary gifts, for the most part, died out after the Apostolic Age.

I agree with the purpose of the Gifts, I just disagree with the dying out part. A study of the history of the Gifts makes it clear that this did not happen.

  I would agree that each part of the body has a different function - in that we are individuals and have various talents. But I believe that we can be aware of what these talents are, if we have a life of prayer and devotion.

Does it necessarily follow that a person who has a different function cannot have the same Source (Spirit)?

I think that Charismatic gifts are opposite of talents. I think the gifts enable people to do things that do not come naturally, and that defy their human abilities. Talents are innate human abilities that, when put to the service of God, are perfected by His Spirit to His use. Maybe that is beyond the thread.

Maybe some need to develop the extraordinary gifts in order to know what they are supposed to do, and that’s okay, I think. But some of us prefer to use the old-fashioned means of traditional prayer and reflection in order to discern God’s will for us, and what God expects us to do for Him. It works for me, anyway, as far as I can tell.

I wonder about this too. I think you are right that some people (especially those weaker in faith) do need supernatural graces to function in a way that comes normally to others. However, I don’t think the “old fashioned way” is contradictory to receiving guidance by way of the gifts. Both are ways that we can further know and understand what God wants from us, and assist us to enter the grace that enables us to do what we are called to do.

 

[Darran]

Bayside is not only unapproved, it has been actually condemned; links to websites are not allowed as it is considered promoting them.

Fair enough. I’m not in support of the apparitions, neither did I know they were condemned or not. I linked it for the writings and not necesarily the quotes, if that is against forum rules then that is one thing I’ll apologise for.

 

[Attila1974]

I haven’t seen the below mentioned during this thread, and I found it very helpful in describing, to myself at least, how authentic charismatic renewal is and how it effects the church.

It answers many of the topics covered in this thread.

Charismatic Renewal

I was going to post the article here however it exceeds the posting size limit.

 

[vardaquinn]

Right now, I’d like to simply make it known that I really don’t like the way these threads tend to go. They leave me annoyed and argumenative. So, let’s just say that the Holy Spirit works in many different ways in each of our lives and that the charisms do exist whether they appear often or seldom. No matter what though use the Holy Spirit and the gifts God has given you to fight for your faith and to promote God, the Eucharist, and Catholicism in general. If you follow this and live a life with love, being charismatic or traditionalist will be unimportant. I think this is the true way that both of these beliefs aim for so we should simply have a love and respect for Catholicism and work for the conversion of the world. It’s not about the charisms or about Latin mass, it’s about loving the Lord your God and loving your neighbor.

Alright then. The way of love, as Paul discusses in his explanation of charisms, is the “more excellent way”. None of this matters if we do not have love.

But again, CCR folks aren’t doing what the Apostles did, nor are they, for the most part, putting themselves in harms way to deliver the message of Christ to unbelievers, as the Apostles did.

God does not always require us to put ourselves in harms way. Martyrdom is a gift, but one we shouldn’t go seeking. In defense of the CCR folks, I will say that they are certainly bringing the message of Christ to unbelievers in a more radical way than probably the majority of other Catholics. If you think this is false, I will be happy to be proven wrong.

Pentacost was not about feeling good about themselves, it was about being able to spread the Faith in an extraordinary manner. The extraordinary gifts, for the most part, died out after the Apostolic Age.

Whether they died out or not is irrelevant. They are here now, we should use them to spread the faith. It needs spreading.

I would agree that each part of the body has a different function - in that we are individuals and have various talents. But I believe that we can be aware of what these talents are, if we have a life of prayer and devotion. Maybe some need to develop the extraordinary gifts in order to know what they are supposed to do, and that’s okay, I think. But some of us prefer to use the old-fashioned means of traditional prayer and reflection in order to discern God’s will for us, and what God expects us to do for Him. It works for me, anyway, as far as I can tell.

And you think we are speaking against this? That this is in anyway in conflict with the traditional way of prayer and devotion? We’re promoting this! This is the best way to discern God’s will. In my experience, discerning my potential calling to the priesthood, prayer and reflection is the best means to let the call of God enter our hearts. I think you seriously misunderstand our aims and goals.

Our various talents should not be confused with charisms. While our talents do come into play in a big way with our role in the Body, God also gives supernaturally inspired gifts (charisms) for us to accomplish our role. They are not natural talents, but supernatural gifts.

Also, the EF is not the form that is used predominantly in the church; the OF is. The local ordinary of the diocese has the right to allow or disallow a Mass or Healing Liturgy that will be predominantly attended by or organized Charismatics. Approved liturgies have always been the OF, and it is possible to incorporate the expression of limited charisms being that the OF is a dialogue Mass, the EF is not

There were actually some efforts to incorporate charismatic gifts and expression (namely tongues and the raising of hands) into the EF (under the approval of a bishop). I don’t think much came of it though.

 

[Denise1957]

Perhaps I am not understanding what you meant by “do what the Apostles did”. We were talking about planting the Church throughout the known world, and becoming martyrs in the process.

Surely you don’t expect that the average lay person is called to plant new churches? I think we are all in agreement that we are all called to lay down our lives for our Lord, even though some of us may feel we are not up to the task. The role of an Apostle was different than any roles in the Church since. The first Deacons, for example, had a very different role than the Apostles, but they clearly were filled and animated by the same Spirit. Although Stephen did become a martryr, we dont’ have any evidence the others did.

Acts 6:2-6
“It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. 3 Therefore, brethren, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5 And what they said pleased the whole multitude, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Proch’orus, and Nica’nor, and Ti’mon, and Par’menas, and Nicola’us, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 These they set before the apostles, and they prayed and laid their hands upon them.

Clearly the Apostles needed to preach and teach, and yet, there were other duties in the Church that needed to be filled by Spirit filled persons.

Neither, so far as we know, did any of the others who were filled with the Spirit of Pentecost. There is no mention of Cornelius or his household becoming martryrs for the faith. Nor is there any record of the jailor and his household planting churches and getting killed because of it. Yes, there was a lot of martyrs in the first three centuries when the faith was illegal. It is written that the Church was built upon the blood of the martryrs.

I think that we all need to be willing to take up our cross and follow Him to calvary. It would not surprise me if this country becomes a new Rome, where it is illegal to be Catholic. May I never be put to such a test! But if I am, may God strengthen me!

I think you are confusing the role with the Spirit that gives to each according to His will.

1 Cor 12:27-31
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the higher gifts.

Not everyone has the same mission as the Apostles, but that does not mean they have not received the same Spirit. This is why I say that Traditionalists do not need to express these charismatic gifts to have the fullness of the faith.

I agree with the purpose of the Gifts, I just disagree with the dying out part. A study of the history of the Gifts makes it clear that this did not happen.

Does it necessarily follow that a person who has a different function cannot have the same Source (Spirit)?

I think that Charismatic gifts are opposite of talents. I think the gifts enable people to do things that do not come naturally, and that defy their human abilities. Talents are innate human abilities that, when put to the service of God, are perfected by His Spirit to His use. Maybe that is beyond the thread.

I wonder about this too. I think you are right that some people (especially those weaker in faith) do need supernatural graces to function in a way that comes normally to others. However, I don’t think the “old fashioned way” is contradictory to receiving guidance by way of the gifts. Both are ways that we can further know and understand what God wants from us, and assist us to enter the grace that enables us to do what we are called to do.

Quote:

“Surely you don’t expect that the average lay person is called to plant new churches?”

I expect that if CCR folks are going to continue to reference that they have the same gifts as those of the Apostles, then they should do what the Apostles did, rather than sit behind thier computers and lecture traditional Catholics about what the Church teaches.

Quote:

“I think that the charismatic gifts are opposite of talents.”

I appreciate that you have taken the time to reference scripture, but I’m more interested in how the Church views scripture. The link to the EWTN site that I’ve posted several times shows how the Church views graces and charisms given by the Holy Ghost, and it is the best source I’ve seen on the subject, and I’m going with that. The Church has not taught that speaking in tongues and prophesying is the norm for a baptized or confirmed Catholic, and it is not taught that we should seek or even “be open” to speaking in tongues and prophesying. This has never been taught. In the early Church, the situation was different. But that’s already been described by others here.

 

[Indyann]

Quote:

I expect that if CCR folks are going to continue to reference that they have the same gifts as those of the Apostles, then they should do what the Apostles did, rather than sit behind thier computers and lecture traditional Catholics about what the Church teaches.

Is this an example of what you think the CCR folks should be doing?

va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/laity/documents/rc_pc_laity_doc_20051114_associazioni_en.html#CATHOLIC%20FRATERNITY%20OF%20CHARISMATIC%20COVENANT%20COMMUNITIES%20AND%20FELLOWSHIPS

The member communities of the Catholic Fraternity have established schools of theology and pastoral work; radio and television stations for evangelisation; spiritual retreat houses; educational and catechetical projects for street children; specific programmes to provide material and spiritual aid to the elderly, immigrants, the sick and the unemployed; primary and secondary schools; homes for the poor; assistance programmes for prisoners and their families; programmes to prevent abortion and assist expectant mothers, and international missions in Africa, Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Sabah, and Indonesia. The members are also committed to evangelisation programmes for young people and young adults in parishes, schools and universities.

 

[guanophore]

Quote:

“Surely you don’t expect that the average lay person is called to plant new churches?”

I expect that if CCR folks are going to continue to reference that they have the same gifts as those of the Apostles, then they should do what the Apostles did, rather than sit behind thier computers and lecture traditional Catholics about what the Church teaches.

Ok, thank you for clarifying. Each of us is called to evangelize. While that could potentially occur on a computer, Jesus set things up so that each one would teach one. His gospel goes person to person. I think your point is a good measure of the authenticity of one’s supposed claim to “walking by the Spirit”. If a person does not live an evangelistic life, then whatever claims they have to spiritual expereinces are suspect.

“I think that the charismatic gifts are opposite of talents.”

I appreciate that you have taken the time to reference scripture, but I’m more interested in how the Church views scripture. The link to the EWTN site that I’ve posted several times shows how the Church views graces and charisms given by the Holy Ghost, and it is the best source I’ve seen on the subject, and I’m going with that.

Yes, an excellent summary. Do you think that summary equates charismatic gifts with talents?

 

[Denise1957]

Denise1957;8434343:

Quote:

I expect that if CCR folks are going to continue to reference that they have the same gifts as those of the Apostles, then they should do what the Apostles did, rather than sit behind thier computers and lecture traditional Catholics about what the Church teaches.

Is this an example of what you think the CCR folks should be doing?

va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/laity/documents/rc_pc_laity_doc_20051114_associazioni_en.html#CATHOLIC%20FRATERNITY%20OF%20CHARISMATIC%20COVENANT%20COMMUNITIES%20AND%20FELLOWSHIPS

The member communities of the Catholic Fraternity have established schools of theology and pastoral work; radio and television stations for evangelisation; spiritual retreat houses; educational and catechetical projects for street children; specific programmes to provide material and spiritual aid to the elderly, immigrants, the sick and the unemployed; primary and secondary schools; homes for the poor; assistance programmes for prisoners and their families; programmes to prevent abortion and assist expectant mothers, and international missions in Africa, Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Sabah, and Indonesia. The members are also committed to evangelisation programmes for young people and young adults in parishes, schools and universities.

Quote:

“The member communities of the Catholic
Fraternity have established schools of theology and pastoral work; radio and television stations for evangelization; spiritual retreat houses; educational and catechetical projects for street children…”

Well, this might be a really good thing, unless their main purpose is to teach speaking in tongues and prophesying as part of the work here, because that’s not what the Apostles were martyred for.

Quote:

“Specific programmes to provide material and spiritual aid to the elderly, immigrants, sick and unemployed; primary and secondary schools…”

Question: So what do these specific programs and materials include as a spiritual aid? If it’s anything like what I’ve seen that the CCR folks post on these threads, then I have to wonder how solid is the Catholic teaching in the materials they provide.

Quote;

“Homes for the poor, assistance programmes for prisoners and their families; programmes to prevent abortions, assist expectant mothers…”

Question: So what percentage of CCR members are involved, would you say, with this type of ministry? Is anyone on these boards involved with them?

Quote:

“And international missions in Africa, Papua New Guinea, Figi, Sabah, and Indonesia. Members are also committed to evangelization programmes for young people and young adults in parishes, schools, and universities.”

Question: What type of evangelization is provided? Those who are generally attracted to the CCR movement are young people.

 

[Inquiringperson]

Right now, I’d like to simply make it known that I really don’t like the way these threads tend to go. They leave me annoyed and argumenative. So, let’s just say that the Holy Spirit works in many different ways in each of our lives and that the charisms do exist whether they appear often or seldom. No matter what though use the Holy Spirit and the gifts God has given you to fight for your faith and to promote God, the Eucharist, and Catholicism in general. If you follow this and live a life with love, being charismatic or traditionalist will be unimportant. I think this is the true way that both of these beliefs aim for so we should simply have a love and respect for Catholicism and work for the conversion of the world. It’s not about the charisms or about Latin mass, it’s about loving the Lord your God and loving your neighbor.

Agreed.

 

[ClayPots47]

I expect that if CCR folks are going to continue to reference that they have the same gifts as those of the Apostles, then they should do what the Apostles did, rather than sit behind thier computers and lecture traditional Catholics about what the Church teaches…

I believe that many of those in the CCR are doing what the Apostles did, as are Traditionalists and other orthodox Catholics are; The Apostles were utilizing the ordinary charisms, and it was in the exercise of the ordinary charisms, that they became martyrs for their faith. Teaching, preaching, serving, administration, leadership, hospitality, etc. The Catechism states that “charisms are to be used in charity or service to build up the Church”. Not all of us are called to be martyrs for the faith, and not all of us are equipped with the proper charisms either. It would not be possible for every Christian, Charismatic or not, to go to dangerous territory and witness to their faith. They may have responsibilities were they are. They may be parents, teachers, leaders in their jobs or in their church or in their community. If all the Charismatics were out being martyrs for the faith, who would be doing the things needed to be done at home? To suggest that the CCR adherents should do what the Apostles did, and go to dangerous areas where they are likely to be martyred, is really not a proper analogy. Not all who received the charisms after the First Pentecost did what the Apostles did. The Corinthians, for example, were not all going out and witnessing to their faith in areas where they most likely were to be martyred. They did not all have that calling. Not even saints who had extraordinary charisms went out to areas where they were likely to be martyrs (Though Teresa of Avila and Francis of Assisi both thought at one time that it was their calling; when both were really called to be reformers in the Church).

The Church has not taught that speaking in tongues and prophesying is the norm for a baptized or confirmed Catholic, and it is not taught that we should seek or even “be open” to speaking in tongues and prophesying. This has never been taught. In the early Church, the situation was different. But that’s already been described by others here.

Some in the CCR may not agree, but this is correct. Even now, though P6, JP2 and B16 have all given support and approval of the CCR, none have ever stated that extraordinary charisms are the norm for all who have received the Sacraments of Initiation. The words ‘seek’ and ‘be open’ are not quite the proper words, Monsignor Vincent Walsh used the word ‘yield’. That is, when we are aware that a charism is offered to us, we should yield to it, accept it. This applies to the ordinary as well as extraordinary. We should seek and be open to the charisms in general, but not any one in particular. The HS will let us know which He wants us to use, and we are free to yield or not yield. This is where discernment comes in, we certainly want to be fairly sure that the charism comes from the HS, and not an evil one. Seeking or being open to a particular gift, could set one up to receiving the gift from the wrong spirit. Msgr Walsh’s teachings are firmly orthodox, and John Cardinal Krol, former Archbishop of Philadelphia, gave Nihil Obstat’s and Imprimatur’s to them (which is something teaching materials should have in the CCR, but many don’t).

 

[Inquiringperson]

I believe that many of those in the CCR are doing what the Apostles did, as are Traditionalists and other orthodox Catholics are; The Apostles were utilizing the ordinary charisms, and it was in the exercise of the ordinary charisms, that they became martyrs for their faith. Teaching, preaching, serving, administration, leadership, hospitality, etc. The Catechism states that “charisms are to be used in charity or service to build up the Church”. Not all of us are called to be martyrs for the faith, and not all of us are equipped with the proper charisms either. It would not be possible for every Christian, Charismatic or not, to go to dangerous territory and witness to their faith. They may have responsibilities were they are. They may be parents, teachers, leaders in their jobs or in their church or in their community. If all the Charismatics were out being martyrs for the faith, who would be doing the things needed to be done at home? To suggest that the CCR adherents should do what the Apostles did, and go to dangerous areas where they are likely to be martyred, is really not a proper analogy. Not all who received the charisms after the First Pentecost did what the Apostles did. The Corinthians, for example, were not all going out and witnessing to their faith in areas where they most likely were to be martyred. They did not all have that calling. Not even saints who had extraordinary charisms went out to areas where they were likely to be martyrs (Though Teresa of Avila and Francis of Assisi both thought at one time that it was their calling; when both were really called to be reformers in the Church).

Some in the CCR may not agree, but this is correct. Even now, though P6, JP2 and B16 have all given support and approval of the CCR, none have ever stated that extraordinary charisms are the norm for all who have received the Sacraments of Initiation. The words ‘seek’ and ‘be open’ are not quite the proper words, Monsignor Vincent Walsh used the word ‘yield’. That is, when we are aware that a charism is offered to us, we should yield to it, accept it. This applies to the ordinary as well as extraordinary. We should seek and be open to the charisms in general, but not any one in particular. The HS will let us know which He wants us to use, and we are free to yield or not yield. This is where discernment comes in, we certainly want to be fairly sure that the charism comes from the HS, and not an evil one. Seeking or being open to a particular gift, could set one up to receiving the gift from the wrong spirit. Msgr Walsh’s teachings are firmly orthodox, and John Cardinal Krol, former Archbishop of Philadelphia, gave Nihil Obstat’s and Imprimatur’s to them (which is something teaching materials should have in the CCR, but many don’t).

Once again, agreed.

 

[Denise1957]

I believe that many of those in the CCR are doing what the Apostles did, as are Traditionalists and other orthodox Catholics are; The Apostles were utilizing the ordinary charisms, and it was in the exercise of the ordinary charisms, that they became martyrs for their faith. Teaching, preaching, serving, administration, leadership, hospitality, etc. The Catechism states that “charisms are to be used in charity or service to build up the Church”. Not all of us are called to be martyrs for the faith, and not all of us are equipped with the proper charisms either. It would not be possible for every Christian, Charismatic or not, to go to dangerous territory and witness to their faith. They may have responsibilities were they are. They may be parents, teachers, leaders in their jobs or in their church or in their community. If all the Charismatics were out being martyrs for the faith, who would be doing the things needed to be done at home? To suggest that the CCR adherents should do what the Apostles did, and go to dangerous areas where they are likely to be martyred, is really not a proper analogy. Not all who received the charisms after the First Pentecost did what the Apostles did. The Corinthians, for example, were not all going out and witnessing to their faith in areas where they most likely were to be martyred. They did not all have that calling. Not even saints who had extraordinary charisms went out to areas where they were likely to be martyrs (Though Teresa of Avila and Francis of Assisi both thought at one time that it was their calling; when both were really called to be reformers in the Church).

Some in the CCR may not agree, but this is correct. Even now, though P6, JP2 and B16 have all given support and approval of the CCR, none have ever stated that extraordinary charisms are the norm for all who have received the Sacraments of Initiation. The words ‘seek’ and ‘be open’ are not quite the proper words, Monsignor Vincent Walsh used the word ‘yield’. That is, when we are aware that a charism is offered to us, we should yield to it, accept it. This applies to the ordinary as well as extraordinary. We should seek and be open to the charisms in general, but not any one in particular. The HS will let us know which He wants us to use, and we are free to yield or not yield. This is where discernment comes in, we certainly want to be fairly sure that the charism comes from the HS, and not an evil one. Seeking or being open to a particular gift, could set one up to receiving the gift from the wrong spirit. Msgr Walsh’s teachings are firmly orthodox, and John Cardinal Krol, former Archbishop of Philadelphia, gave Nihil Obstat’s and Imprimatur’s to them (which is something teaching materials should have in the CCR, but many don’t).

A very nice response, thanks ClayPots.

I probably didn’t state it very well, but I see the need to differentiate between ordinary graces that are given, by baptism, to help us maintain our faith and to maintain our station in life, and which helps us to be open to graces needed to merit Heaven when we die (which the Church has always taught), and extraordinary graces such as speaking in tongues and prophesy. We can agree that the Church has not taught that we are to go and seek extraordinary graces such as speaking in tongues and prophesying.

But what the Apostles in the upper room were given was something else. They were able to speak, as followers of Christ, about Him in languages that everyone could understand at the same time. And all of them, save St. John, were martyred. How many of the CCR folks are able to go out and preach to unbelievers in this manner? In languages that the CCR folks don’t know, but that those unbelievers who are hearing can understand in their own language? And yet they cite scripture about the Apostles in the upper room, as if they have what they had. This is the problem. This is what I’m getting at.

We are attempting to find a word that accurately describes how Catholics are to be “open to,” or “yield” to the extraordinary graces. Since there is really not an accurate word to describe what it is exactly, isn’t this perhaps indicative that the Church has never taught it? The Church is very specific in her language. If the Church had always taught that we should seek out, be open to, or yield to extraordinary graces, than she would have come up with the proper terminology long before now. That we have to struggle with finding a term that desribes it means that it’s not what the Church has always taught.

Though the popes have given personal approval to CCR (with precautions), this does not mean that we, as Catholics, have to do what the CCR folks do, or accept accept CCR. (We should of course, try to be charitable toward the CCR folks, though, which I struggle with at times.)
For instance, our dear Pope Benedict XV1 has written and spoken more extensively on the subject of enviromentalism, or responsible stewardship, rather, than he has on the subject of Renewal. But does this mean that we all have to accept everything that he says on the subject? Does it mean, then, that we all have to start participating in, say, recycling? No, it doesn’t.

 

[AntiqueCatholic]

So what’s the procedure to get the gifts, then? How is it done?

 

[Heuchler]

So what’s the procedure to get the gifts, then? How is it done?

There isn’t some official procedure, the Holy Spirit either gives it to you or it doesn’t.

 

[AntiqueCatholic]

So they just manifest spontaneously at Charismatic meetings, or outside? How would you know if they were real or true?

 

[Heuchler]

So they just manifest spontaneously at Charismatic meetings, or outside? How would you know if they were real or true?

Exactly, that’s where the trouble begins. It is really a question of if it is a “new pentacost” or not.

 

[Inquiringperson]

So they just manifest spontaneously at Charismatic meetings, or outside? How would you know if they were real or true?

You’ll have to test it. If someone starts saying prophecies, you have to confirm whether it’s true or not.

 

[guanophore]

But what the Apostles in the upper room were given was something else. They were able to speak, as followers of Christ, about Him in languages that everyone could understand at the same time. And all of them, save St. John, were martyred. How many of the CCR folks are able to go out and preach to unbelievers in this manner? In languages that the CCR folks don’t know, but that those unbelievers who are hearing can understand in their own language? And yet they cite scripture about the Apostles in the upper room, as if they have what they had. This is the problem. This is what I’m getting at.

I see your point, but this does not account for everyone else who received the same gifts, yet did not preach this way, or get martryed. Justin Martryr writes in the second century (definitely post Apostolic) that the faithful experience the gift of tongues in the gathering of the Church.

  We are attempting to find a word that accurately describes how Catholics are to be "open to," or "yield" to the extraordinary graces. Since there is really not an accurate word to describe what it is exactly, isn't this perhaps indicative that the Church has never taught it?

No. I think we will find our answers in the writings of the mystics. But it is true that what the Holy Fathers prayed for in terms of “a New Pentecost” has no historical precedent.

The Church is very specific in her language. If the Church had always taught that we should seek out, be open to, or yield to extraordinary graces, than she would have come up with the proper terminology long before now. That we have to struggle with finding a term that desribes it means that it's not what the Church has always taught.

I agree about the clarity of language. Charismatics find the communications of the Popes on these matters perfectly clear.

Though the popes have given personal approval to CCR (with precautions), this does not mean that we, as Catholics, have to do what the CCR folks do, or accept accept CCR. (We should of course, try to be charitable toward the CCR folks, though, which I struggle with at times.)

Yes, and I appreciate your efforts.

For instance, our dear Pope Benedict XV1 has written and spoken more extensively on the subject of enviromentalism, or responsible stewardship, rather, than he has on the subject of Renewal. But does this mean that we all have to accept everything that he says on the subject? Does it mean, then, that we all have to start participating in, say, recycling? No, it doesn't.

I see no reason not to accept everything he has written and said. I don’t find any of it objectionable according to the Catholic faith. But I also agree that it is not a mandate that we recycle. I feel personally compelled by my own moral values to do this, but I don’t think anyone will fail to be united to their heavenly inheritance because they dont.

That being said, can I have your cans?