I tell my own kids, who were raised charismatic evangelical, that anything that is true and good in the pentecostal movement has Catholicism as its root.It’s a lot more than poor music my friend. The P & W service and the annual charismatic conference often resembles a Benny Hinn revival.
A comment on the “poor music” thread of this conversation. I invite you to listen to a few songs written by some charismatic friends of mine (Catholic and Protestant). They are anything but shallow, and they invite the worshiper to enter into the presence of angels and saints, who stand in perpetual adoration before the throne of the living God.
St Paul does not condone gibberish tongues.
The Church Fathers, like St Paul, do not condone gibberish tongues.
Satan can appear as an angel of light. He is the master deceiver.
You are entitled to your opinion.
The protestant charismatic revivalist movement, which the Catholic Church embraced in 1967, should never have been embraced.
Yes. That is unfortunate.
Sounds like syncretism.
You are entitled to enjoy any song you choose. I cannot comment on Liturgical “music”. All the protestant hymns sound…er…well…protetestant to me.
I have not seen that your Church says these “tongues” are great gifts of grace either. I think that your Church is not quite sure.
Satan is the great deceiver and the father of lies.
I do not believe the “spirits” have been thoroughly tested and discerned by your Church–the movement is quite recent.
Pardon my ignorance—but what is the OF service?
OF is Ordinary Form or Novus Ordos.
You’re right. He does condone praying in an unknown tongue, however, although he cautions that it is an aid for personal prayer (unless there is also an interpretation), and he furthermore cautions that it is not a central or indispensible gift. (See 1 Cor 14). Any charismatic who claims that a person without the gift of tongues does not have the Holy Spirit is wrong, but it does not follow that those with the gift of tongues do not have the Holy Spirit.
I fail to see Satan’s motive in bringing people into the Church through the charisms, only for them to discover the Body of Christ contained inside the Church. The charismatics I know become more devotional every day; they certainly don’t need loud music or speaking in tongues to pray. But, even when they become more devotional, they do not reject the enthusiasm that brought them to the throne of Grace.
…St. Paul wrote this passage precisely because ‘tongues’ had become a source of disorder in the Church of Corinth; and even while he does not forbid them, he decidedly minimizes their significance.
Are you familiar with the term “prelest”?
Why wouldn’t Paul forbid the work of Satan? And what on earth did he mean by saying that “I thank my God (that) I speak with tongues more than ye all”? (1 Cor 14:18).
Sounds pretty silly and irreverent to me, if your description is accurate.
Just looked it up. If your implication is that charismatics care more for experience than holiness, then you are make a gross overgeneralization. Either you haven’t known many charismatics, or the charismatics you’ve known are shallow and don’t know God.
LOL! It surely does not mean that the Church should adopt gibberish tongues or start aping the practices of the protestant chaismatic revivalist movement.
Indeed.
The best translation of prelest is: spiritual deception.
No.
Thats what I figured!
I try not to judge individuals. But my perception of this innovative movement within the Catholic Church is not positive. I know that my writing often comes off as combative and forceful. Please forgive me if I have offended you (and others) in any way.
I’d like to see your critique of the Charismatic Renewal Movement that does not use the words “gibberish”, “aping”, or “protestant.”
Thats like critiquing the Superbowl and not mentioning Football!I’d like to see your critique of the Charismatic Renewal Movement that does not use the words “gibberish”, “aping”, or “protestant.”
