Is the Charismatic Renewal Catholic

[EricBrooks]

Check out this article: sspx.org/miscellaneous/catholic_charismatic_renewal.htm

I’m sure many people would like to reject this out of hand because it comes from the SSPX website, but at the very least it raises some valid concerns.

If you put aside all the arguments about “those people” being lead by the devil, it’s pretty straightforward. The key to the argument seems to be that, because the Charismatic movement sees renewal as taking place through a revival that began outside of the Church, the very existence of the movement suggests that the Catholic Church is not the unique ark of salvation posessing the fullness of truth.

It seems to me that a movement that attempts to renew the Church by drawing on the traditions already present within makes a whole lot more sense than any movement like the charismatic renewal, Zen rooms at monasteries, or other new devotions that suggests the key to renewal lies outside the Church.

But I have very little in the way of first hand experience with Charismatic Catholics, I am aware that SSPX is often too extreme for me, and I would be open to being shown something suggesting that I’ve missed the mark here.

 

[S_J_Thaikattil]

Read the Book of Acts to know about the First Pentacost.

**The Charismatic Renewal is indeed Catholic. ** It has the approval of the Pope.

The Charismatic Renewal is only about a particular form of spirituality. Catholic Charismatics attend Mass, and follow all other Sacraments of the Catholic Church. Put it this way, instead of saying the Rosary they choose the style of prayer which is strongly Bible based and emphasizes certain aspects more than others.

Read up about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal from Catholic sources.

Here is one:

Divine Retreat Centre, Muringoor, Potta, Kerala, India

drcm.org/

PS: Don’t be afraid of Catholics using different techniques of prayer. As long as it is Jesus they believe in as Savior and God, they are doing nothing wrong. People who are trapped in legalism and rituals are afraid of anything unfamiliar to them because they do not understand the meaning of worshiping God in spirit and in truth.

 

[Danuska]

Well, since I am kinda in the renewal, i thought that I would take a look at the article. First shock
*“Baptized in the Spirit,” “Praying in tongues,” “The gift of prophecy,” and “A personal relationship with Jesus” are all indispensable buzz-words of the so-called Catholic Charismatic Renewal (hereafter referred to as the CCR), a movement which traces its roots to an unsupervised student “retreat” at Pittsburgh’s Duquesne University in 1967. By 1990, the movement claimed *

Has the person who wrote that ever read the bible? Especially the Acts of the Apostles or 1 letter to Corinthian chapter 12 and 14?

The implications of this statement should be lost on no one with even a cursory knowledge of his catechism. From an orthodox standpoint and to give the author the benefit of the doubt, one could see this statement as a reference to the sacrament of Confirmation, the sacrament in which the Holy Ghost comes to us in a special way to make us true Christians and perfect soldiers of Christ.

Yeah, but how many of us were aware of what Confirmation really is!!! If i had to go through it now, I would have prayed and fasted, and I would have chosen my favorite saint as my patron, St Faustina. But I am afraid I just went to confirmation then because everyone else did… And the Saint I chose was on the basis whether the name sounded nice or not… That is why there is so much fuss about that Baptism in the Holy Spirit because now I understand the importance!

*On the contrary, charismatics deny any clear connection between “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” and the Catholic sacraments since “sacramental rite and religious experience are complementary parts of the basic Christian initiation.” 3 *

Deny? That’s new to me… actually, once I asked a priest, if someone was confirmed and baptised, they recieved the Holy Spirit, so why would they need the prayer for the infilling. The priest had nothing to do with Charismatics at that time, but he pointed out that Pentacost was not a one time experience - there is another instance in the Acts where the Apostles were once again filled with the Holy Spirit during the prayer - again, read the Acts.

*It is obvious that many people, sometimes even great Saints, are never given notable consolations in their Faith, much less extraordinary manifestations of the Holy Ghost. To say that an unbaptized person who has experienced this “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” is somehow as close to God as (or even closer than) a pious, baptized Catholic who has never had such an experience is clearly absurd. *

Who said that a person who has the gifts of Spirit is closer to God? There is a big stress, at least in the group that I attend that what matters is the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the FRUITS. Jesus said that not everyone who calls me Lord will enter the kindgom of heaven, and some will say that didn’t we cast out demons in your names, or didnt we prophesy in your name? But that is not the basis for sanctity. What matters is what kind of person you are and whether you are bearing the fruit. So I just find that comment mean.

And I think I will just stop at that, because it would take too much writing to argue with the rest of the article, I think it’s better to reach for the sources - books by Charismatic priests/authors, and Cathecism and the Bible or the Pope’s opinion to get a clear picture.

Of course, there are a lot of bad things that could be said about the Movement, I just know that as long as it has the approval of the Pope and Bishops, it cannot be wrong. Strangly, it is Charismatic Movement that helped me best to appreciate Rosary (and we do pray the Rosary) - first thing that struck me - I knew one person, he had those charisms of prophesy and what not, but at one point I knew he was going through a very rough time. I tried to help so when I reached home, I just prayed the Rosary for him. The next day he thanked me for my prayers saying that he really felt the power of it. But the funny thing is that I never told him I was going to pray for him…

Well, I could go on like that - about the time when the same person told me that he saw someone from my family very sick, a few months later my father was in very serious condition in hospital, the doctors gave up hope, and that is when that person told me that he had a vision of Mother Mary praying the Rosary, and the light was coming out of the Rosary. He also told me that Jesus was asking me to meditate on His Passion, and that my father will live even though the doctors do not believe that - my cousin was one of them, so my father had the best possible care at that hospital. So what I did - I just prayed Sorrowful Misteries every day and my father is alive and well today. The Lord even confirmed that that there was something more to my father’s recovery - when the nurses diconnected him from those respirators, after over 6 weeks you are supposed to learn to breath - first they diconnect you for 15 minutes, then for longer etc. But they said that my father was the first such case, after diconnection - he just started breathing on his own and all was well and is till now, it’s been five years since that time.

Anyway, I could go on with that, I do not want to defend all, there are errors, and not all the criticism is unfounded. But is it Catholic? For me - yes, or I would not be a part of it.

Or maybe just take a look at this testimony of one Indian priest, for me it is amazing jmanjackal.net/eng/engpers.htm

 

[puzzleannie]

. The key to the argument seems to be that, because the Charismatic movement sees renewal as taking place through a revival that began outside of the Church, the very existence of the movement suggests that the Catholic Church is not the unique ark of salvation posessing the fullness of truth.
.

no it did not, the CCR began simultaneously on two Catholic college campuses in prayer groups led and formed among good Catholics. this is an approved spiritual movement accepted by 3 popes, and discussed in depth on the proper forum, spirituality, if you would like to find out more.

the source is flawed, and the proposition on which the argument is flawed.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

Having been involved it to some extent at one time, I would say this movement has a number of major problematic areas:

• The intrinsic belief that the Church somehow “went wrong” and lost its way for, oh, about 19 centuries until they came along and discovered the gifts of the Holy Spirit again. (Sound familiar? Should we call it the Charistmatic Reformation?)
• A completely improper reliance on emotions and emotionalism for guidance on the same level as or even above the rationality of reliance on the Magisterium and Church authority in general.
• Following from the above, a lot of wishy-washiness and muddying of areas that are actually completely clear, such as the status of Protestant communities in relation to the visible Church.

Perhaps these problems are not completely intrinsic to the movement itself, but they are so widespread and ingrained the result is the same.

 

[loyola109]

The “Charismatic Catholic” movement is influenced by Protestantism. There is no other way of stating that. I was raised Protestant, I was raised by Protestant parents who attended a variety of Protestant Churches that used forms of “Charismatic” worship. Note: I have been to probably more than 50 Protestant Churches under my parents when I was younger. When I finally become a Catholic under my own pursuit for salvation (two years ago), I felt that I was returning to the roots of Christendom through the Church. Unfortunately, I did encounter at some Parishes the same form of Charismatic worship that I encountered at Pentecostal Churches.

Ladies and Gentlemen, you can say that the Charismatic Catholic Movement is worthwhile, and it may be endorsed by the papacy, but there is no denying the fact that the Charismatic form of worship is derived from the more Evangelical wings of protestantism. If the Church uses the ideas of protestantism within the Church, at least cultural traditions, then at least indirectly, we are recognizing the superiority of their traditions v.s ours. This, in my opinion, sows confusion and disorder within a Church that has already too many confused Catholics within it.

Some may say that it allows us to come closer to God and that is all that manners. Well, then under that pretext, we should confer with all the different schismatic sects within Christendom and ask them how they come closer to God, perhaps even with non-Christian religions. The precedent that is set by this movement is dangerous, and though I am a young college student that is full of hope and wonderment within my faith, I recognize the dangers that are inherent within the acts of validity towards schism, and this is something that we must avoid at all costs if we are to safeguard the Church that is the Church that Christ founded.

 

[palmas85]

no it did not, the CCR began simultaneously on two Catholic college campuses in prayer groups led and formed among good Catholics. this is an approved spiritual movement accepted by 3 popes, and discussed in depth on the proper forum, spirituality, if you would like to find out more.

the source is flawed, and the proposition on which the argument is flawed.

If you are going to speak of the movements’ early days why not tell the whole story of how the movement actually began? The involvement of charismatic protestants for instance, and how those Catholics who initially received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit at the very beginning actually asked a protestant minister to pray over them that they might so receive it. It might also be of interest that the people know of the intense dissatisfaction that some of those in the beginning had of the Catholic Church and how they were reaching out to the protestants in an attempt to find something that they thought was missing in the Catholic Church. You left those parts out. :tsktsk:

Leaving out some of the essential elements of an historical event can actually alter the opinion others have of the event. In something this important, I think it is necessary that people not in the movement need to know ALL of the details, not just the ones which support the fiction now being spread that the movement suddenly appeared within the Church with no outside prompting or influence and that is just plain wrong, because that is not the way it happened.

Not by a long shot.

 

[napoli426]

We have all we need in our church. We have the sacraments. We have the successor of St. Peter. The problem with the 20th and 21st Century ideology is that we think we know better than almost 2000 years of Church teaching. We somehow have the idea that no body had any brains before our times. If you need the Charismatic renewal to jump start your faith…I would suggest returning to the sacraments and especially to Eucharistic adoration…in fact spend an hour a day in front of our Lord…and you’ll find you don’t need any Charismatic nonsense…

 

[mantilla410]

Read the Book of Acts to know about the First Pentacost.

**The Charismatic Renewal is indeed Catholic. ** It has the approval of the Pope.

REALLY!!! Where is that approval? I want to see it.

PS: Don’t be afraid of Catholics using different techniques of prayer. As long as it is Jesus they believe in as Savior and God, they are doing nothing wrong. People who are trapped in legalism and rituals are afraid of anything unfamiliar to them because they do not understand the meaning of worshiping God in spirit and in truth.

I am not AFRAID of anything!!!:tsktsk: What I do not like is people trying to grab me in Mass, telling me that I am spiritually stunted because I don’t go around with my hands up in the air like I’m at a rock concert.

 

[Michael96]

Like any spiritual movement within the Church we can find testaments of good things and bad things to come from the CCR. Most of us don’t live at either extreme (either “the CCR is the only real way to worship” or “the CCR is not Catholic”) so most of us can appreicate what is good and simply not involve oursleves in things that we don’t see as good.

I don’t buy the “CCR is protestant” arguement - if we follow that we’d have to say bits of acts are protestant.

Keep an open mind about the benefits and potential problems and you’ll be OK.

 

[wisdomseeker]

The “Charismatic Catholic” movement is influenced by Protestantism. There is no other way of stating that. I was raised Protestant, I was raised by Protestant parents who attended a variety of Protestant Churches that used forms of “Charismatic” worship. Note: I have been to probably more than 50 Protestant Churches under my parents when I was younger. When I finally become a Catholic under my own pursuit for salvation (two years ago), I felt that I was returning to the roots of Christendom through the Church. Unfortunately, I did encounter at some Parishes the same form of Charismatic worship that I encountered at Pentecostal Churches.

Ladies and Gentlemen, you can say that the Charismatic Catholic Movement is worthwhile, and it may be endorsed by the papacy, but there is no denying the fact that the Charismatic form of worship is derived from the more Evangelical wings of protestantism. If the Church uses the ideas of protestantism within the Church, at least cultural traditions, then at least indirectly, we are recognizing the superiority of their traditions v.s ours. This, in my opinion, sows confusion and disorder within a Church that has already too many confused Catholics within it.

Some may say that it allows us to come closer to God and that is all that manners. Well, then under that pretext, we should confer with all the different schismatic sects within Christendom and ask them how they come closer to God, perhaps even with non-Christian religions. The precedent that is set by this movement is dangerous, and though I am a young college student that is full of hope and wonderment within my faith, I recognize the dangers that are inherent within the acts of validity towards schism, and this is something that we must avoid at all costs if we are to safeguard the Church that is the Church that Christ founded.

Well said. i never seen this group. but for what i read here about what they say it seems very clear to me that it is very protestant to me.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

don’t buy the “CCR is protestant” argument - if we follow that we’d have to say bits of acts are protestant.

We’d only have to say that if we didn’t understand Acts. You seem to think people here are saying that the gifts of the Holy Spirit themselves are intrinsically Protestant - is that so?

 

[Michael96]

We’d only have to say that if we didn’t understand Acts. You seem to think people here are saying that the gifts of the Holy Spirit themselves are intrinsically Protestant - is that so?

I’d only say that *some *people appear to think that seeking the gifts of the Holy Spirit is a “protestant” notion. And I think perhaps we would both correct them in that mistaken notion.

P.S. But I don’t have a problem with being “influenced” by protestants; at times protestants (such as Charles Wesley and Martin Luther King) have actually taught things that we’d all do well to be influenced by.

 

[bkovacs]

Sounds protestant to me. Like the pentalcostals. I wouldn’t consider it Catholic. You don’t see movements like this with the Orthodox Churches either.

 

[eichenb2]

The “Charismatic Catholic” movement is influenced by Protestantism. There is no other way of stating that. I was raised Protestant, I was raised by Protestant parents who attended a variety of Protestant Churches that used forms of “Charismatic” worship. Note: I have been to probably more than 50 Protestant Churches under my parents when I was younger. When I finally become a Catholic under my own pursuit for salvation (two years ago), I felt that I was returning to the roots of Christendom through the Church. Unfortunately, I did encounter at some Parishes the same form of Charismatic worship that I encountered at Pentecostal Churches.

Ladies and Gentlemen, you can say that the Charismatic Catholic Movement is worthwhile, and it may be endorsed by the papacy, but there is no denying the fact that the Charismatic form of worship is derived from the more Evangelical wings of protestantism. If the Church uses the ideas of protestantism within the Church, at least cultural traditions, then at least indirectly, we are recognizing the superiority of their traditions v.s ours. This, in my opinion, sows confusion and disorder within a Church that has already too many confused Catholics within it.

Some may say that it allows us to come closer to God and that is all that manners. Well, then under that pretext, we should confer with all the different schismatic sects within Christendom and ask them how they come closer to God, perhaps even with non-Christian religions. The precedent that is set by this movement is dangerous, and though I am a young college student that is full of hope and wonderment within my faith, I recognize the dangers that are inherent within the acts of validity towards schism, and this is something that we must avoid at all costs if we are to safeguard the Church that is the Church that Christ founded.

Protestantism :knight2:

 

[eichenb2]

We’d only have to say that if we didn’t understand Acts. You seem to think people here are saying that the gifts of the Holy Spirit themselves are intrinsically Protestant - is that so?

Gifts of Holy Spirit are Catholic, but not normative.

 

[santodomingo]

Check out this article: sspx.org/miscellaneous/catholic_charismatic_renewal.htm

I’m sure many people would like to reject this out of hand because it comes from the SSPX website, but at the very least it raises some valid concerns.

If you put aside all the arguments about “those people” being lead by the devil, it’s pretty straightforward. The key to the argument seems to be that, because the Charismatic movement sees renewal as taking place through a revival that began outside of the Church, the very existence of the movement suggests that the Catholic Church is not the unique ark of salvation posessing the fullness of truth.

It seems to me that a movement that attempts to renew the Church by drawing on the traditions already present within makes a whole lot more sense than any movement like the charismatic renewal, Zen rooms at monasteries, or other new devotions that suggests the key to renewal lies outside the Church.

But I have very little in the way of first hand experience with Charismatic Catholics, I am aware that SSPX is often too extreme for me, and I would be open to being shown something suggesting that I’ve missed the mark here.

I appreciate the misgivings surrounding the origins of the Charismatic Movement in the CC, but the second part of the article provided in the link is pure venom. The apparitions at Medjugorje are NOT forbidden by Rome. I know many people who have made a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, and they have nothing to do with the Charismatic Movement.

The writer seems bitter about the “success” of the Virgin Mary in bringing so many back to Christ through her apparitions. I have heard only words of wonder and joy about Medjugorje, and I plan to travel there with my family as soon as possible. There is nothing heretical about the apparitions, and to ridicule them and even claim that Satan is behind them, is very close to the sin against the Holy Spirit.

These people from SSPX ought to be careful. They talk a lot about how we are all going to Hell because we don´t follow their advice. Perhaps they´ll get a nasty surprise some day!

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

I appreciate the misgivings surrounding the origins of the Charismatic Movement in the CC, but the second part of the article provided in the link is pure venom. The apparitions at Medjugorje are NOT forbidden by Rome. I know many people who have made a pilgrimage to Medjugorje, and they have nothing to do with the Charismatic Movement.

The writer seems bitter about the “success” of the Virgin Mary in bringing so many back to Christ through her apparitions. I have heard only words of wonder and joy about Medjugorje, and I plan to travel there with my family as soon as possible. There is nothing heretical about the apparitions, and to ridicule them and even claim that Satan is behind them, is very close to the sin against the Holy Spirit.

These people from SSPX ought to be careful. They talk a lot about how we are all going to Hell because we don´t follow their advice. Perhaps they´ll get a nasty surprise some day!

M is a forbidden subject here and it’s definitely a condemned apparition. The local bishop is the Church and both local bishops, since the very beginning, have found ‘nothing supernatural occurring’ and have released very strong statements condemning the ridiculous dishonesty and disobedience by the ‘seers’ and their handlers. Then there’s the false prophecies, heterodox messages, the fact that a priest central to the whole thing and defended by the ‘gospa’ has been censured by the Vatican as a fraud, etc., etc., etc.

Like I said, though, forbidden topic.

 

[Paul_Folbrecht]

I’d only say that *some *people appear to think that seeking the gifts of the Holy Spirit is a “protestant” notion. And I think perhaps we would both correct them in that mistaken notion.

P.S. But I don’t have a problem with being “influenced” by protestants; at times protestants (such as Charles Wesley and Martin Luther King) have actually taught things that we’d all do well to be influenced by.

It would be an irrational, extremist position to imply that no Protestant person has anything to offer of value (spiritually or otherwise). I don’t think that’s what’s being said here.

I also don’t know any informed and properly catechized Catholics who would read Acts and think of it as ‘Protestant’ because there was speaking in tongues. That strikes me as rather silly.

What’s Protestant is this modern-day notion that the Sacraments are, pretty much, ‘not enough’, or not the centrality of the faith life, that the primary source of Truth is one’s personal (emotional) experiences, that being a part of the visible Church that Christ founded is not too important, etc.

Those things are Protestant in the bad sense.

 

[Prometheum_x]

Gifts of Holy Spirit are Catholic, but not normative.

“To each individual the manifestation of the Spirit is given for some benefit” (1 Cor 12:7)

“To each individual” sounds like it is establishing a norm.

“Pursue love, but strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, above all that you may prophesy” (1 Cor 14:1)

St. Paul encourages the Corinithians to “strive eagerly” for spiritual gifts. Why, unless there was some reasonable expectation of receiving them?