Is there such a thing as "Baptism of the Holy Spirit"

[Joysong]

I am asking whether the term should be used “Baptism OF the Holy Spirit” in Catholic circles. There are other threads talking about “Baptism WITH the Holy Spirit”, but I am not asking about that.
It is the so called “Baptism” that is an emotional or sensory experience. I know that it is not real Baptism, but is it a term that should even be used because of confusing the issue???

You are right that it can be confusing, but those within the charismatic circles understand what is taking place and have coined that terminology to describe it. Those who are not in the movement who hear this wording often misapply their reason to what they don’t understand.

It might be good to look at Acts 10:44-48. While Peter was speaking to a gentile household, the Holy Spirit came upon those present with evidence of praising God and speaking in tongues. Peter then recognized that these foreigners had been blessed by God and “ordered them to be baptized.” You see then, that in spite of having received an anointing of the Holy Spirit, the sacramental baptism was still performed afterwards.

Elsewhere in scripture, we find that Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out unclean spirits and to heal the sick - a power usually recognized as a manifestion of the Holy Spirit. (Mt. 10:1)
After the Resurrection, Jesus spoke to them again and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit …” (Jn. 20:22)

Note well, that these initial gifts of the Holy Spirit were not the actual outpouring these men received at Pentecost. Who would deny that the gift of the Spirit had been given to them in all three occasions? We believe there are sacramental gifts of confirmation and baptism, but there are other gifts of the Spirit that come independently of either. None of us can say to God, you did it wrong! My reason tells me so.

I hope this helps.

 

[steve99]

Outstanding:thumbsup: , point me to the references in the Catechism that refer to this release of the Holy Spirit or the “making up” of what we lacked at Conformation.

I’ll point you to scripture.

Firstly though the Catechism:
****1302 ****It is evident from its celebration that the effect of the sacrament of Confirmation is the special outpouring of the Holy Spirit as once granted to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.

So what happened at the day of Pentecost?

****When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability.(****Acts 2:1-4)

And what is that special out pouring?
“But Peter, standing with the eleven, raised his voice and addressed them, “Men of Judea and all who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and listen to what I say. Indeed, these are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only nine o’clock in the morning. No, this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel:
‘In the last days it will be, God declares,
**** that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh,’****
(Acts 2:14-17)

And what should be the result of this special outpouring?
In the last days it will be, God declares,
**** that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh,****
**** and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,****
**** and your young men shall see visions,****
**** and your old men shall dream dreams.****
**** Even upon my slaves, both men and women,****
**** in those days I will pour out my Spirit;****
**** and they shall prophesy.****
(Acts 2:17-18)

contd…

 

[steve99]

contd… from above

So at Confirmation do we hear speaking in tongues? Do we hear prophecy? Do young men have visions?

It wasn’t just on Pentecost day that this pouring out of the Spirit had visible effects.

****“While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God.” ****(Acts 10:44-45)

****“****When Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied” (Acts 19:6)

Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. The two went down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit (for as yet the Spirit had not come upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus). Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14-17)

Now we are not told explicitly that anything visible occurred, but Simon was so impressed by the result that he wanted to buy the power that the Apostles had

“Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, saying, “Give me also this power so that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 8:18-19)

 

[Deidre]

I’m positive that there must be something in the Churches teaching that supports the Charismatic view that the alleged baptism of the Holy Spirit or with the Holy Spirit or however they word it, separate from the sacraments, leads to an increase of grace. I am waiting for one of the Charismatic supporters here to point that out to me. I would love to read it.

CCC
2003 Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” "benefit."53 Whatever their character - sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues - charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.54

CCC
2004 Among the special graces ought to be mentioned the graces of state that accompany the exercise of the responsibilities of the Christian life and of the ministries within the Church:

 

[cpayne]

Thanks, Deidre–I didn’t have time to look it up.

 

[VociMike]

It just occurs to me (maybe I’m slow) that the word “baptism” has a very particular meaning attached to it in Catholic theology. It is very much a one-time act, and a permanent, objective life-changing act. So if the term “baptism of/in/with the Holy Spirit” is going to be used, then it should also represent a one-time permanent, objective life-changing act. Is that the way it is used?

I myself don’t see the granting of special graces to correspond to this understanding. Comments?

 

[cpayne]

It just occurs to me (maybe I’m slow) that the word “baptism” has a very particular meaning attached to it in Catholic theology. It is very much a one-time act, and a permanent, objective life-changing act. So if the term “baptism of/in/with the Holy Spirit” is going to be used, then it should also represent a one-time permanent, objective life-changing act. Is that the way it is used?

I myself don’t see the granting of special graces to correspond to this understanding. Comments?

Although the term “baptism” is commonly used in this way by Pentecostals, I don’t much like it either. “Infilling” (infilling of the Holy Spirit) is also commonly used and seems more descriptive, also less sacramental in nature. Most Christians believe in a sort of infilling of the Holy Spirit–Pentecostals specifically attach speaking in tongues with it.

 

[steve99]

Sometimes the Sacrament of Confirmation is called the sacrament of service – where we are empowered to serve. But all too often it is known as the sacrament of exit from the church. Soon after receiving it teenagers leave the Church. Something has gone wrong.

Possibly it is because teenagers are Confirmed too young, before they have a mature faith and a mature understanding, and are ready to fully commit themselves to Christ.

Baptism is that opportunity that perhaps was lacking at Confirmation

We say we receive the Holy Spirit, but where have we put him? Locked away in a back room in our lives? We know where he is if we need him. That is why Baptism of the Holy Spirit is sometimes called Release of the Holy Spirit. We let him out to run free in our lives.

Someone said the question should not be “Have we got the Holy Spirit”, but “Has the Holy Spirit got us?”

 

[palmas85]

at Confirmation do we hear speaking in tongues? Do we hear prophecy? Do young men have visions?

 ** Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God.” **/

When Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied”

** heard that ** had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. The two went down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit (for as yet the Spirit had not come upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus). Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit (Acts

Outstanding references:thumbsup:

Unfortunately, none of them address the issue I brought up. I don’t doubt the existence of charisms or the ability of the Holy Spirit to bestow them. I doubt that the Charismatic renewal is an effective or even valid way to obtain them, or if they are even necessary for everyone to obtain in order to obtain salvation.

Point me to a reference or references in the theology of the Catholic Church or in scripture that even remotely indicates that the events of the day of Pentecost will be repeated exactly as they occurred on that day and that we as Christians are required to experience them… By what you folks are inferring, the sacrament of Confirmation DOES NOT HAVE the following:

1 speaking in tongues
2 prophecies
3 visions
etc.

And therefore the Sacrament of Conformation is defective in form and incomplete in nature. That sounds like heresy to me, but I may be wrong.,

As I said I don’t doubt the validity of charisms at all. Nor do I doubt the ability of the Holy Ghost to impart these charisms to whomsoever He pleases. Throughout history it has been done and done often. But a service or a Mass is not necessary for them to be bestowed and may not even be wise. Remember that demons can and do answer charismatic calls and pleas for further sanctification. Discernment might not always be what we think it is. Of course, I doubt that some, perhaps many Catholic charismatics even believe in the existance of demons so it could be a moot point.

Morever, the current Charismatic renewal grew solely out of protestant pentecostal theology which is outside of Catholic theology in scope. They believe by and large, and I’m not saying that Catholic charismatics believe so, that a second birth and baptism in the Holy Spirit is necessary for salvation. I don’t think that can be applied to Catholic theology in quite those terms…

I’ve heard others claim that many of todays Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation are defective because they were bestowed upon those with limited or no understanding of what the sacraments were and that therefore the Charismatic renewal is ready and able to pick up the slack so to speak and correct tjese defects of the Sacraments.

I don’t believe that. I’m sorry but I can find no real justification for the movement. Taken to its extreme, I believe it could be harmful to the unity of the Church by setting aside a spiritual elite, the charismatics, amongst the faithful. Remember the Gnostics by and large were within the individual churches. They worshipped alongside everyone else, received the same sacraments and partook of the same communion, they but believed that they had truer and more complete understanding of the sacraments and of the faith. I see many Charismatics doing exactly the same today.

But as I have been told by many Charismatics in the past, I am no doubt uncircumsized of heart and ears and thus unworthy and quite possibly doomed for eternity.:bigyikes:

Besides I am well known as being mean spirited, uncharitable and possessed of a pre-Vatican II mentality.

 

[cpayne]

Palmas85: Even though it may not appear so, I actually agree with much of what you have written. I want to disagree with one point, however (the same point I disagreed with earlier when someone else said much the same thing): Pentecostals / Charismatics do NOT (that I have ever heard) believe that the Pentecostal experience is necessary for salvation. In fact, as I understand it, it has little or nothing to do with salvation at all.

 

[palmas85]

Palmas85: Even though it may not appear so, I actually agree with much of what you have written. I want to disagree with one point, however (the same point I disagreed with earlier when someone else said much the same thing): Pentecostals / Charismatics do NOT (that I have ever heard) believe that the Pentecostal experience is necessary for salvation. In fact, as I understand it, it has little or nothing to do with salvation at all.

I agree with you there.

 

[steve99]

Perhaps I should have phrased some points I made a little more carefully.

Certainly I did not mean to imply that Confirmation was defective in that it did not bestow the graces and seal of the Holy Spirit appropriate to the sacrament, but perhaps there is some shortfall in the preparation & expectations of its effect

I quoted the Catechism:
1302 It is evident from its celebration that the effect of the sacrament of Confirmation is the special outpouring of the Holy Spirit as once granted to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.

Does Confirmation usually look like an outpouring, or an outdribbling?

I’m not denying we receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, but then we receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism too. So why again at Confirmation? Have we lost him in the meantime?

However this thread is about the Baptism in the Holy Spirit so perhaps I’m getting sidetracked and I’d like to go back to that.

For too many Catholics, especially cradle Catholics (here comes wild generalisation) their spiritual life consists of
Childhood – Baptism & Confirmation
Adulthood – Mass on (most) Sundays + (optional) good works such as church cleaning or gardening
Death – heaven (possibly via Purgatory).

But this is not enough. At some time in our lives we need a deep conversion of heart, a commitment to Jesus, a handing over of our lives to him. We will probably never get to 100% but at some point we need to cross a threshold, a tipping point, where give more of our lives to Jesus than we hold back. For converts such a conversion will normally precede Baptism & Confirmation (as at Pentecost & Acts 8). But for most Catholics this will be sometime in adulthood (if at all). There will be many reasons why people come to this conversion and various triggers, but such courses as “Life In The Spirit Seminars” and the Cursillo 3 days provide the teaching, the stimulus and the time for that reflection needed for that conversion of heart & commitment.

The booklet that accompanies the Life In The Spirit Seminars that I am familiar with, asks the participants to ask for that change of heart and for the power to do it. The Seminars help participants to realise that request, and particularly the *Baptism in the Holy Spirit *session seems to give them that infilling that they need.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The term, “Baptism of the Holy Spirit,” doesn’t mean reception of the Holy Spirit, who is received at Baptism and Confirmation, but rather, the manifestation of the Holy Spirit to the person of faith.

It happened to me, and I have no doubt about it.

Jim

 

[palmas85]

Perhaps I should have phrased some points I made a little more carefully.

Certainly I did not mean to imply that Confirmation was defective in that it did not bestow the graces and seal of the Holy Spirit appropriate to the sacrament, but perhaps there is some shortfall in the preparation & expectations of its effect

I quoted the Catechism:
1302 It is evident from its celebration that the effect of the sacrament of Confirmation is the special outpouring of the Holy Spirit as once granted to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.

Does Confirmation usually look like an outpouring, or an outdribbling?

I’m not denying we receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, but then we receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism too. So why again at Confirmation? Have we lost him in the meantime?

However this thread is about the Baptism in the Holy Spirit so perhaps I’m getting sidetracked and I’d like to go back to that.

For too many Catholics, especially cradle Catholics (here comes wild generalisation) their spiritual life consists of
Childhood – Baptism & Confirmation
Adulthood – Mass on (most) Sundays + (optional) good works such as church cleaning or gardening
Death – heaven (possibly via Purgatory).

But this is not enough. At some time in our lives we need a deep conversion of heart, a commitment to Jesus, a handing over of our lives to him. We will probably never get to 100% but at some point we need to cross a threshold, a tipping point, where give more of our lives to Jesus than we hold back. For converts such a conversion will normally precede Baptism & Confirmation (as at Pentecost & Acts 8). But for most Catholics this will be sometime in adulthood (if at all). There will be many reasons why people come to this conversion and various triggers, but such courses as “Life In The Spirit Seminars” and the Cursillo 3 days provide the teaching, the stimulus and the time for that reflection needed for that conversion of heart & commitment.

The booklet that accompanies the Life In The Spirit Seminars that I am familiar with, asks the participants to ask for that change of heart and for the power to do it. The Seminars help participants to realise that request, and particularly the *Baptism in the Holy Spirit *session seems to give them that infilling that they need.

While it may not have been what you intended to portray it is exactly what you did portray. And morever, it is pretty close to what many charismatics believe which is that by virtue of this second more meaningful baptism, that of the spirit, they have achieved a somewhat higher spiritual status than the rest of us.

I actually did some research into Pentecostal beliefs and by and large they do believe that the rebirth or the second baptism, that of the Holy Spirit is indeed necessary and totally scripturall in nature. They maintain that the baptism by water is one event and the baptism of the Holy Spirit a separate event and must be manifested in some way. They do not have the same concept of Baptism that Catholics do in that to them it is a mere symbolic entry into the church although some do attach a tad more meaning to it.

I agree that many Catholics never achieve more than a rudimentary comprehension and actualization of their faith, but where I disagree is that the Charismatic renewal is the most effective place to achieve it, as by its very nature it is open to misuse, fraud and demonic intervention.

Also your statements about baptism and confirmation show a basic misunderstanding of Catholic theology and teaching, which sad to say is very prevalent these days and also explains why Catholics today are in many cases easy prey so to speak for heretical causes and movements both within and outside the Church.

And before I get bashed, I’m not alleging that the Charismatic renewal is and of itself is heretical. But if the majority of its followers do believe that the Sacraments are defective in form and somehow ineffective in the transmission of grace, as the OP here apparently does, then their beliefs are indeed heretical.

 

[Deidre]

Palmas85: Even though it may not appear so, I actually agree with much of what you have written. I want to disagree with one point, however (the same point I disagreed with earlier when someone else said much the same thing): Pentecostals / Charismatics do NOT (that I have ever heard) believe that the Pentecostal experience is necessary for salvation. In fact, as I understand it, it has little or nothing to do with salvation at all.

I *have* heard a group of Pentecostals say that they believed that if you didn't speak in tongues, you didn't have the Holy Spirit in you.:shrug: 
 
But like you, I have *never* heard a Catholic Charismatic claim that a person's salvation was dependent on having the charisms.  Nor have I ever heard of a Catholic Charismatic feeling they were among the spiritual elite for having been gifted with these charisms.  I'm not saying there aren't Charismatics who don't feel that way.  I've just never known any myself.  And if some Charismatics *do* feel that way, they aren't respresentative of the majority and they certainly don't represent what the church teaches.

I believe that the Holy Spirit can bestow these gifts on anyone He chooses in any situation He chooses.  I believe they can come through the Sacraments or apart from the Sacraments.

Most Charismatics I know experienced a deep spiritual yearning after they received the gifts of tongues or resting in the Spirit.  However, I also recognize the fact that many people are blessed to have this spiritual yearning *without* experiencing the charisms.  

And unfortunately, likewise, there are both Charismatics who never move past the 'experience of tongues' to grow spiritually and non-Charismatics who never move past the sacraments to respond to God's grace and grow spiritually.

 

[steve99]

While it may not have been what you intended to portray it is exactly what you did portray.

Where?

And morever, it is pretty close to what many charismatics believe which is that by virtue of this second more meaningful baptism, that of the spirit, they have achieved a somewhat higher spiritual status than the rest of us.

I don’t know of any Catholic Charismatics that do this.

I actually did some research into Pentecostal beliefs and by and large they do believe that the rebirth or the second baptism, that of the Holy Spirit is indeed necessary and totally scripturall in nature. They maintain that the baptism by water is one event and the baptism of the Holy Spirit a separate event and must be manifested in some way. They do not have the same concept of Baptism that Catholics do in that to them it is a mere symbolic entry into the church although some do attach a tad more meaning to it.

Quite so but that does not apply to Catholic Charismatics

I agree that many Catholics never achieve more than a rudimentary comprehension and actualization of their faith, but where I disagree is that the Charismatic renewal is the most effective place to achieve it, as by its very nature it is open to misuse, fraud and demonic intervention.

Nowhere did I say that it is the most effective way of achieving more than a rudimentary actualization of their faith. And I think your final comment is just a cheap jibe. Many things are open to misuse, fraud and demonic intervention but you need to provide some evidence that it is prevelant before slinging mud around like that.

Also your statements about baptism and confirmation show a basic misunderstanding of Catholic theology and teaching, which sad to say is very prevalent these days and also explains why Catholics today are in many cases easy prey so to speak for heretical causes and movements both within and outside the Church.

Where?
If you mean "Baptism is that opportunity that perhaps was lacking at Confirmation” that was a mistyping it should have said “Baptism In The Holy Spirit……”

If you mean “I*’m not denying we receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, but then we receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism too. So why again at Confirmation? Have we lost him in the meantime?*” I was being provocative – obviously not a good move when replying to you.

I take a deep exception to your accusations here that I have a basic misunderstanding of Catholic Theology and teaching.

And before I get bashed, I’m not alleging that the Charismatic renewal is and of itself is heretical. But if the majority of its followers do believe that the Sacraments are defective in form and somehow ineffective in the transmission of grace, as the OP here apparently does, then their beliefs are indeed heretical.

But the majority of it’s believers don’t believe that. Again you are just mud slinging.

 

[palmas85]

Where?

I don’t know of any Catholic Charismatics that do this.

Quite so but that does not apply to Catholic Charismatics

Nowhere did I say that it is the most effective way of achieving more than a rudimentary actualization of their faith. And I think your final comment is just a cheap jibe. Many things are open to misuse, fraud and demonic intervention but you need to provide some evidence that it is prevelant before slinging mud around like that.

Where?
If you mean "Baptism is that opportunity that perhaps was lacking at Confirmation” that was a mistyping it should have said “Baptism In The Holy Spirit……”

If you mean “I*’m not denying we receive the Holy Spirit at Confirmation, but then we receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism too. So why again at Confirmation? Have we lost him in the meantime?*” I was being provocative – obviously not a good move when replying to you.

I take a deep exception to your accusations here that I have a basic misunderstanding of Catholic Theology and teaching.

But the majority of it’s believers don’t believe that. Again you are just mud slinging.

Not mud slinging at all my friend. Just stating the facts as you portrayed them. You see, I happen to believe in the Catholic faith 100%. Nowhere in the catechism or in Catholic theology is the second baptism, that of the Holy Spirit alluded to. It is not one of the sacraments, not necessary in the scheme of things for salvation and I will say again open to much abuse. Remember the Montanist heresy? probably not but I will tell you.

It revolved around charismatic actions, speech, prophecy healing etc. It included such great things as Christ being cursed and the way of salvation ridiculed. It didn’t start that way, no it started off faitly orthodox and morphed into Montanus claiming to be the Son of Man prophesized The followers started to believe that they were specially blessed, more in tune with the Holy Spirit and spiritually more aware than non members. Just the same as do many charismatics both Catholic and otherwise. Not all by any means, but a lot. Enough to make a difference in the way that the movement is viewed by both Catholics and Protestants, not off of whom accept it either.

Sorry, but that is the truth.

 

[kellyanne]

Palmas,

It has been quite obvious from the get-go that you abhor charismatics and have no desire to inquire about it, only to condemn it. You never miss a thread where it is being discussed, nor an opportunity to inject the OLD, OLD argument on Montanism, which has absolutely no similarity. It is not only a straw man argument but it is showing your stripes for what they are. How did you say it? Mean-spirited? Why do you post? To condemn your brothers in Christ? To provoke argument? To get another thread closed so folks cannot have a decent discussion?

 

[Walking_Home]

Not mud slinging at all my friend. Just stating the facts as you portrayed them. You see, I happen to believe in the Catholic faith 100%. Nowhere in the catechism or in Catholic theology is the second baptism, that of the Holy Spirit alluded to. It is not one of the sacraments, not necessary in the scheme of things for salvation and I will say again open to much abuse. Remember the Montanist heresy? probably not but I will tell you.

It revolved around charismatic actions, speech, prophecy healing etc. It included such great things as Christ being cursed and the way of salvation ridiculed. It didn’t start that way, no it started off faitly orthodox and morphed into Montanus claiming to be the Son of Man prophesized The followers started to believe that they were specially blessed, more in tune with the Holy Spirit and spiritually more aware than non members. Just the same as do many charismatics both Catholic and otherwise. Not all by any means, but a lot. Enough to make a difference in the way that the movement is viewed by both Catholics and Protestants, not off of whom accept it either.
Sorry, but that is the truth.

---

They do sort of give that impression.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Palmas,

It has been quite obvious from the get-go that you abhor charismatics and have no desire to inquire about it, only to condemn it. You never miss a thread where it is being discussed, nor an opportunity to inject the OLD, OLD argument on Montanism, which has absolutely no similarity. It is not only a straw man argument but it is showing your stripes for what they are. How did you say it? Mean-spirited? Why do you post? To condemn your brothers in Christ? To provoke argument? To get another thread closed so folks cannot have a decent discussion?

For someone who only joined the forums on May 4th, you know an awful lot about what Palmas’ preferences are. You remind me very much of someone else here.