Is this an almost trueish understanding?

[Godlovestrength]

I’d probably just point back to my first reply.

I also like to add another thing - If you see others talk not too nice about the movement, you could ask if some of them have any negative experiences about the movement (not about what they believe about the movement). This way, you might bring this concern to your Charismatic group at your parish and have some good discussion in order to have unity.

For those who do not believe in the movement, I wouldn’t worry much about it. Pray for them as you pray for others.

Personally, I enjoy the group at my parish but not 2 other groups at different parishes where lots of judgments and pride - this problem is due to the fact they are new and do not have a good spiritual direction or they do not believe they should listen to anybody besides “God tell me this, and that is all truth and I would not believe advices from people who don’t speak in tongue”. Those who try to give advice had been considered as against them.

One of the 2 groups finally learns that they need to listen to their own pastor and start to love to study bible with folks who don’t speak in tongue. The other group does not only like to join the Bible study group with others, they also consider the Bible group having something against them.

The problems mentioned above are only examples; there are more problems. This weakens the unity of the 2 parishes.

The group at my parish is awesome and I go there every Thursday.

I’m glad I asked this question, I now have a different understanding of how you were relating.
Thank you.

I have in the past had the same problems and I don’t think that this will pass, there will always (until Jesus comes again) be those who believe that they have the truth ( but don"t) and will not accept advice or open positive criticissim, or even that they are not in tune with biblical teaching, (catholic or other wise).

This is all a part of the human pain Jesus came to suffer for. But Jesus also tells that the “fires of hell will not relinquish the strength of the church”.

Thank you water
Godbless

 

[Godlovestrength]

Godlovestrength,

It sounds to me like you are doing the best that is possible. There is really no other Christian way to handle this.

Perhaps, when you hear someone bashing, you could sincerely smile (not sarcastically) and say “We should love and pray for all of our brothers and sisters especially if we think they are being mislead, not judge them.”

I am sorry you lost your friends to cancer but you will see them again.

Love,
Sarah

Thanks Sarah I never thought of this in a bad way, only that I must be doing something wright for satan to want to destroy me.
That alone built me to carry on. The prayers I put time into were also strengthening, and also the fact that Ihad a very strong relationship with St Therese that at times I could feel her jpresence guiding me. Our Lord also gave me a good holy friend to relate to who I worked with.

I am not sorry about my friends having gone to heaven to me that is the best I could ever offer a person. And to know that some people I suffered and prayed for are in heaven,well! even my daughter who was murdered , my knowing that she is in heaven. The greatest gift I could ever have in a human sence is to have brought a child up to take Jesus as her Lord, and for me to know that 10 days befor her life was taken she went forward to give her life to Jesus. That is the best I could ever do, no matter what I may go through, the end product has to be Jesus.
AMEN AMEN AMEN,

Today Ihad the beauty of sharing with my work mate who is a non practicing catholic. He asked questions so I asked him what his god is? He said he didn’t have one. I told him that we all have a god and that he might think of god as being a “motivator” now what motivaed him in his life, or, what did he love and he told me his car. I told him to take that away and what would he have? Almost nothing he said.
I told him that my motivator is “Love” now could he take it away and what would I have left? You can"t because it"s inside of you. This “love” is called Jesus and He never leaves me or let’s me down.
So! a little soil turning and seed sowiing.
He and Iget on very well though.

Godbless

 

[water]

I have in the past had the same problems and I don’t think that this will pass, there will always (until Jesus comes again) be those who believe that they have the truth ( but don"t) and will not accept advice or open positive criticissim, or even that they are not in tune with biblical teaching, (catholic or other wise).

This is all a part of the human pain Jesus came to suffer for. But Jesus also tells that the “fires of hell will not relinquish the strength of the church”.

I’ve realized that there are always different types of people like that in any group. However, when a leader of group is wrong, it is very dangerous.

 

[Godlovestrength]

I’ve realized that there are always different types of people like that in any group. However, when a leader of group is wrong, it is very dangerous.

I understand where you are comming from and agree. I have had to tell some people (a long time ago) that they would leave the catholic church and they were named some 4 months before they left. One was my wife sadly to say. One of the women who led them away had a very evil spirit in her. I told my wife what was happening when the Holy Spirit told me, but she still left.
However i always say that it is not the Catholic charismatic renewal that is wrong but the person who would not listen who is out of line.
I believe that this is where the unity between the leaders and the priest and leaders having the strength to use scripture to keep the group in line and leadership in line is imperitive.

Godbless.

 

[water]

I believe that this is where the unity between the leaders and the priest and leaders having the strength to use scripture to keep the group in line and leadership in line is imperitive.

Godbless.

Yes, it is. I agreed.

 

[Coreopisis]

I’ve realized that there are always different types of people like that in any group. However, when a leader of group is wrong, it is very dangerous.

Exactly.

In the case of the Charasmatic Renewal there are multiple groups in the overall organization so even if there are a few leaders of a few groups who are wrong it isn’t fair or appropriate to condemn the entire organization and call it a bad movement. (I am not saying that you are I am just speaking generally.)

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Church will always have her misguided zealots, who will attack what they don’t see as purely in accord with Catholic tradition.

All the saints went through persecution from fellow Catholics.

St. John of the Cross was thrown in prison by his own religious order, for his teachings on spirituality. St. Teresa would’ve suffered the same, had the writings of women been published at that time.

St. Bernadette was grilled by the Church as well as her novice mistress, who was perhaps mentally ill.

I just happened to read a piece from St. Augustine’s writing on Monasticism, that seems appropriate here.

They were many who did not become Christians, but, finding themselves Christians, remained so. They
were too strongly impressed by Christianity to leave it, and too little impressed to be Christian indeed. Monasticism, page 12.

Most people as St Augustine describes above, leave the Church, where as there are others, in their attempt to make themselves better Catholics, become tyrants to those who don’t follow their ideal of religious sanctity. They are culturally Catholic, but they have never experience a conversion of heart, which is why contemplative prayer is something to be mistrusted.

In all, I’m beginning to realize that we have to offer up the persecution we receive from such souls and pray for them.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

If she were alive today I think St Teresa of Avila might be considered fundamentalist by some in todays’ Church just because she was so adamantly orthodox in her obedience to Church teachings. But I doubt she would comprehend what happens in a Charismatic meeting.

Actually I don’t think she’d be considered a fundamentalist by fundamentalist, being, those of us who follow her and St. John of the Cross’s teaching on contemplative prayer, are usually considered as liberals by conservatives fundamentalist.

Also, in their day, many in the Church opposed them. St. John of the Cross, was thrown into prison by his own Carmelite order.

That all being said, conservative and liberal are political labels, and generally not accurate when attaching them to people .

Mother Teresa or Pope John Paul II, were not considered conservative fundamentalist, but rather, holy persons. So, I think the same would be true if St. Teresa were here today.

Jim

 

[fhansen]

Actually I don’t think she’d be considered a fundamentalist by fundamentalist, being, those of us who follow her and St. John of the Cross’s teaching on contemplative prayer, are usually considered as liberals by conservatives fundamentalist.

Also, in their day, many in the Church opposed them. St. John of the Cross, was thrown into prison by his own Carmelite order.

That all being said, conservative and liberal are political labels, and generally not accurate when attaching them to people .

Mother Teresa or Pope John Paul II, were not considered conservative fundamentalist, but rather, holy persons. So, I think the same would be true if St. Teresa were here today.
Jim

St. Teresa of Avila wasn’t a fundamentalist but what fundamentalist Christians have in common with Catholics like her and John Paul is a non-compromising adherence to Christian basics -in their case Catholic teachings, of course-and a rejection of modernism (more a matter for JP). Even when I was immersed in a semi-fundamentalist mentality, I was always impressed with the strong faith in Christian basics which I heard expressed by John Paul II, while still being such an innovative thinker. I understand it now. At any rate, one of the posters had mentioned that Charismatics were often branded as fundamentalists and when another poster compared St Teresa to Charismatics, my response was that she would’ve been closer in some ways to a fundamentalist than to a Charismatic as I believe the Charismatic experience to be fundamentally-couldn’t resist- different from the contemplative one.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

fhansen,
actually St. Teresa’s teaching were in opposition of Church teaching of her time. Mental prayer was considered dangerous by many of the clergy of her time.

It was only over time, that both her’s and St. John of the Cross’s teachings were understood and fully accepted. What they taught was part of the ancient traditions of the Church, but during her time, which was during the Reformation and the Spanish Inquisition, they were new and unknown by even the clergy.

Jim

 

[fhansen]

fhansen,
actually St. Teresa’s teaching were in opposition of Church teaching of her time. Mental prayer was considered dangerous by many of the clergy of her time.

It was only over time, that both her’s and St. John of the Cross’s teachings were understood and fully accepted. What they taught was part of the ancient traditions of the Church, but during her time, which was during the Reformation and the Spanish Inquisition, they were new and unknown by even the clergy.

Jim

I understand that many of her contemporaries were not at all comfortable with an “upstart” telling them what God was all about by way of her direct experiences. People today, whether out of jealosy or self-righteousness or fear or healthy scepticism, often react the same way. But she frequently consulted with “learned men” to learn more herself and to ensure that her experiences never conflicted with the teachings of the Church. I think she instinctively understood what the Church teaches, that private revelation can in no way alter the deposit of faith which was once for all handed down to us at the time of the NT Church. Her revelations added a rich wealth of knowledge, however, about the nature of God, His love for us and desire for us to know Him personally, His ways of working within us as individuals, the contemplative approach to seeking Him, and in general, a taste of what being in His presence might be like. While we do need to be discerning about private revelations, I think there’s a tendency with some to think that they’re all phony or demonic and that God wouldn’t “do that” or to forget that our religion is pointing us to something much greater and less conceivable than anything we could imagine or experience in this life.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

fhansen

But she frequently consulted with “learned men” to learn more herself and to ensure that her experiences never conflicted with the teachings of the Church.

Actually it was she who taught “learned men,” John of the Cross in particular.

She followed God’s will, which was her only will.

Jim

 

[fhansen]

fhansen

Actually it was she who taught “learned men,” John of the Cross in particular.

She followed God’s will, which was her only will.

Jim

I agree she always followed Gods’ will but she didn’t distinguish it from the Churchs’ will-which was extremely important to her. She had to act sometimes in defiance of her spiritual guides but not of the teachings of the Church. I remember her saying that she had nothing to fear from the Inquisitor because she was in agreement with the Church and nothing she ever said or did should be otherwise. She was extremely humble and knew that her experiences didn’t put her above the law.

God gave her much knowledge and understanding but I’m not aware that every last detail of the faith was revealed to her during her various unions with Him-or if that was necessarily the intent anyway. She consulted learned men for better theological understanding or to check herself against their knowledge. She was, in any case, given many specific works to do which she carried out against all odds. I think maybe we’re off-topic BTW.

 

[fhansen]

It was only over time, that both her’s and St. John of the Cross’s teachings were understood and fully accepted. What they taught was part of the ancient traditions of the Church, but during her time, which was during the Reformation and the Spanish Inquisition, they were new and unknown by even the clergy.

Jim

Maybe we’re talking about different things-I know you’re knowledgeable about the mystics. The “ancient traditions” you mention- these are more related to mysticism and prayer rather than theology or doctrine?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Maybe we’re talking about different things-I know you’re knowledgeable about the mystics. The “ancient traditions” you mention- these are more related to mysticism and prayer rather than theology or doctrine?

I’m talking in the context of the time period of when St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross, lived. What they taught, was not accepted by the Church officials around them and were seen as dangerous and against Church doctrine. It wasn’t until they were gone, that their writings were looked at and accepted as profound, by the hierarchy of the Church.

Don’t forget, communication between Rome and the rest of the Catholic world, was very slow. Often, corrupt local Bishops acted before the Pope could intervene on behalf of the persecuted. St. Joan of Arc is an example.

In today’s world, communication is faster, but even then, the Church responds very slowly and cautiously.

I think if St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross were alive today, they would not be persecuted by what is politically labeled, “liberals,” but rather, by “conservatives.” Why would things be any different today than they were over the course of history ? People with open minds and open hearts will be opened to others, where as people with rigid adherence to their interpretation of doctrine, will be intolerant.

Jim

 

[fhansen]

I think if St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross were alive today, they would not be persecuted by what is politically labeled, “liberals,” but rather, by “conservatives.” Why would things be any different today than they were over the course of history ? People with open minds and open hearts will be opened to others, where as people with rigid adherence to their interpretation of doctrine, will be intolerant.

Jim

Thank you
I think she may have been persecuted by both if she lived today. She seemed to be a unique combination of free spirit and obedient believer. The “conservatives” would’ve persecuted her for daring to think she could approach God in such an intimate and direct manner-and tell them anything about Him- while todays’ “liberals”, who would’ve been open to her path, might ask why it was so important for her to remain subject to doctrine and if she really needed to be so humble and self-deprecating. She doesn’t come across as a maverick as, say, Thomas Merton probably was, but in any case always stayed true to the will of her Beloved as He made it known- in spite of the odds. I guess its one thing to pray to God but it can be an entirely different-and often difficult -path when He actually answers.

 

[Godlovestrength]

fhansen

Actually it was she who taught “learned men,” John of the Cross in particular. She followed God’s will, which was her only will.

I didn’t know that Jim very interesting if one were to look deeply into her having been the teacher.
The other part you mention about “God’s will” yes, but only when the spirit entered her for Him to take over completly. However just imagin that happening to one of us.
Godbless

 

[JimR-OCDS]

JimR-OCDS;3571462:

fhansen

Actually it was she who taught “learned men,” John of the Cross in particular. She followed God’s will, which was her only will.

I didn’t know that Jim very interesting if one were to look deeply into her having been the teacher.
The other part you mention about “God’s will” yes, but only when the spirit entered her for Him to take over completly. However just imagin that happening to one of us.
Godbless

Perhaps, “taught” isn’t the right word here. Teresa, shared with John, her mystical experiences, thereby opening him to his own. He became as much her spiritual director, as she was his.

Either way, it wasn’t they teaching each other, but Christ, teaching both of them, and they merely shared what they had been given.

Which is essentially what we all do. We ourselves, have nothing that wasn’t given to us, but merely share what Christ has given to us.

Jim

 

[fhansen]

Godlovestrength;3576291:

Perhaps, “taught” isn’t the right word here. Teresa, shared with John, her mystical experiences, thereby opening him to his own. He became as much her spiritual director, as she was his.

Either way, it wasn’t they teaching each other, but Christ, teaching both of them, and they merely shared what they had been given.

Which is essentially what we all do. We ourselves, have nothing that wasn’t given to us, but merely share what Christ has given to us.

a
Jim

I’d only add that every time I’ve read where St Teresa used the term “learned men”-it was her term and she used it fairy often-she used it in reference to men she consulted with who were educated in the Catholic faith and could enlighten her about Church teachings or theology. Women had little opportunity for education in those days.That she enlightened John of the Cross and taught the whole world about prayer and mystical theology is without doubt-and she was awarded the title Doctor of the Church for it.