Pentecostal emotionalism

[MaggieOH]

Does motion and commotion make you holy ?

Maybe you should ask king David, because he was the one who danced before the Ark of the Covenant.

Motion and commotion has nothing to do with personal holiness, but it does have something to do with how one can be lifted up towards Heaven through the blessings of the Holy Spirit.

MaggieOH

 

[MaggieOH]

The answers on this thread are proving to be very interesting. I have already stated that I am a closet Charismatic and that is because God has allowed me to have some very personal experiences involving prayer, reflection and proclaiming the Word of God.

There is one other experience I had and that is when I was invited to participate as part of a group praying for others as they stepped forward asking for prayer. I do not claim anything for or about myself during that experience. It was the first time that I had learned to pray in a spontaneous fashion for others. From my point of view I have to say that I was drained from a very powerful experience, and then I received feedback from someone about what she experienced, and how the Holy Spirit had worked during that time of prayer. This was not a session where people were “slain” in the Spirit. Yet it was a session in which I can confidently say that the Holy Spirit was present and He used the participants in a moment of grace.

The problem that I have with Pentecostals and what I have heard about them, is that I see the need for emotion taking over from moments of grace. We have in the Holy Mass, at the moment of the Consecration, a point that is a moment of grace brought about by the Presence of the Lord in the Eucharist. It is the high point of the Mass and it is the reason that we attend Mass, either on a weekly or a daily basis.

Since I have always had a tendency to enjoy the rythmn of music, I tend to immerse myself within the rythmn of music. A hymn that is powerful and makes me want to raise my hands in praise of God is one that helps me to bring to mind God’s presence in a deeper way.

However, and this is based upon the fact that I live within the Hills district of Sydney, and very close to Hillsong Church (AOG) Baulkham Hills, I cannot say that all Christian music with a certain flavour will have the same effect upon me. To put it another way, the problem that I have with that music is the emotionalism that it generates. My biggest criticism of Hillsong is the Pastor and his wife with their comments about what they can do because they are “Christians”. The assemblies that they have at Hillsong are huge, and most of it seems to be about experiencing what is happening on the stage in the way of Christian rock bands. It is about having a feeling of “feel good” but it is the kind of feeling that does not last. A man of my acquaintance described his experience with Hillsong as being like a puppet in a trance like state.

I have other concerns too, but they are concerns that relate to individual churches within the Pentecostal grouping. Yes, I have come across Oneness, not here in Australia but on the Internet. The ones I came across were really quite ignorant.

Maggie

 

[MariaG]

posted by mj330

As a current AofG, I must agree. There is a tendency to ‘pick and choose’ those Scriptures that are to be interpreted literally. Why not interpret Matt 16:13-20 literally?

Because that takes one down the road to Rome. :bigyikes: If Peter is the Rock…

My prayers are with you. You do not face an easy road, the hardest for me being that if and when you take the plunge, many good Christians who you can still see as such, will no longer view you as a Christian but someone who Satan is deceiving. Even here in these forums, that hurts the most.

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

 

[BenK]

No one is going to interpret Matt 16:17-19 literally. Peter is not literally a rock. Hell doesn’t literally have a gate, nor does Heaven have a literal lock and key. Nor did Peter go around literally tying people up or literally untying people who are tied up.

It strikes me as hypocritical for Catholics to criticise Pentecostals for being too focussed on emotion. So we like contemporary music and value excellence in worship; how is that different from the ornate cathedrals and stained glass of the Roman church? If Christians are supposed to value austerity and reason and mistrust passion and emotion, why something as inspiring as St. Peter’s basillica? Why is excellence and largess worldly when it’s communicated through contemporary music, and holy when it’s communicated through architecture?

And if we are to mistrust the fervor that comes with being in a large crowd of worshippers, what are we to make of the enormous show of piety around the recent funeral and election of Popes? Were those crowds in Rome ‘in a puppet like trance state’? Was the devotion expressed to John Paul II just a cult of personality?

Of course people are going to be inspired to worship through various forms of Art, and of course people are going to be drawn into exuberance in the presence of a large group of like minded people. Of course people are going to want to experience a felt presence of the Father they adore.

In any case, it’s not the emotional high that comes with mass worship that’s the illusion, it’s the emotional low that attends our workaday lives. In the moment that it feels like God is present and anything is possible, in that moment our feelings are right: God is present and anything is possible.

 

[Osage_Orange]

Having emotion and being moved by the Holy Spirit is not intrinsically “bad”; I believe emotionalism is wrong when it replaces all other forms of worship and prayer. People who claim that you must FEEL the faith/spirit seem to be rejecting the very style (if that’s a good word to use) of prayer Jesus performed. Take, for example, Luke 22:39-46. How did the disciples fall asleep when Jesus was praying if he were loud or creating a lot of commotion?

 

[AuntMartha]

catsrus:

The meaning of the word tongues as used in the book of Acts is languages. Pentecostals don’t get this. Why would the Holy Spirit give 120 people an ability to go preach to other nations if the people of the other nations couldn’t understand a word that was said?
Common sense.
Had Peter and Paul traveled about babbling nonsense, who in the world (literally!) would have converted to Christianity???

Excellent point.

Aunt Martha

 

[Milliardo]

BenK:

In any case, it’s not the emotional high that comes with mass worship that’s the illusion, it’s the emotional low that attends our workaday lives. In the moment that it feels like God is present and anything is possible, in that moment our feelings are right: God is present and anything is possible.

I think that’s the basic problem of Pentecostals: worship has become like a drug, a fix. Once the feeling is gone, the only way to get it back is to find where that fix is. I’m not deriding Pentecostals, but merely stating that we should see God not only in the crowd we worship with, but indeed in even daily life. That is why St. Francis of Assisi found beauty in everything, because God is there, and he found praise even in everyday things.

 

[Mysty101]

Osage Orange:

Having emotion and being moved by the Holy Spirit is not intrinsically “bad”; I believe emotionalism is wrong when it replaces all other forms of worship and prayer. People who claim that you must FEEL the faith/spirit seem to be rejecting the very style (if that’s a good word to use) of prayer Jesus performed. Take, for example, Luke 22:39-46. How did the disciples fall asleep when Jesus was praying if he were loud or creating a lot of commotion?

Very good point.

Milliardo:

I think that’s the basic problem of Pentecostals: worship has become like a drug, a fix. Once the feeling is gone, the only way to get it back is to find where that fix is.

Another excellent point. I usually only attend Catholic Charismatic Groups, but I can also see this problem . The enthusiasm and joy are a wonderful blessing, but we must realize that it does ebb and flow.
This thread is such a pleasant change from the rukus that usually goes on in any thread mentioning tongues.
I am going to try to discuss some Gifts & Fruits of CCR over in Spirituality, if anyone cares to join in.

 

[BenK]

The meaning of the word tongues as used in the book of Acts is languages. Pentecostals don’t get this. Why would the Holy Spirit give 120 people an ability to go preach to other nations if the people of the other nations couldn’t understand a word that was said?

1 Corinthians 14: 1Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 2For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.

It’s clear here that whatever St. Paul meant by ‘speaks in a tongue’ it wasn’t something that other people frequently understood. It wasn’t even about other men understanding what was said, it about speaking to God.

I’m not deriding Pentecostals, but merely stating that we should see God not only in the crowd we worship with, but indeed in even daily life. That is why St. Francis of Assisi found beauty in everything, because God is there, and he found praise even in everyday things.

This is very true, but not a foreign thought to us. Our church’s old worship Pastor used to frequently tell us that ‘worship is not something you sing, it’s something you live.’

 

[MariaG]

Benk,

No one is going to interpret Matt 16:17-19 literally. Peter is not literally a rock. Hell doesn’t literally have a gate, nor does Heaven have a literal lock and key. Nor did Peter go around literally tying people up or literally untying people who are tied up.

Yeah, but did Jesus literally change Peter’s name to rock, a name that until now had only been used to refer to God or did rock refer to his profession of faith? Did Christ litereally give Peter the authority, symbolically represented by keys? Does Peter’s name being changed to Rock and given the keys seem significant?

It’s clear here that whatever St. Paul meant by ‘speaks in a tongue’ it wasn’t something that other people frequently understood. It wasn’t even about other men understanding what was said, it about speaking to God.

And I was goin to quote the passage about tongues of angels and of men, but I think yours was better.

:bible1: 1 Corinthians 14: 1Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 2For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.

There are some who may wish to deny that men will speak in unknown tongues, tongues of angels, tongues spoken to God and not men, but Scripture says otherwise.

Your Charasmatic Catholic Christian sister in Christ,
Maria

 

[BenK]

Does Peter’s name being changed to Rock and given the keys seem significant?

Oh, I wasn’t arguing for one interpretation of this passage or another. I was just trying to point out that a ‘let’s just take everything literally’ approach to the bible is overly simplistic. The Bible, just like just about every piece of literature ever written, at times uses metaphor and symbolic language.

 

[MariaG]

Oh, I wasn’t arguing for one interpretation of this passage or another. I was just trying to point out that a ‘let’s just take everything literally’ approach to the bible is overly simplistic. The Bible, just like just about every piece of literature ever written, at times uses metaphor and symbolic language.

 

[Br.Patricius]

MaggieOH:

She remembered a prayer that she had been taught in Latin. Needless to say they shouted Alleluia as though she had a genuine experience because they did not understand that she spoke in Latin.

I confess that in my more iconoclastic moments, I have the urge to run back to my old Pentecostal church and recite the Ave Maria in Latin just for the reaction. If I had the guts, I would do it during one of the “tongues-and-interpretation” sessions we used to have.

I was fourteen years an evangelical Pentecostal and still clearly remember my first experience hearing tongues spoken in a service, thinking it was another language. However, with several years of undergraduate- and graduate-level work in linguistics under my belt, I’ve come to realize that “ecstatic utterances” is about the best description I could offer of the “tongues” I heard (and practiced) daily. None of what I heard bore any of the earmarks of an actual language.

This is not to say I don’t believe God could enable one to speak an unlearned tongue. Just that I’ve never heard one.

However, I don’t believe most Pentecostals believe you must speak in tongues to be saved (I was aware in my time as a Pentecostal that some did, but I never personally encountered any).

Nevertheless, I am extremely grateful for my years in the Pentecostal church. It taught me a love of Scripture and a closeness to God that I had certainly not experienced in the Methodist church of my youth, nor in many of the Catholic parishes I have been involved in since.

Br. Patricius, OCSO