Questions about the charismatic renewal...

[grannymh]

Precisely because I have learned about the charismatic movement is that my common sense tells me to take this movement with a grain of salt.

Briefly:

I know that the gift of speaking in tongues started (was reintroduced) with Charles Parham, one of two individuals credited with starting the Pentecostalism movement, the emphasis of which was the glossolalia or speaking in tongues. Parham believed the Holy Spirit communicated directly with him; he rejected religious authorities; he believed in the rapture; and an associate of him, William Seymour was directly involved in the development of the Azusa Street Revival, considered as the birthplace of the Pentecostal movement in the early 1900s in Los Angeles. Parham’s movement was initially rejected as heretic by the Assemblies of God, although later merged with other Pentecostal groups in 1914 to form the General Council of the Assemblies of God in the USA.

In the 1940’s William Branham went further founding the faith healing movement, and his teachings influenced the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements even more. He believed in divine revelation through astronomical constellations and commented that God wrote three Bibles: the zodiac, the great pyramid and the Holy Bible. Branham also also spoke strongly against religious organizations and he did not believe in the Trinity.

My sincere apology for stopping here. However, it is important to understand some of the history of Pentecostalism so that it can be fairly contrasted with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. Some other sources have mentioned the Methodist Faith and the Holiness movement which may have been called by a different name.

One of the important differences between Pentecostalism and the Catholic Church is that Catholic Leaders like Father Hardon recognized the history of Pentecostalism and warned of the dangers of it. One of the dangerous issues was the difference between religions which did not recognize the Seven Sacraments (including the Eucharist) and the Catholic Church which lives out Christ’s promise in Chapter 14, Gospel of John.

Yes, there were some awful growing pains as Catholics recognized that the Holy Spirit was drawing attention to the teachings of St. Paul. However, because of the concerns of Catholic leadership, the Catholic Charismatic Renewal itself remained within the heart of the Catholic Church.

 

[grannymh]

Trying to understand 1 Corinthians 12, 13 & 14 is very difficult, and even though charismatics will say that when they speak in tongues they do the same thing Paul referred to, I’m skeptical. Who can assure us the “tongues” we hear today are the same tongues Christians spoke 2000 years ago? Who can assure us that 2000 years ago there were as many tongues as there were individuals as it is the case today? No two charismatics “speak” the same tongue.

If “tongues” were not “languages”, why would they disappear for 1900 years and then reappear 100 years ago, not in the Catholic Church, but among non Catholic individuals teaching error, who rejected the Church, its authority and its teachings?

Of course this is difficult to understand because it emphasizes human abilities and basically excludes the Holy Spirit. That is one of the abuses when it comes to St. Paul’s reference to the ordinary (common) gift of praying to God in prayer tongues. People are so caught up in language sounds, that they forget that it is the Holy Spirit Who forms the sounds of praying in tongues.
I am beginning to wonder if in order to understand the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, a refresher Catholic course on the Holy Spirit should be offered.

In addition, as I am currently looking for the reasons why the Holy Spirit chose modern times, I realize that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal places the true Divinity of Jesus front and center.
Jesus Christ is more than “a prophet among prophets” which is a popular concept in our secular culture.

Remember that Jesus declared Himself God. One of many reasons for this is that at first He was considered one of a long line of prophets. As a young person who read the “best
sellers” it was obvious to me that the divinity of Jesus was under attack. Also, I lived in an area where different faiths considered Jesus Christ as one of the many messengers of God. In Christ’s time, His divinity was under attack. In our modern times, His divinity is under attack. The center of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is Jesus Christ,True Man and True God.

 

[Prieldedi]

Of course this is difficult to understand because it emphasizes human abilities and basically excludes the Holy Spirit. That is one of the abuses when it comes to St. Paul’s reference to the ordinary (common) gift of praying to God in prayer tongues. People are so caught up in language sounds, that they forget that it is the Holy Spirit Who forms the sounds of praying in tongues.

If the only discernment we have is what the protestant charismatic movement told us in the 1960s, “it is the Holy Spirit”, is this discernment at all? Don’t forget that someone told Jesus,

“Lord, teach us to pray, just as John taught his disciples.”
And Jesus said to them, “When you pray, say this:
Father, hallowed be your name,
may your kingdom come,
give us each day the kind of bread we need,
and forgive us our sins, for we also forgive all who do us wrong,
and do not bring us to the test.” (Luke 11:1-4)

Jesus taught us to pray in our language in words that other people understand. One hundred years ago Charles Parham taught us to pray in tongues and he said those unintelligible sounds come from the Holy Spirit. What he experienced 100 years ago is what is practiced today in the Catholic charismatic movement. Was Charles Parham right? How do we know? All we have is his word.

To me it would be extraordinary if I start praying in Russian and Russians would understand me. I would not know I’m speaking Russian, nor anyone in my family or congregation, but if there were Russians present they would. A bilingual Russian would let us know, in my language, what I just said. If I pray to God all by myself in Russian, it would still be a formal language even though I could not identify it. My question remains the same, how do we know that the way Christians prayed 2000 years ago, “the sounds of praying in tongues” as you call it, is the same Charles Parham claims?

I’ll continue praying the way Jesus taught us.

I am beginning to wonder if in order to understand the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, a refresher Catholic course on the Holy Spirit should be offered.

In addition, as I am currently looking for the reasons why the Holy Spirit chose modern times, I realize that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal places the true Divinity of Jesus front and center.
Jesus Christ is more than “a prophet among prophets” which is a popular concept in our secular culture.

Remember that Jesus declared Himself God. One of many reasons for this is that at first He was considered one of a long line of prophets. As a young person who read the “best sellers” it was obvious to me that the divinity of Jesus was under attack. Also, I lived in an area where different faiths considered Jesus Christ as one of the many messengers of God. In Christ’s time, His divinity was under attack. In our modern times, His divinity is under attack. The center of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is Jesus Christ, True Man and True God.

All Christian denominations say the same thing, that they are “Christ centered”. Yet they are so centered in Jesus that they feel they offend Him if they say hello to His Mother. It is not enough to say that the center of the movement is Christ, you can still err discerning where the sounds come from.

The people that left the charismatic group I have been referring to, now that they are out they stopped praying in tongues. Why?

 

[Salvatore123]

granny,

We are NOT back at “square one” - I quoted St. Paul, with authoritative textual commentary from the Commentary on Holy Scripture (acknowledged by most, including the founder of this website, as the best commentary every produced on the entire bible), as speaking of TWO distinct charisms: (1) speaking in tongues and (2) prophesying.

YOU then further distinguished the first one into two “subparts”: (a) speaker in the vernacular and (b) uttering sounds that no one understands. You even used yourself as an example about how you utter the word “lamb”. The way you described yourself praying is almost as if (and I mean no disrespect in saying this - it is what came to mind when I read it) you fell into some sort of uncontrollable “trance” so that you lost control of how to pronounce certain words when you prayed.

The problem, from the beginning, that I, and now several others, have been consistently bringing up has never yet been answered. Instead of responding directly to the questions posed, we are told in an almost condescending tone that we need to go back and learn basic Catholicism.

I am STILL waiting for someone - ANYONE - to answer: WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF UTTERING SOUNDS THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS OR CAN INTERPRET, AND WHO GETS TO DETERMINE IF THOSE SOUNDS ARE TRULY INSPIRED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT?

If you say ANYONE other than Holy Mother Church, you are NO different than a protestant who claims the same charism.

P.S. - and we cannot ALL run to the Diocese every time we find something “offensive” that we do not believe is “sanctioned” by the Church. If I ran to my Diocesan office to complain about every abuse I see during Novus Ordo Masses I would not have time to do anything else in my life . . .

 

[grannymh]

Prieldedi,

I have been thinking about you. Thank you for getting back on line. In the U.S., I usually suggest reporting abuses in Catholic organizations first to the pastor and then to the diocesan office which would oversee such a Catholic organization. This person might be an Episcopal Vicar, or liaison to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. On this thread, a public link was posted to a type of covenant community and I was able to trace it to a possible diocesan department on evangelization. Because I was not sure exactly who to contact in that particular diocese, I simply posted the public information I found.

I am sorry, I do not know the protocol in Nicaragua.

This is the Catholic Charismatic Renewal resource in the U.S. My suggestion is to search this site for information.

nsc-chariscenter.org/index.asp

nsc-chariscenter.org/About/role.asp

 

[grannymh]

If the only discernment we have is what the protestant charismatic movement told us in the 1960s, “it is the Holy Spirit”, is this discernment at all? Don’t forget that someone told Jesus,

I cannot speak for Nicaragua, but this is what happened in the U.S. in regard to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal.

"As early as 1969, only two years after the Renewal started, the U.S. Bishops investigated the fledgling movement and the Committee on Doctrine wrote that “theologically the movement has legitimate reasons of existence. It has a strong biblical basis. It would be difficult to inhibit the working of the Spirit which manifested itself so abundantly in the early Church.”

“Subsequent statements in 1975, 1984 and 1997 have been equally affirming.”

The above quote and additional information is on this link. nsc-chariscenter.org/AboutCCR/#

Discernment then took many forms as Catholic Church leaders became involved with the “fledgling movement.” While Church leaders were well informed about early Protestant Pentecostalism, this would not be considered using Protestantism as the only discernment.

One needs to remember that Catholics are not the only people who read Scripture. As you detailed earlier, interest in the early Church took hold in other religions before 1967. Obviously, what was happening in other religions was studied by the first persons to be touched by the Holy Spirit. This would not be considered using other religions as the only discernment. The first persons in this movement did have brains and they used them to check St. Paul’s teachings with Catholicism as their guide.

Obviously, the first concern of Catholic charismatics was to remain in the Catholic Church. But this “concern” did mean that they would close their minds to the teachings of St. Paul.

“Even the charismatic gifts, as taught in “Pentecostal” literature, are listed by Adolph Tanquerey in his Spiritual Life (a text well-known to priests and religious). He explains the nine charismatic gifts and expects them to be manifested as the soul makes its way to God.” Source:* A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church*, by Msgr. Vincent M. Walsh.
.
Yes, I know that some Catholic Charismatics, both individuals and groups, did leave Catholicism as some Catholics have done in the past and present. Perhaps they left because they could not get the Catholic Charismatic Renewal to go against the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Jesus taught us to pray in our language in words that other people understand. One hundred years ago Charles Parham taught us to pray in tongues and he said those unintelligible sounds come from the Holy Spirit. What he experienced 100 years ago is what is practiced today in the Catholic charismatic movement. Was Charles Parham right? How do we know? All we have is his word.

Here, Charles Parham is not considered a teacher of Catholicism.

He may have explained the gift of Prayer Tongues since he was able to read Scripture. People who oppose Catholicism may be able to accurately explain the gift of Prayer Tongues. But explanations
do not change Catholic doctrine which is why the Catholic Charismatic Renewal remains in the Catholic Church as is.

My humble suggestion is to forget Charles Parham. He may be a hero in some eyes; however, the Catholic Charismatic Renewal prefers St. Paul and the doctrines of the Catholic Church.

To me it would be extraordinary if I start praying in Russian and Russians would understand me. I would not know I’m speaking Russian, nor anyone in my family or congregation, but if there were Russians present they would. A bilingual Russian would let us know, in my language, what I just said. If I pray to God all by myself in Russian, it would still be a formal language even though I could not identify it. My question remains the same, how do we know that the way Christians prayed 2000 years ago, “the sounds of praying in tongues” as you call it, is the same Charles Parham claims?

The first two things one must do before receiving the Holy Spirit Gift of Prayer Tongues is to know what the gift entails both spiritually and physically and then to desire the gift. One can pray to the Holy Spirit for reception of this ordinary gift.

The only thing this hang-up on human language does is to prevent a person from learning about prayer tongues so that an informed decision can be made about a desire for this gift.

I’ll continue praying the way Jesus taught us.

That is an excellent free will choice.

All Christian denominations say the same thing, that they are “Christ centered”. Yet they are so centered in Jesus that they feel they offend Him if they say hello to His Mother. It is not enough to say that the center of the movement is Christ, you can still err discerning where the sounds come from.

Yes.
But why would someone want to eavesdrop on a person’s personal prayer to God? Is there a “hope” that the person is asking for mercy because he sinned in such and such a way? Listening to those sounds make for great gossip. And would the eavesdropper really care about an error as to where those sounds came from?

I’m talking about the Catholic Church and not some other faith system which ignores the Blessed Mother. I am talking about prayer to God.

The people that left the charismatic group I have been referring to, now that they are out they stopped praying in tongues. Why?

If those people were extremely good friends,
I might consider asking them why. Otherwise, I would not pry into their personal life.

PLEASE NOTE:

I may be in the minority on this thread; however,
I am NOT interested in knowing every word someone uses to personally pray to God. Even when a person freely decides to pray in tongues in a group, I am NOT interested in knowing every word which is used because even in a group, a person can pray to God.

 

[grannymh]

“Pope John Paul II has been an enthusiastic supporter of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. In 1979 soon after becoming Pope he said, “I am convinced that this movement is a sign of the Spirit’s action . . . a very important component in the total renewal of the Church.” He has met with the international leaders of the Renewal on a number of occasions, and regularly sends greetings to National and International Conferences on the Renewal.”
Source: nsc-chariscenter.org/AboutCCR/

Describing the Catholic Charismatic Renewal as a SIGN of the Holy Spirit’s action within the Catholic Church is, in my humble opinion, the best way to explain the Catholic Charismatic Renewal.

 

[Salvatore123]

granny,

I am NOT disputing the existence of the charism of speaking in tongues.

I simply want SOMEONE to explain to me HOW one is to go about discerning whether another person is sincerely inspired by the Holy Spirit or if they are merely a “fake”.

Is that too much to ask?

You say that we should not be interested in what other people have to say to God “personally”. I agree - I am not camped out at the confessional with a stethescope listening in on people’s confessions.

I am talking about WHY there is a need for MEMBERSHIP in “charismatic groups”.

If, as you claim, I can prayerfully ask for these charismatic gifts and the Holy Spirit will decide whether to “gift” them to me, then why do I need to join a group?

And if you say, “I don’t”, then you have pretty much eliminated the NEED for the “charismatic movement”.

 

[Prieldedi]

Prieldedi, I have been thinking about you. Thank you for getting back on line. In the U.S., I usually suggest reporting abuses in Catholic organizations first to the pastor and then to the diocesan office which would oversee such a Catholic organization…

How would a member of the group know what an “abuse” is if he’s told that everything comes from the Holy Spirit? He’s told the Holy Spirit guides the group in all its endeavors, that the Holy Spirit is 100% behind them, supporting them, encouraging them, caring for them. On what ground will anyone accuse others of abuse if the Holy Spirit is their guide?

All problems are solved inside the group, whether by the leaders or by those appointed by the leaders to do so. It’s all done in good faith and it appears there aren’t really huge problems. But if a person has doubts about the Spirit gifts, then he’s told his faith is not strong enough, or that he has not committed himself sufficiently with the community, or that he doesn’t understand “the ways the Spirit works”, etc. For the leaders, those who doubt have weak faith; for the doubters they are convinced by the leaders that they have weak faith. Outcome: Problem solved.

"As early as 1969, only two years after the Renewal started, the U.S. Bishops investigated the fledgling movement and the Committee on Doctrine wrote that “theologically the movement has legitimate reasons of existence. It has a strong biblical basis. It would be difficult to inhibit the working of the Spirit which manifested itself so abundantly in the early Church.”

Discernment then took many forms as Catholic Church leaders became involved with the “fledgling movement.” While Church leaders were well informed about early Protestant Pentecostalism, this would not be considered using Protestantism as the only discernment.

“Theologically the movement has legitimate reasons of existence” IS NOT EQUAL TO It is the Holy Spirit. Have the Bishops examined all the prophecies that have poured in the charismatic groups over more than 4 decades?

In the charismatic movement the first step to receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit is to experience “Baptism in the Spirit”. Once an individual has gone through it he will start to receive the gifts. So far (starting about 40 years ago) all we have are testimonies of Catholics who’ve had personal experiences, which go from violent movements of the arms or body, to uncontrollably laughter, to fainting. Some testimonies tell us that the individual feels that God “takes over” him to do with him whatever He (God) wants, turning him like a marionette at God’s disposal. To me this seems like possession. I’ve never heard that God has possessed anyone.

After the “Baptism in the Spirit” experience one receives a gift from the Spirit, whether it’s speaking in tongues, the gift of prophecy or other. True, one cannot deny another person’s experience, so if someone says “I felt this or that”, no one can deny it. The problem is that those in the charismatic movement who have this kind of experience base being Catholic, what they believe and their Catholic life, on that experience. They feel also that those who do not have that experience are missing… well, everything!

If we are missing that much one must conclude that there is a greater outpouring of grace through the “Baptism in the Spirit” than through the sacraments, which would force us to change the whole doctrine and sacramental theology of the Church, with the Pentecostal churches as first among the churches filled with the Holy Spirit’s power.

You mentioned the USA Bishops, I give you Pope St. Pius X Pascendi Dominici Gregis Encyclical (1907) in which he deals with Individual Experience and Religious Certitude:

*This is their manner of putting the question: In the religious sentiment one must recognise a kind of intuition of the heart which puts man in immediate contact with the very reality of God, and infuses such a persuasion of God’s existence and His action both within and without man as to excel greatly any scientific conviction. They assert, therefore, the existence of a real experience, and one of a kind that surpasses all rational experience. If this experience is denied by some, like the rationalists, it arises from the fact that such persons are unwilling to put themselves in the moral state which is necessary to produce it. It is this experience which, when a person acquires it, makes him properly and truly a believer.

How far off we are here from Catholic teaching we have already seen in the decree of the Vatican Council.* (Vatican I - Bold mine)

He goes further when he says:

We shall see later how, with such theories, added to the other errors already mentioned, the way is opened wide for atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with the other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being met within every religion? In fact that they are to be found is asserted by not a few. And with what right will Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? With what right can they claim true experiences for Catholics alone? (Bold mine)

(In this encyclical you can replace the word “Modernists” with “Charismatics” and the message would apply equally.) There are two ways to view “individual experiences”, and both are in opposition as you can see. One from a Pope who is a Saint, the other from Bishops of the USA.

One needs to remember that Catholics are not the only people who read Scripture. As you detailed earlier, interest in the early Church took hold in other religions before 1967. Obviously, what was happening in other religions was studied by the first persons to be touched by the Holy Spirit. This would not be considered using other religions as the only discernment. The first persons in this movement did have brains and they used them to check St. Paul’s teachings with Catholicism as their guide.

Obviously, the first concern of Catholic charismatics was to remain in the Catholic Church. But this “concern” did mean that they would close their minds to the teachings of St. Paul.

Charles Parham is not considered a teacher of Catholicism.

Precisely because other people were reading Scripture, and they were the FIRST PERSONS in this movement, is that I cannot understand how these Catholics in the 1960’s DID NOT HAVE the brains to see the difficulties to connect these protestant experiences with St. Paul’s teachings.

To me (and others like me) the problem with St. Paul’s writings is that nobody knows for sure how the Spirit worked 2000 years ago. The public outpouring of the Spirit’s “speaking in tongues” ceased, there were no visible manifestation in the Catholic Church from the Early Church until the late 1960s, when the “new” public manifestation of speaking in tongues were introduced in the Catholic Church by protestants.

I know that Charles Parham is not a teacher for Catholics, not directly that is, but he is indirectly. He was the first person to experience these gifts from the Spirit. Then others around him experienced the same thing, later more and more people were experiencing the same, and on and on until a group of Catholics got in contact with Protestants from Pentecostal churches in the 1960s, and were overwhelmed by the “power” of the Spirit they witnessed. So I stand by what I said, Charles Parham taught Catholics how to pray in tongues.

 

[grannymh]

How would a member of the group know what an “abuse” is if he’s told that everything comes from the Holy Spirit? He’s told the Holy Spirit guides the group in all its endeavors, that the Holy Spirit is 100% behind them, supporting them, encouraging them, caring for them. On what ground will anyone accuse others of abuse if the Holy Spirit is their guide?

I understand what you are saying.

Hopefully, there is someone outside the group, maybe a former member, who would be able to seek the advice of an appropriate person in you diocese. This could even be a parish pastor. In my opinion, seeking advice is not the same as reporting an abuse.

As I said before, I can only speak of the U.S. and cannot speak for your country.

 

[grannymh]

Describing the Catholic Charismatic Renewal as a SIGN of the Holy Spirit’s action within the Catholic Church is, in my humble opinion, the best way to explain the Catholic Charismatic Renewal.

The more I think about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal as a Sign of the Holy Spirit’s actions, the more I think it is important to understand what Our Lord said about the Holy Spirit. “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in My name–He will teach you everything and remind you of all that * told you.” Source: Chapter 14, Gospel of John.

Interestingly, what is known as the “Baptism of the Spirit” – this is not the Catholic Sacrament of Baptism-- is based on a genuine, serious, personal commitment to Jesus as Lord. Its intent is to deepen and strengthen one’s personal relationship with Jesus. In the Catholic religion this means The Eucharist.

What was the main thing that Jesus taught us and what needed reminding in the 1960’s?

In the Catholic religion, the heart and center of the Catholic Church, the source and summit of Catholicism, is The Eucharist. In the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, the focus is first the Real Presence of Jesus in The Eucharist.

As a reminder of what Jesus taught in Chapter 6, Gospel of John, one of the Signs of the Holy Spirit’s action is the personal commitment to Jesus, often referred to as the “Baptism of the Spirit” which is not the Catholic Sacrament of Baptism… Following this deep prayer experience – the experience of totally loving Jesus – often, not always, there is the reception of ordinary (common) gift of praying to Jesus in the sounds of prayer tongues.

Obviously, there has been preparation for this commitment to Jesus, for example, the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation is unique to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. Preparation would also include the “how” of prayer tongues.

An interesting description of the Holy Spirit’s actions is Chapter 10 in Acts.*

 

[Prieldedi]

I understand what you are saying.

Hopefully, there is someone outside the group, maybe a former member, who would be able to seek the advice of an appropriate person in you diocese. This could even be a parish pastor. In my opinion, seeking advice is not the same as reporting an abuse.

As I said before, I can only speak of the U.S. and cannot speak for your country.

The abuses are seen by former members as “non Catholic teachings” taught by the leaders of the group (community). Remember what I said before, that this group is in communion with similar groups from the USA, it has an alliance with the Sword of the Spirit, an ecumenical international alliance of Catholic and Protestant charismatic groups based (I believe) in the USA. They all believe that God has a new covenant with them, a new and eternal covenant, which by definition, leaves everyone else outside of this new covenant. They say that “when you’re renewed by baptism in the Holy Spirit, your faith comes alive”, which would mean that other Catholics have a dead faith.

The leaders of this Nicaraguan group went to Rome in 1975 to the International Conference of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, and on Pentecost Monday 1975 a prophecy was given by Ralph Martin in St. Peter’s Basilica in the presence of Pope Paul VI. The group believes in that prophecy, and Ralph Martin together with Stephen Clark were involved when the group was born in 1977, and the alliance has been active to this day.

Let me give you an example of the non Catholic teachings the group accepts: Charles Whitehead, British chairman of the International Catholic Charismatic Renewal (ICCR) said:

“Whatever distracts from the primary focus --the openness to the Holy Spirit-- I do not want to see in the charismatic renewal … But I am concerned when charismatic prayer groups include devotion to Mary and start praying the rosary … I do not see this as openness to the Holy Spirit, but rather as a return to traditional piety.” (CHARISMA MAGAZINE) (Bold mine)

That’s why there was no devotion to the Virgin Mary when my friend was a member of this group. So you see, it’s not a Nicaraguan charismatic problem, it’s an international charismatic problem, no devotion or barely a devotion for the Virgin Mary. This is just one of the abuses/errors the movement has made.

My friend gave me following questions he submitted to the group leaders after he left:

• Why has the prophetic guidance of the group never been submitted to the Bishop for proper evaluation?
• What would you do if the Bishop declares it as not worthy of belief? Who would you follow then?
• Why does the charismatic renewal have the privilege for not submitting its prophecies to the legitimate ecclesiastical authorities, and instead considers them as true guides from God, just based on the discernment of the local leaders?
• Is not there a wrong concept of Church behind this position, which manifests itself in believing that the authority to discern a prophecy lies in the local body of elders (leaders), who are secular, and not in a diocesan Bishop, legitimate pastor and authority in your diocese? Isn’t this a Protestant criterion?
• Are not the Bishops, in communion with the Pope, the legitimate pastors of the Church, endowed with the authority to guide and tend the flock of the Church, and among other things to protect it from error?

These questions have never been answered by the leaders of the group.

 

[Prieldedi]

The more I think about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal as a Sign of the Holy Spirit’s actions, the more I think it is important to understand what Our Lord said about the Holy Spirit. “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in My name–He will teach you everything and remind you of all that * told you.” Source: Chapter 14, Gospel of John.*

From John Gospel’s Chapter 13 until the beginning of Chapter 18 Jesus talks only to the Apostles. All He says is just for them. This promise you mention was made by Jesus only to the Apostles, that is to the future leaders of His Church, to the future first Bishops of His Church. If Jesus had us all in mind, He would have used another moment to deliver this promise, like the Sermon on the Mount.

That’s why when the charismatic movement appeared many Catholics had their doubts, because it contradicted the understanding of the Church regarding the Holy Spirit. It had never been like that in over 19 centuries, and all of a sudden, BANG!, wake up!, this is the “the Holy Spirit that the Father will send” we are told, coming to lay Catholics’ lives (not the Bishop’s) 1960+ years (not later but…) late?

 

[grannymh]

The abuses are seen by former members as “non Catholic teachings” taught by the leaders of the group (community). Remember what I said before, that this group is in communion with similar groups from the USA, it has an alliance with the Sword of the Spirit, an ecumenical international alliance of Catholic and Protestant charismatic groups based (I believe) in the USA. They all believe that God has a new covenant with them, a new and eternal covenant, which by definition, leaves everyone else outside of this new covenant. They say that “when you’re renewed by baptism in the Holy Spirit, your faith comes alive”, which would mean that other Catholics have a dead faith.

The leaders of this Nicaraguan group went to Rome in 1975 to the International Conference of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, and on Pentecost Monday 1975 a prophecy was given by Ralph Martin in St. Peter’s Basilica in the presence of Pope Paul VI. The group believes in that prophecy, and Ralph Martin together with Stephen Clark were involved when the group was born in 1977, and the alliance has been active to this day.

Let me give you an example of the non Catholic teachings the group accepts: Charles Whitehead, British chairman of the International Catholic Charismatic Renewal (ICCR) said:

“Whatever distracts from the primary focus --the openness to the Holy Spirit-- I do not want to see in the charismatic renewal … But I am concerned when charismatic prayer groups include devotion to Mary and start praying the rosary … I do not see this as openness to the Holy Spirit, but rather as a return to traditional piety.” (CHARISMA MAGAZINE) (Bold mine)

That’s why there was no devotion to the Virgin Mary when my friend was a member of this group. So you see, it’s not a Nicaraguan charismatic problem, it’s an international charismatic problem, no devotion or barely a devotion for the Virgin Mary. This is just one of the abuses/errors the movement has made.

My friend gave me following questions he submitted to the group leaders after he left:

• Why has the prophetic guidance of the group never been submitted to the Bishop for proper evaluation?
• What would you do if the Bishop declares it as not worthy of belief? Who would you follow then?
• Why does the charismatic renewal have the privilege for not submitting its prophecies to the legitimate ecclesiastical authorities, and instead considers them as true guides from God, just based on the discernment of the local leaders?
• Is not there a wrong concept of Church behind this position, which manifests itself in believing that the authority to discern a prophecy lies in the local body of elders (leaders), who are secular, and not in a diocesan Bishop, legitimate pastor and authority in your diocese? Isn’t this a Protestant criterion?
• Are not the Bishops, in communion with the Pope, the legitimate pastors of the Church, endowed with the authority to guide and tend the flock of the Church, and among other things to protect it from error?

These questions have never been answered by the leaders of the group.

Thank you for mentioning the "International Catholic Charismatic Renewal (ICCR). Have you been to its website? I ask this because on another thread, someone mentioned it as a kind of source for charismatic renewal.

My suggestion then and now is to go to this link for information about the U.S. Catholic Charismatic Renewal.
nsc-chariscenter.org/index.asp

 

[Salvatore123]

granny,

As you requested, I visited the site you referenced.

THESE are my two concerns:

“Catholic Charismatic Renewal invites all people to experience the Holy Spirit who opens us to a life-changing relationship with Jesus Christ and the love of the Father. The Holy Spirit empowers us for* personal *holiness . . .”

“The mission of the National Service Committee is to foster the dynamic grace of *baptism in the Holy Spirit *(Acts 1:5) which empowered the members of the early Church at Pentecost.”

First, the words I italicized are taken almost verbatim from the protestant “salvation” prayer, which states, as its goal, that we recognize we have a “personal relationship with Christ”: “I accept Jesus Christ as my PERSONAL Lord and Savior.”

THAT is theologically incorrect/inaccurate. Jesus is NOT MY personal Lord and Savior. Jesus, from a Catholic theological standpoint, was EVERY MAN’s redeemer. Yes, Jesus cares for all of us individually, and yes we all should strive to pray to Jesus “one on one”. But I have seen TOO often that when one focuses on the “personal relationship”, the relationship of people with their Church diminishes. This blures the distinction between redemption and salvation, which protestants combine. Catholicism teaches that Christ was the redeemer (and in which man played no role), and that man needs to cooperate with Christ during his life so that he might be saved when he dies.

Second, I believe the “mission” completely misrepresents what occurred on Pentecost. NO ONE (as far as we see in the Bible) other than the Apostles received the special gifts conferred on the Apostles at Pentecost by the Holy Spirit. That “mission statement”, at the very least, implies that at the time of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descended on ALL Christians at that time. Every commentary I have read/studied states that Christ spent 40 days ONLY with the Apostles, and limited his appearance to them for several reasons explained in Acts. During the 40 days Christ spent with them, when the Holy Spirit descended on them and “gifted” them, this was done to steel their “spines” so as to be ready for the difficult task ahead: converting nations of men to the New Word.

I am not saying that no one else should spread the “good news” now - but at that time, Christ purposely “held back” his appearances.

In sum, we see how many times St. Paul had to write to different “groups” to correct their misunderstandings/misapplications of what Christ originally taught. And this correction had to occur after being taught first-hand only a half-generation removed from Christ’s presence on Earth. Can you imagine if we turned everyone loose who claimed to be “baptised by the Holy Spirit” to go out and preach the NT?

I can imagine it - the result is protestantism.

 

[grannymh]

The abuses are seen by former members as “non Catholic teachings” taught by the leaders of the group (community).

My apology for not replying to all of your post. I am not satisfied with my draft for a detailed reply.

 

[Joan_Marian]

Reading most of the comments and questions it looks like some people are trying to prove what is of the Lord and what is not. The Catholic Charismatic Renewal has been accepted and encouraged by the Pope and the Bishops. If a movement has already being approved it is best to allow the authority of the Church to be over that movement. It is a free choice within the Catholic Church that is given to people. No one is forced to join if they don’t believe in the Charismatic Renewal. Charismatic Catholics are not perfect people but are aware there is a loving Father who will always accpet them and love them into holiness. The gatheringa are gatherings and meetings are there as a space to praise God and worship because the people who come have a common experiience of the Holy Spirit and have been changed from non-believers to believers. Many people I personally know have returned to the Catholic faith and the Sacraments because of their experience of the Holy Spirit. I am one of them. It is the fruit in each life that will show others the validity of the experience. I have fallen in love with the Catholic faith and will be forever thankful for the joy God the Father gave me when I experienced the Holy Spirit in 1976. We are all one family and are called to accept and love each other. If the authority of the Church has allowed the Charismatic movemnt to exist all who are Catholic need to accept it and love those who are not identical in their relationship with God and Church. Each must look to their own life and holiness and allow others to do the same.

 

[jjkp777]

My friend gave me following questions he submitted to the group leaders after he left:

• Why has the prophetic guidance of the group never been submitted to the Bishop for proper evaluation?
• What would you do if the Bishop declares it as not worthy of belief? Who would you follow then?
• Why does the charismatic renewal have the privilege for not submitting its prophecies to the legitimate ecclesiastical authorities, and instead considers them as true guides from God, just based on the discernment of the local leaders?
• Is not there a wrong concept of Church behind this position, which manifests itself in believing that the authority to discern a prophecy lies in the local body of elders (leaders), who are secular, and not in a diocesan Bishop, legitimate pastor and authority in your diocese? Isn’t this a Protestant criterion?
• Are not the Bishops, in communion with the Pope, the legitimate pastors of the Church, endowed with the authority to guide and tend the flock of the Church, and among other things to protect it from error?

These questions have never been answered by the leaders of the group.

I agree. This is exactly the problem with Charismatic covenant communities. By their very nature and under the claim of “God told me so” or “the Holy Spirit said to me”, they do not see themselves as under the full and complete authority of the Catholic Church. Sure, they CLAIM to be under the authority of the Catholic Church but they do NOT submit to the authority of the Church based on their ACTIONS. I recommend to those who have not yet done so to look at the history of several Covenant communities in the previous posts to find repeated examples of this. Unfortunately, as I continue to point out, this is the norm, rather than the exception.

 

[jjkp777]

For those reading who have no idea what it’s like to attend a Charismatic praise and worship assembly, please read the following link:

traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a032htFusionCatholicism_Vennari.htm

Below are excerpts:

**"Debauched Catholicism

While watching the noisy “commit your life to Jesus” session, I kept asking myself: what is the point? Catholics have never engaged in such a degrading spectacle before. Why do it at all? It is easy to understand why Protestants put themselves through this exercise, since for many of them, it is the one and only means of becoming “saved”.

Most evangelical and Pentecostal Protestants do not believe that a Christian is “born again” when baptized. Rather, a man or woman is not “saved”, does not become a “Christian,” until he makes a personal commitment to Jesus Christ. It is the standard “get saved” process one sees in Protestant tracts. I acknowledge I am a sinner, I acknowledge my need for Jesus, and I commit myself to Jesus by accepting Him as my personal Lord and Savior. Thus, according to this system, even if you are a baptized Roman Catholic, you are still not a “Christian” until you make this personal commitment to Jesus.

I remember my heartbreak when a cradle-Catholic friend told me that he was now a “Christian”. He was beaming with enthusiasm, so happy to realize he had never been a Christian before, and now he was. Here was a man who, due to this newly found “salvation”, walked away from the true Faith, abandoned Holy Mass and the sacraments, and now embraced a heretical creed. He was objectively living a mortal sin against the First Commandment. Yet he displayed a similar kind of effected jubilation, the same effervescent toothpaste smile, that same so-called “alive in Jesus” mannerism that I saw from many at this latest Charismatic conference — which proves that outward appearances of being supposedly “full of the Spirit” mean nothing.

This dear friend of mine had been baptized and raised Catholic, so indeed, he had been a Christian since the day of his Christening. But at one point in his life, he attended one of those noisome evangelical businessman’s gatherings where he was told that his baptism really didn’t matter. His Catholicism didn’t matter. No, if he wanted to be a “Christian”, there was no other way to do it but to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. And as he was a product of post-Vatican II Catholic education, he fell for it in a flash.

The Protestant formula of being “saved” by accepting Jesus as one’s personal savior is based on a rejection of the sacrament of Baptism as the means established by Christ to cleanse original sin and fill the soul with sanctifying grace. It is by this means alone that we receive the Divine Life of the Blessed Trinity in our souls. This is the central point of doctrine denied by the Protestant’s getting “saved” by merely accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior.

So, if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, why does the Steubenville Catholic imitate a Protestant practice based on rejection of bedrock tenets of the Catholic Faith? What good does publicly accepting “Jesus as Lord and Savior” when one is already in the state of grace? It is a shallow, emotional spectacle found nowhere in our sacred heritage. One can only try to imagine noble Catholics such as G.K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc or Emperor Karl of Austria submitting to this gushing “commit your life to Jesus” parody.

In fact, the Catholic Church already has a public ceremony to “re-commit one’s life to Jesus”, if you will, it is the “Renewal of Baptismal Promises” enacted on Holy Saturday. This dignified and noble ceremony is steeped in Catholic tradition and symbolism. It is not, as were the Steubenville antics, a cheap imitation of Jim and Tammy Baker emotionalism. And if a baptized soul falls from grace, then he must seek the Sacrament of Confession, a point of doctrine that the Steubenville species does not appear to deny (there were confessions going on throughout the conference weekend and the attendees were encouraged to go).

Again, what we see in all this is fusion Catholicism: Catholicism admixtured with Protestant elements that denigrate the Catholic Faith, and serves to ennoble a Protestant practice that denies the very words of Our Lord Jesus Christ in His institution of the Sacraments.[2]

Blessed Pope Pius IX, as with all the Popes up to Vatican II, rightly recognized Protestantism in all its forms as “a revolt against God.”[3] Pius IX also, in his magnificent Syllabus of Errors, solemnly condemned the error that “Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion”,[4] an error on which “Catholic Pentecostalism” is based.[5] What went on at this Steubenville weekend — which was steeped to the gills in Protestant spirit — was by no means an explosive outpouring of the Holy Spirit. On the contrary, all indications point to the spirit of the underworld at work.

Saturday

In 1974, in a scathing criticism of the Charismatic movement, the staunchly orthodox Archbishop Dwyer of the United States said, “We regard it bluntly as one of the most dangerous trends in the Church in our time, closely allied in spirit with other disruptive and divisive movements; threatening grave harm to unity and damage to countless souls.”[6]

Joseph Fitcher, in his 1974 book The Catholic Cult of the Paraclete, mentioned that some Catholic prelates were “worried about the Protestant influence on their people” due to Pentecostalism. Fitcher quoted Bishop Joseph McKinney’s worry about Catholics being “misled and not being firmly grounded in theology”.[7]
6. Dwyer’s criticism appeared in an interview published in the National Catholic Register, July 21, 1974 and is cited from Joseph Fitcher’s The Catholic Cult of the Paraclete, Sheed and Ward, Inc. New York, 1974, p. 40
7. Op. cit. page 40. Original quote from Bishop Joseph McKinney appeared in an interview published in New Covenant, September, 1971, pp. 10-16.
My weekend at Steubenville proved how correct were these good bishops’ concerns. This was especially evident during Saturday’s events. The day began with a short “Worship and Praise” session, with the same rock’n’pop music, the same emotionalism from the audience, the same Protestant-style “Praise God”, “Hallelujah”, “Praise the Lord” salvos from the podium. This was followed by two lectures. Al Mansfield spoke on “We Walk by Faith, Not By Sight”, telling the heartbreaking story of his New Orleans home being destroyed in Hurricane Katrina. In the process, he urged everyone, “do not leave here without getting baptized in the Holy Spirit.”

Then came Bert Ghezzi’s “The Transforming Power of the Sign of the Cross,” which was by and large a fine presentation. He explained the Catholic practice of making the Sign of the Cross, the history of this practice and what a holy and powerful sacramental it is.

This was followed by the 10:30 a.m. “Eucharistic Liturgy”, a Novus Ordo celebration full of rock’n’pop music. Some of the details of this liturgy will be recounted in a future installment.

We then arrived at the two afternoon workshop sessions: the first at 2:00, the second at 3:30. Each of the sessions had five workshops conducted simultaneously by various speakers. For the moment, I will only mention one of the workshops I attended. It was entitled “Forming Your Character With the Saints” conducted by Joanne Storm, Ph.D., a preppy and enthusiastic young lady who teaches Psychology at Steubenville. Though her manner of presentation may not be for everyone, the content of her speech was, for the most part, quite good. She listed a “Top 10 Characteristics” of the Saints that included: frequent use of confession; living a counter-cultural life; humility; devotion to the Eucharist and other points. Not mentioned on the Top 10, however, was devotion to Our Blessed Mother. I thought this a serious omission, though I do not in any way question Dr. Storm’s love of Our Lady.

During her presentation it occurred to me that there was another point the saints had in common. All of them became saints without a Pentecostal “baptism of the Holy Spirit”. All of them rose to heroic sanctity without attending rock’n’roll masses, without publicly “accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior” in the Protestant fashion, without adopting Protestant terminology and mannerisms. Her talk inadvertently demonstrated that the last thing one needs to become a saint is any participation in this new wave of Pentecostalism now infecting the Catholic Church.

In fact, every saint that Dr. Storm mentioned: Saint John Vianney, Saint Teresa of Avila; Saint Joan of Arc, Saint Elizabeth of Hungary, Saint John Bosco, would have run from that Steubenville conference screaming in horror at what was presented as “Catholic” to gullible participants. Worse, Saint Katherine Drexel of Philadelphia, who died in 1928, would have immediately recognized the Steubenville weekend for what it was: a high-decibel reincarnation of the revivalist, big-tent, store-front Protestant pentecostalism rampant in early 20th Century America."**

Please click on the link above to read it in its’ entirety.

Peace and God bless you as you discern the Truth!

 

[grannymh]

For those reading who have no idea what it’s like to attend a Charismatic praise and worship assembly, please read the following link:

traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a032htFusionCatholicism_Vennari.htm

In other words…

If any of our readers live near the place in the link, you have the free choice to go or not to go to this event. At the end of the article it says
This article was first published in Catholic Family News, August 2006
So, please check what is going on currently.

Also, as I have said before, if there is a serious abuse of the charismatic gifts listed by St. Paul or a serious abuse of Catholicism, one should report these abuses to the appropriate vicar or office in the Diocese.

Those readers who do not live in the area of the event or who prefer something more conservative, my consistent advice is to check with the Diocese for the standing of nearby Catholic Charismatic Renewal groups. I researched one of the links about a covenant community and apparently it came under the office for evangelization instead of a spiritual vicar. Dioceses do differ; yet it is relatively easy to find out about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal within the Catholic Church.

If there are readers who are not interested in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal – that is no problem. Being a charismatic individual is not some kind of a litmus test for determining holiness. On the other hand, maybe learning about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal could be a help in becoming more holy.

One of my friends credits the Catholic Life in the Spirit seminar as giving him the strength to watch his wife die of cancer. Whether or not he personally prayed in tongues was not a concern. What was important was to support him, his wife, and children in their time of deep sorrow. This is an example of what it means to have a personal relationship with Jesus. We, and members of a Charismatic prayer group, imitated Jesus’s love for the sick and dying as best we could. Years later, this friend continued his personal relationship with Jesus by becoming a scheduled adorer at the Perpetual Adoration of the Eucharist Chapel