Questions about the charismatic renewal...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mikaele
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I had previously said (not that it matters to anyone reading) I was finished commenting as I did not think I had any more to contribute, but after reading the various posts by people since my last post, I found three distinct “points” about “charismatic gifts”:
  1. Except for when they were specifically mentioned in the Bible as having affected several people who were “important” within the Church at that time (St. Paul details the where/when/who), we see - based on Church writings and history - a literal absence of the continuation of these “gifts”. I respectfully submit that as Father Most (RIP - I corresponded with him several times before he died - he was a very good historical theologian who wrote some very important books and articles that are still relevant and cited today) suggested, the “charismatic gifts” mentioned in the Bible occurred at a special time and in a specific community because of the need to help spread the New Word preached by Christ. In other words, THE CHURCH needed it to help the THE CHURCH continue to spread.
  2. The Church goes through a period of more than a thousand years before we see this “revival” of “speaking in tongues”, and it is documented that it arose first in Protestant circles, and was later adapted by Catholic groups who were clearly not “satisfied” with the present state of the Church at that time. For some reason, people thought the “Church” needed some “updating” in the 1950’s and 1960’s. I submit that the Church was fine - the people were the ones who had the problems. The Church did not cause the rise of Communism, Liberalism, “tune in, turn on, drop out” culture, “free love”, racism and the associated riots, the Vietnam War, etc. I don’t think that anyone can say with a straight face that the Catholic Church in America, and especially in Europe, is better off today than it was in the early 20th century. Orthodox Catholicism has been decimated, and we find people popping up with all sorts of “cures”. I am firmly in the camp that does not believe people who engage in “hysterical emotional outbursts” as evidence of “possession of the Holy Spirit”. I HAVE SEEN the denigration of the Holy Mass by the presence of hand-holding, raised hands, deviating from the GIRM, full bands accompanied by clapping as though at a concert - this is all Protestant-rooted. The presence of “speaking in tongues” in the Bible IS proof - yes, proof - that this charism existed and may still exist. But the presence of it in the Bible is NOT proof that everyone who acts “charismatic” is indeed under the influence of the Holy Spirit . . . and THAT is the problem. Who decides, from a Church view, whether a person exercising an alleged “charism” is to be believed? Good Lord - look at what it takes for the Church to recognize a person as a saint or an apparition as truthful (Fatima, Lourdes, vs. Medjugore)!!!
  3. Finally, I have said it before, and I will say it for the final time: I have NEVER said that the Holy Spirit is limited by ANYTHING - whether time, people, emotion, “tactics”, whatever - the Holy Spirit will do whatever It wants to do when It wants to do it.
But I respectfully submit that EVERY “charismatic Catholic” who claims to have “discovered” this new charism that I have experienced, has always sought out the Holy Spirit, become “emotional” (to be charitable), and then sought affirmation that what he or she experienced was a charism from the Holy Spirit. From my reading of the Bible, the Holy Spirit chooses IT’S own time and place to deliver It’s gifts - not man. It is as though they are DESERATELY seeking “the Holy Spirit” to such a degree that it is a foregone conclusion that they ARE going to find the Holy Spirit - it is only a matter of time. That is simply too presumptuous for me.

And am I mistaken that St. Paul as well as Vatican II (in a surprisingly frank, smart statement) stated that one should NOT seek out such “gifts”???

In closing, I simply have never found it necessary for God to need OUR help in doing anything. I find it “hubris gone wild” when I see people claiming that the Holy Spirit has bestowed some sort of charism on only them, and that they believe it is necessary to continue God’s Church, that this alleged charism be spread to others.

Some sincere defenders of “charismatic catholics” on this thread have said that it is NOT necessary that anyone partake or engage in the charism of “speaking in tongues” and other “charismatic gifts”. Yet, why are these charismatic groups so intent on getting people to join them? Contrary to what some have said, these groups - and I have HEARD their pitch first hand - essentially say that to truly “reach” God, one needs to become charismatic.

Sorry . . . I just don’t believe that, and I don’t believe that the Catholic Church as ever taught that . . .
 
1Corinthians 14: 1-3

“Pursue love, but strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, above all that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God, for no one listens; he utters mysteries in spirit. On the other hand, one who prophesies does speak to human beings, for their building up, encouragement, and solace.”

1Corinthians 14: 5

“Now I should like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy.”
 
It’s like people won’t even try to understand… Granny, you have the patience of a saint! 🙂
 
Granny,

Your quotes, I believe, support the points I have been making all along . . .
  1. “Pursue love, but strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, above all that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God, for no one listens; he utters mysteries in spirit. On the other hand, one who prophesies does speak to human beings, for their building up, encouragement, and solace.”
Here, St. Paul is quite clearly stating that speaking in tongues and prophesying are two distinct spiritual gifts. When one speaks in tongues, one is speaking to God (I never denied this, nor did I say this was not possible). When one is prophesying, one is speaking to people - IN FURTHERANCE OF THE CHURCH’S MISSION. This is EXACTLY what I said previously. The Holy Spirit was “sharing” different gifts on a CERTAIN people at a CERTAIN time for a CERTAIN purpose. St. Paul merely records that sharing and instructing how those gifts should be used.
  1. “For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God, for no one listens; he utters mysteries in spirit.”
Again, this goes to a point I raised in one of my first posts in this thread over a year ago: WHY utter sounds that no human being can understand? If it is, indeed, prayer to God, then by all means - pray to God. I don’t think anyone will have a problem with that . . .

But that is NOT what most charismatics (at least, not those I have experienced) do or encourage or seem to want to achieve: they make a public show of their “newfound charism” and somehow think that speaking to God in tongues is better than speaking to God in one’s vernacular language. I don’t buy that argument. When we pray, God looks to our heart and soul - He looks at WHAT we say and our SINCERITY in saying it - not the words we use to say it.
  1. “he utters mysteries in spirit”
Again - goes to my point: why utter sounds that no one understands but God?

I hope, for the final time, that I am NOT against “speaking in tongues” to God. I see, however, NO logical sense in doing so out loud with the intent that MEN hear the “tongues”, when what is being said is, quite clearly stated by St. Paul, a “mystery”.

How, exactly, does one evangelize people with mysteries - things that they will not understand?
  1. “Now I should like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy.”
Finally, and again quite clearly, St. Paul “ranks” the two charisms in importance for the people to whom he is speaking and at the time he is speaking to them: If one wants to speak in tongues, by all means, speak in tongues. Talk to God in any manner you wish - no one will condemn that, provided it is done with sincerity and without mockery.

But what the Church needed at that time in its history to advance itself through the world were people imbued with the charism of prophecy. And in this sense, “prophecy” was NOT used to connote the same charism as practiced by the OT prophets, as that sort of prophecy had ended by virtue of Jesus Christ coming to Earth to FULFILL the words of all the prophets.

The following is an analysis by what is considered by most theologians as probably the best bible commentary ever produced: “A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture”.

"The term ‘prophecy’ seems to have a wide sense, including a miraculous insight into doctrine, morality, and perhaps the thoughts of other men. Ancient Jewish prophets had the same powers. As regards the charism of ‘tongues’ (i.e., languages - one word for both in Greek) by far the best view is that it was the same gift as the Apostles received at Pentecost: the miraculous power of speaking LANGUAGES not previously learnt. Its purpose, as Paul says in v. 22 was the conversion of unbelievers [as I said before: furthering the advancement of the Church], and to make it a frequent part of Christian worship, as had been done at Corinth, was an abuse. . . . There are two other views about the gift: (1) That it was the sort of unintelligible utterance which we hear of in certain sects, Christian and otherwise, caused by unwholesome religious excitement - in fact, GIBBERISH. In that case Paul would not merely have restricted it, but would have very certainly banned it.

This is the FIRST time, in all of the history of this post, that I reviewed the book I just cited. I humbly suggest that what I quoted above SUPPORTS what I have been saying all along:

A. Uttering “gibberish” makes no sense (pardon the pun) to do because no one listening benefits from it.

B. I have NEVER met a “charismatic catholic” speak in “tongues”, and then have ANYONE, including the speaker, explain to me what was just said. Yet they, as a group in each setting I met them, INSISTED that what they were doing/saying had a benefit for all present. Ironic they could not tell me what that benefit was . . .

C. “Charismatic catholic” groups ENCOURAGE “mass participation” in their groups and seek out “followers”. They take PRIDE in their supposed “gift” and somehow think that if people join them and listen to them, then the “gift” will be given to them as well. That is SO presumptuous that it borders on predicting when the Holy Spirit will act.

D. Finally, as the book I cited states: “Prophecy is superior because it benefits others . . . Sounds are useless unless their meaning is understood . . . Among Christians themselves (whether in praying or preaching) all incomprehensible speech is out of place”.
 
Salvatore123 said:
Granny,

Your quotes, I believe, support the points I have been making all along . . .
Click to expand...
Yes.
What is important is to place your points next to *both *what is found in St. Paul’s teachings *and *what is found elsewhere in history. When one does this, one finds a variety of situations, some good, some bad, some neutral.

As St. Paul says: "“Pursue love, but strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, above all that you may prophesy.” (1 Corinthians 14: 1)

The Holy Spirit Gift of Prophesy appears in St. Paul’s list which begins with 1Corinthians 12:1. “Now in regard to the spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be unaware.”

Prophesy is the classical ministry gift whereby God speaks His own thoughts to humans through a human being. Speaking in the vernacular is the means of giving God’s message. This is so that God’s messenger is sure of God’s message and those hearing the message hear it in their own language. This is different from Acts 2: 5-12 in that the Gift of Prophesy is when there is a shared language being spoken between *both *the speaker *and *the listeners. In Acts 2: 5-12, the apostles are speaking in their normal Galilean tongue, yet they are heard instantly according to the different language of each listener which in many cases would not be naturally understood by each apostle. This singular instance in Acts has been referred to as a miracle of hearing.

The Old Testament is full of people using this Holy Spirit Gift of Prophesy. The difference from Acts 2: 5-12 is that both prophets *and *listeners are using the same language. From looking at the prophets in the Old Testament, one realizes right off that it is a Charismatic ministry to the people of God. This Charismatic Gift continues in the New Testament. Some examples are Luke 1: 67-79; Luke 2:32-34; Acts 13:3.

The greatest and most important use of the Holy Spirit Gift of Prophesy is the period following the Apostolic era which is the period we live in. To understand how this gift is presented to our period, which stretches over centuries, one has to study Chapter 14, Gospel of John. This is the promise of the Holy Spirit and what His mission is to the Catholic Church. In our period, the Gift of Prophesy, God’s message to humans, is shared between humans living at different times and thus it is prominent in the infallible doctrines of Catholicism based on Divine Revelation. Divine Revelation is God’s message of truth given to various councils and thus to the community. This is a repetition of the gift of Prophesy listed by St. Paul.

It is so easy to say that the “gifts” given to people at the time of the apostles were only meant for that period–but, as seen above, this popular general statement is not totally accurate.

Paul’s emphasis on the Gift of Prophesy is obvious. Its importance throughout history cannot be overestimated nor can its dangers be overlooked.
Here, St. Paul is quite clearly stating that speaking in tongues and prophesying are two distinct spiritual gifts. When one speaks in tongues, one is speaking to God (I never denied this, nor did I say this was not possible). When one is prophesying, one is speaking to people - IN FURTHERANCE OF THE CHURCH’S MISSION. This is EXACTLY what I said previously. The Holy Spirit was “sharing” different gifts on a CERTAIN people at a CERTAIN time for a CERTAIN purpose. St. Paul merely records that sharing and instructing how those gifts should be used.
Click to expand...
It is correct that the Charismatic Gift of Prophesy was in furtherance of the Church’s Mission. But, as I demonstrated above, the Gift of Prophesy, which St. Paul recorded in Chapter 12 of 1 Corinthians, was not limited to the Apostolic Age.

Next, we need to look at “For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to human beings but to God…” (1Corinthians 14: 2) Salvatore123 has some excellent comments in post 183 which need to be addressed. However, I need to get ready for the Holy Sacrifice Mass …

Quick note: Salvatore123 is on target when he says “Here, St. Paul is quite clearly stating that speaking in tongues and prophesying are two distinct spiritual gifts.”
My assumption from the rest of his post, is that Salvatore123 is referring to the gift of praying in tongues which is available to anyone.
 
Our Lord prayed for our unity and in the course of history, Charismatics have divided, confused, and misled. Just a few examples of different Charismatic communities have been cited but there is a plethora of other examples that can easily be given.

The gifts shouldn’t be the focus but rather unity in Jesus Christ.

John 17
20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,
23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.
24 Father, I desire that they also, whom thou hast given me, may be with me where I am, to behold my glory which thou hast given me in thy love for me before the foundation of the world.
25 O righteous Father, the world has not known thee, but I have known thee; and these know that thou hast sent me.

Martin Luther was the beginning of over 40,000 denominations… The Charismatic Covenant communities have unwittingly subdivided our Catholic faith to its’ detriment.

I would argue that the Church desperately needs to provide CCD review courses for Catholic adults. There is a yearning to re-learn what one may have already learned during one’s youth but forgotten. This yearning for Truth is being exploited by Protestants and Charismatic communities by introducing false teachings…why not just have CCD review classes for adults… why introduce a false pseudo-Sacrament and non-traditional rituals through these Christian Life Seminars? This only takes away many from the one true Church established by our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and introduces them to (see its’ fruit) to something entirely man-made. The enemy divides and confuses. God unites.
 
**Regarding the basic elements of the Holy Spirit Gift of praying in tongues commonly known as prayer tongues directed to God Himself and not to one’s neighbor. **

Prayer tongues is the way the English language can be used to distinguish between the two separate gifts using tongues which are referred to as “speaking”.

Regarding the important distinction between the two “tongues” gifts, St. Paul explains it this way.

1Corinthians 14: 13-19
"Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray to be able to interpret. [For] if I pray in a tongue, my spirit is at prayer but my mind is unproductive. So what is to be done? I will pray with the spirit, but I will also pray with the mind. I will sing praise with the spirit, but I will also sing praise with the mind. Otherwise, if you pronounce a blessing [with] the spirit, how shall one who holds the place of the uninstructed say the “Amen” to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? For you may be giving thanks very well, but the other is not built up.

“I give thanks to God that I speak in tongues more than any of you, but in the church I would rather speak five words with my mind, so as to instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.”
 
Why two different gifts of Tongues?

The logic of two different Holy Spirit gifts using “tongues” is based on the example of Jesus both preaching in the temple and praying on the mountain.

Obviously the entire list of Holy Spirit gifts listed in 1Corinthians 12: 4-11 are meant to outwardly build up the Church of Jesus Christ. In this list, there are two gifts which present the word of God which is His message for the community. One is the Gift of Prophesy given in the vernacular and the other is the Gift of [speaking] Tongues which must be used in cooperation with the Gift of Interpretation of Tongues. (1Corinthians 12:10). Both gifts reflect the mission of Jesus Christ to preach the Good News.

As for Jesus praying to His Father (which includes Matthew 26: 42), there are plenty of examples in the lives of the Saints and in our own lives as well. Biographies of Saints mention* both* their time in prayer to God and their time in serving the needs of the Church. The means of prayer to God are numerous.

Because we live in the 21st century is not sufficient reason to ignore the means that St. Paul used for his prayer to God. In 1Corinthians 14: 13 -19 (post 186), it is St. Paul’s comparison between the terms with the spirit and with the mind which illustrates prayer tongues for us. It is easy for us to understand that with the mind refers to our rational abilities.

I am sure that with the spirit brings a variety of thoughts. However, when one uses the Gift of Prayer tongues, one freely sets aside temporarily the use of her or his memory which is used in speaking and praying. She or he then uses the normal speech mechanism of the lips, tongue and larynx under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. St. Paul describes this in 1Corinthians 14:14. “[For] if I pray in a tongue, my spirit is at prayer but my mind is unproductive.”

For us, the way to pray in St. Paul’s example, is to yield to the Holy Spirit. In a sense, that is similar to the familiar phrase, “die to oneself” – in other words we submit ourselves to God. While we give the Holy Spirit control over our speech faculties, we still retain control as to whether or not we actually use our speech faculties. We have to let or allow the Holy Spirit to pray within us and we can withdraw that permission at any time.

The yielding to the presence and power of God is also employed by the Saints in their deepest moments in prayer. Giving oneself over to God is the similarity between praying in tongues and the many spiritual avenues of prayer of the different saints.
 
Granny,

As I have cited several times, both a long time ago, and recently, although I do not deny the existence of “speaking in tongues”, I have yet to find one (what one would call “orthodox”/pre-1960’s culture) theological opinion that states that such a gift involves uttering sounds that (1) mean nothing to the “utterer” when asked, (2) mean nothing to those who listen.

Several protestants have responded to this thread, but even they cannot answer a basic question I have asked many times, without answer:

Why would God or the Holy Spirit “come into” someone so that they are possessed of the charism of “speaking in tongues” for the moment, that leads them to utter sounds that make no sense to the “utterer” or those listening?

I don’t think that is an unfair question to ask, and I do not think it is a fair response to say: “Well, ask the Holy Spirit - not me (and I am not directing this to you - this was said by others). It is the one causing the charism - not me”.

That is simply too dismissive and fails to get to the underlying POINT of all of this, which St. Paul quite plainly sets forth in Corinthians.

Even Karl Keating, one of the founders of this forum, has stated quite clearly that (and I am paraphrasing) it makes no logical sense for God to cause someone to utter sounds that absolutely no one can understand. How does listening to gibberish (which, by definition, are sounds that are completely unintelligible by any man) further God’s goals?

If we get into the “I just FEEL that the Holy Spirit is in me” line of thinking/argument, then it is impossible to have a productive conversation/discussion because I don’t know of anyone who can “debate” one’s “feelings”.
 
Salvatore123 said:
Granny,

As I have cited several times, both a long time ago, and recently, although I do not deny the existence of “speaking in tongues”, I have yet to find one (what one would call “orthodox”/pre-1960’s culture) theological opinion that states that such a gift involves uttering sounds that (1) mean nothing to the “utterer” when asked, (2) mean nothing to those who listen.

Several protestants have responded to this thread, but even they cannot answer a basic question I have asked many times, without answer:
Click to expand...
And I have repeatedly answered that the pre-60’s culture which some people ask about is that of St. Paul. If some people do not wish to accept that answer, that is their decision. I cannot change St. Paul’s actions.

In post 186, in the section 1Corinthians 14: 13-19, there is this comment from St. Paul: “I will sing praise with the spirit.” If some people do not wish to accept the answer that St. Paul is praising God, that is their decision. I cannot downgrade St. Paul’s love for God.
Why would God or the Holy Spirit “come into” someone so that they are possessed of the charism of “speaking in tongues” for the moment, that leads them to utter sounds that make no sense to the “utterer” or those listening?
Click to expand...
This is as far from a correct understanding of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal and the ordinary gift of praying in tongues as day is from night. If someone wishes to understand how St. Paul’s words in Post 186 are being used in this century by the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, then one needs to be open to the correct information about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. Obviously, disagreement will occur. But what is the use of disagreement when it is based on misconceptions?
I don’t think that is an unfair question to ask, and I do not think it is a fair response to say: “Well, ask the Holy Spirit - not me (and I am not directing this to you - this was said by others). It is the one causing the charism - not me”.
Click to expand...
Personally, I do not pay any attention to the response “Well, ask the Holy Spirit – not me.”
That is simply too dismissive and fails to get to the underlying POINT of all of this, which St. Paul quite plainly sets forth in Corinthians.
Click to expand...
I have read a number of points presented by St. Paul. I have presented some of his points in post 186. Please notice that Post 186 does not contain anyone’s interpretation. I waited to post 187 to use some, not all, of St. Paul’s points to answer the question – “Why two different gifts of Tongues?” It is my observation that many people who object to the use of Tongues have difficulty understanding these two gifts. Post 187 is a beginning. If someone is interested in more information regarding this post, I will be happy to answer those questions.

In post 187, I used a different approach to understanding the difference between the two gifts of Tongues by referring to the life of Jesus Christ.
Even Karl Keating, one of the founders of this forum, has stated quite clearly that (and I am paraphrasing) it makes no logical sense for God to cause someone to utter sounds that absolutely no one can understand. How does listening to gibberish (which, by definition, are sounds that are completely unintelligible by any man) further God’s goals?
Click to expand...
Why paraphrase? May I respectfully point out that a misleading paraphrase is not proper especially when it sounds like a reference to St. Paul.
If we get into the “I just FEEL that the Holy Spirit is in me” line of thinking/argument, then it is impossible to have a productive conversation/discussion because I don’t know of anyone who can “debate” one’s “feelings”.
Click to expand...
No comment necessary.
I did post 186 so that people could read St. Paul’s words without anyone’s spin on it. Nonetheless, this does not mean that one should avoid the rest of St. Paul’s teachings.

Post 187 was done so that an interested person could start learning what is involved in prayer tongues as taught in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. If anyone is interested in post 187, please do not hesitate to address it. Otherwise, post 187 stands as written.

Please note –
The Catholic Charismatic Renewal does not make fun of St. Paul by calling his prayers and God’s messages gibberish.
 
Granny,

I caught something you said that I had not really thought about before. You said:

"Prayer tongues is the way the English language can be used to distinguish between the two separate gifts using tongues which are referred to as “speaking”.

Regarding the important distinction between the two “tongues” gifts, St. Paul explains it this way."

If I misunderstood/misunderstand what you are saying, I apologize.

You APPPEAR to be saying that St. Paul describes THREE gifts in 1 Corinthians: 2 “tongue gifts” and 1 “prophesy” gift.

I do not believe that interpretation withstands scrutiny.

I never thought I would be quoting from the new NABRE Study Bible (which, to me, is a horrible translation) comments, but I was surprised to see the commentary mirrors what I have been saying:

"The series in contrasts . . . discloses the problem in Corinth: a disproprotionate interest in tongues, with a corresponding failure to appreciate the worth of prophecy. Paul attempts to clarify the relative values of those gifts by indicating the kind of communication achieved in each and the kind of effect each produces.

"They involve TWO kinds (not THREE) of communication: tongues [defined as] private speech toward God in inarticulate terms that NEED interpretation to be intelligible to others; prophecy [defined as] communication with others in the community.

"They produce TWO kinds of effect. One who speaks in tongues BUILDS HIMSELF UP; it is a matter of individual experience and personal perfection, which inevitably recalls Paul’s previous remarks about being inflated, seeking one’s own good, pleasing oneself. [Granny - I, and several others, have been saying this exact thing all along: “charismatic catholics” - at least the ones I have encountered - take almost a perverse pride in their so-called gift, and set themselves apart from those who do not have that gift. St. Paul is DEFINITELY denigrating this.]

"But a prophet builds up the church: the them of building up or edifying others, the main theme of the letter, comes to clearest expression in this chapter . . .

“Sound, IN ORDER TO BE USEFUL, MUST BE INTELLIGIBLE. THIS PRINCIPLE IS ILLUSTRATED BY A SERIES OF ANALOGIES FROM MUSIC AND FROM ORDINARY HUMAN SPEECH; IT IS APPLIED TO THE CASE AT HAND. THE CHARISM OF INTERPRETATION LIFTS TONGUES TO THE LEVEL OF INTELLIGIBILITY, ENABLING THEM TO PRODUCE THE SAME EFFECT AS PROPHECY.”

He may be a poor example, given his past, but Jimmy Swaggart “speaks in tongues” in the manner that several protestants have referred to in “support” of speaking in tongues that no one understands.

Although I have not seen it done with Swaggart (I have seen it asked of “charismatic catholics” - to no avail), I am as certain about this next statement as anything I have ever said: When Swaggart speaks in tongues, I submit that if he went back and reviewed himself on tape speaking, he would not be able to tell you what he was saying, and not ONE interpreter was nearby explaining to the congregation what it is Swaggart was saying when he was uttering his gibberish.

And I find that Swaggart’s use of “speaking in tongues” is very illustrative of the inefficacy of what he claims the Holy Spirit has “called” him to do. Swaggart, if you watch enough of him - and I have - will preach his sermon and at the “emotional highpoints” during his sometimes hours-long talk, he will pepper phrases such as (and of course, I am paraphrasing, because I cannot make ANY sense out of what he is saying, so I cannot accurately reproduce in stenographic form what he said - but I will do my best):

“Praise be God and the Holy Spirit . . . hambabala samba seca tosotu . . . Praise God for giving me strength . . . jenesca sotoro bemaba soto . . .”

What POSSIBLE benefit was derived when Swaggart (or anyone else for that matter) talked as he did above?

HOW does that further the Church and a love of God (remember - Paul prefaces EVERYTHING he tells the Corinthians with the admonition that, without love, everything else is for naught)?

Time and time again, we always come back to what I have asked repeatedly:

“What purpose does it serve to have someone speak a completely unintelligible sound?”

Remember: if it can be translated by the speaker or by an interpreter, then, by definition, it is not unintelligible.

Thus, with this post and my previous one, I hope I get my point and question across: If, as Paul says, striving for tongues, as the Corinthians were doing, was leading them astray, what purpose does the “charistmatic renewal” serve? What is being renewed? Why choose or seek a “gift” that sets one apart from the vast majority of the rest of the Church?

I have posted in this thread with utmost sincerity and truly with an open mind (despite what another poster said). I want to know WHY, in today’s era, “speaking in tongues” is so paramount for these “charismatic groups”, when they were non-existent in the Catholic world for literally over a thousand years (and I mean “non-existent” in the sense that the Catholic Church never officially taught about this charism or even mentioned it, until after Vatican II)?
 
granny,

So that it does not appear to a recent-reader who reads your last post that I denigrated St. Paul in any manner, I most certainly did not.

I have NEVER said that what St. Paul said when speaking in tongues was gibberish.

Gibberish, by definition, is an utterance that has no basis in any known language and that CANNOT be explained/interpreted by either the speaker or the listener.

I would NEVER characterize St. Paul’s “speaking in tongues” in such a manner.
 
Salvatore123, let us pray for Granny and others who cannot understand the message you are trying to share… Sometimes, pride or the truth is so overwhelming that everything in all of the previous posts written by you and me simply cannot be understood and must, in their minds, be refuted.

For example, for Protestants, why can’t they understand John 6? What is not clear? They claim “Sola Scriptura” (bible alone) yet they are completely blind to the Holy Eucharist. How can this happen? Well, look at Pharaoh in Exodus… God hardened his heart and was blind to the plagues until finally, upon the death of the firstborn sons of the Egyptians, he let the Israelites go. Clearly, we know that serious sin can blind.

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm

Charismatics belittle the Saints when they believe they have the same gifts as them. They also belittle the Saints when they proceed to invite people into their Christian Life Seminars and say that they too can have the very same gifts that our Apostles had.

These gifts can dangerously enlarge one’s ego beyond understanding the Truth. There are several examples of this in charismatic history.

Peace be with you and to charismatics trying to find the Truth about this “Renewal”
 
Salvatore123 said:
granny,

So that it does not appear to a recent-reader who reads your last post that I denigrated St. Paul in any manner, I most certainly did not.

I have NEVER said that what St. Paul said when speaking in tongues was gibberish.

Gibberish, by definition, is an utterance that has no basis in any known language and that CANNOT be explained/interpreted by either the speaker or the listener.

I would NEVER characterize St. Paul’s “speaking in tongues” in such a manner.
Click to expand...
This is what I posted.

Please note –
The Catholic Charismatic Renewal does not make fun of St. Paul by calling his prayers and God’s messages gibberish.

Please note that I was not referring to indiviudals who do not agree with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. Please note that I referred to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal itself, its very self.

Thank you.
 
Salvatore123 said:
Granny,

I caught something you said that I had not really thought about before. You said:

"Prayer tongues is the way the English language can be used to distinguish between the two separate gifts using tongues which are referred to as “speaking”.

Regarding the important distinction between the two “tongues” gifts, St. Paul explains it this way."

If I misunderstood/misunderstand what you are saying, I apologize.

You APPPEAR to be saying that St. Paul describes THREE gifts in 1 Corinthians: 2 “tongue gifts” and 1 “prophesy” gift.
Click to expand...
Correct. I referred to three gifts of the Holy Spirit while St. Paul lists 10 Charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit found in Chapters 12 and 14 in 1Corinthians.

The Catholic Charismatic Renewal clarifies which gift of tongues St. Paul is referring to in the beginning of Chapter 14, 1Corinthians, by presenting the whole of Chapter 14 and its relationship to the whole of Chapter 12.

The actual problem is that those unfamiliar with the Catholic Charismatic Renewal tend to sidestep some of St. Paul’s essential teachings regarding the 10 Charismatic Gifts which are prominent in Chapters 12 and 14.

I have deliberately sidestepped mentioning each of the 10 Charismatic gifts because that would be too much to absorb without proper preparation. Basically, as one reads St. Paul, one finds that he has grouped nine of these gifts as ministries to the others. It is the 10th gift of ordinary prayer tongues which people misunderstand.
Paul attempts to clarify the relative values of those gifts by indicating the kind of communication achieved in each and the kind of effect each produces.
Click to expand...
May I respectfully point out that this general interpretation, while informative, misses the heart of St. Paul’s teaching regarding Tongues.

St. Paul’s basic clarification of the two kinds of Charismatic Gifts which use Tongues is found in post 181. St. Paul’s personal evaluation of the ordinary gift of Prayer Tongues is in post 186, last paragraph where St. Paul gives thanks to God for this gift.

I have never listened to Jimmy Swaggart. Is he promoting the Catholic Charismatic Renewal?

I did google Mr. Swaggart and found this among many sources. Apparently, he is a Pentecostal American Pastor, etc. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Swaggart

I am sorry, but I do not see why I should discuss him when the Catholic Charismatic Renewal participates in the life of the Catholic Church.
 
jjkp777 said:
ewtn.com/expert/answers/charismatic_renewal.htm

I posted this link before but have reposted this information for those who may have missed this information:

"Discernment of Charisms

…

On the other hand, a spirit which acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh is of God (1 John 4:2). Such doctrinal correctness is a motive of credibility in the authenticity of a charism or event. Yet, a person may simply be operating by the human spirit fortified by Faith and may not be manifesting an extraordinary gift. To determine whether a given phenomenon exceeds human nature calls for a discernment beyond simple orthodoxy. For example, in the special case of an apparition, when a bishop declares an event to be “worthy of belief” or “not worthy of belief” he does so based upon both scientific (can it be explained?) and theological (is it from God?) criteria. So, orthodoxy is the necessary beginning of the discernment, not the end.

There is yet another dimension of the discernment which needs to be considered. Since charisms are given to build up the Church, there is no necessary connection with personal sanctity. Saints, sinners and even unbelievers have manifested these gifts. The pagan prophet Balaam was given the Divine spirit of prophecy in order to authenticate Israel as the People of God (Num. 22). Thus the moral state of the recipient (good or bad) does not by itself indicate a true or false charism. When actually under the constraint of the Spirit of God, however, the true charismatic could not say or do anything contrary to that Spirit. No one could claim, for instance, that the Spirit of God led him to get drunk or do anything sinful, although he might at other times do such things.

Practically speaking, therefore, the many instances of extraordinary charisms within the Charismatic Renewal will never come under the official scrutiny of the Church. Priests and Catholic laity associated with the Renewal will most likely have to discern each instance themselves, according to the theological criteria of Catholic theology and prudence. It is easier to dismiss a phenomenon as NOT from God than it is to determine its other possible sources (human or divine spirit). A basic question prayerfully asked must be “is this particular event a credible example of the action of the Spirit of God - a Spirit incapable of any lie or sin and which can only lead people (even non-Catholics) to a deeper Catholic faith and unity?” This should do much to protect us from the roaring lion (1 Peter 5:8), even if it cannot produce the judgement that something is certainly from God - a fact which only the Holy See can ultimately state."
Click to expand...
 
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

"Extraordinary gifts are not to be sought after, nor are the fruits of apostolic labor to be presumptuously expected from their use; but judgment as to their genuinity and proper use belongs to those who are appointed leaders in the Church, to whose special competence it belongs, not indeed to extinguish the Spirit, but to test all things and hold fast to that which is good.(116)"

During these Charismatic Covenant Christian Life Seminars, aren’t they doing the complete opposite? I know that during the seminar we attended, we were asked to pray for extraordinary gifts before our Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Isn’t this the complete OPPOSITE of what the aforementioned document says to do? What does that say about this Renewal?

Peace and the Truth be with you!
 
Salvatore123 said:
I have posted in this thread with utmost sincerity and truly with an open mind (despite what another poster said). I want to know WHY, in today’s era, “speaking in tongues” is so paramount for these “charismatic groups”, when they were non-existent in the Catholic world for literally over a thousand years (and I mean “non-existent” in the sense that the Catholic Church never officially taught about this charism or even mentioned it, until after Vatican II)?
Click to expand...
I respect your sincerity. Please respect my sincerity that I have answered this question with the fact that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal goes back to St. Paul. Would it help if I added that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is not renewing the middle centuries?

Nor is the Catholic Charismatic Renewal renewing Protestant teachings. Would it help if I point out the obvious that St. Paul is not a Protestant? St. Paul is the source of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal in spite of the fact that other Christians do read Scripture.

Scripture is Sacred. In this Forum, it is permissible to discuss Scripture from various viewpoints. I respect that.

Consequently, I will do my best to present the Catholic Charismatic Renewal position regarding this thread’s questions about Tongues.
 
now the spirit of the lord entered him and he began to speak in tongues

however hours later they realized it was just gas

(c) lolcats

now thats what is think of when someone says false tongues : )

Shalom
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top