S
StTommyMore
Guest
Try the Holy Scriptures. The early Church was Charismatic.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
I’m referring to the present state. Look at this for example:May I ask if you are using the word “Charismatic” in the language of the Catholic Church which sometimes uses the word Charism as another word for the many, many Gifts of the Holy Spirit. As an example, the *Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, *refers to the Gifts and Fruits of the Holy Spirit in paragraphs 1830 -1832. These particular gifts are known as the Isaiah Gifts. Other gifts are referred to as ministries within the Mystical Body of Christ.
In practice, a person may be considered “Charismatic” as one receiving various gifts of the Holy Spirit without ever praying in tongues to God.
Catholic Charismatic pioneer Kevin Ranaghan told 7,500 Catholics in the audience that barking like dogs and oinking like pigs is a true manifestation of the Holy Spirit.
I have examples from local experiences. At a Charismatic gathering a member of the community had a vision or message from the Holy Spirit: the mother of another member was healed, she had been hospitalized but the Holy Spirit just told the seer she would return home. In two weeks the lady was dead. This sort of “charisma” is so common now, so many people claim to have it, and then you see things like that of the lady. Also, the messages are trivial, and knowing how God has communicated with man throughout history and compare it with this outbreak of communication to all kind of people, that I just don’t believe it to come from the Holy Spirit.
There is another reason, to me a very important reason not to accept it:
“What the soul is to man’s body, the Holy Spirit is to the Body of Christ, which is the Church. The Holy Spirit does in the whole Church what the soul does in all members of one body. But see what you must beware of, see what you must take note of, see what you must fear. It happens that in the human body, or rather, off the body, some member, whether hand, finger, or foot, may be cut away. And if a member be cut off, does the soul go with it? When the member was in the body, it lived; and off, its life is lost. So too, a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body; cut off, he is made a heretic; the Spirit does not follow an amputated member.”
St. Augustine (354-430), Bishop of Hippo, Sermons, 267, 4
You see, this charismatic movement comes from the member that was cut away 500 years ago, the amputated member the Spirit does not follow.
I don’t deny the gifts from the Holy Spirit, it’s just that these are not gifts from Him, no matter how good they seem to be.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
Are you saying that every single member of the early Church had these gifts? Or were these manifestations just among a few, the leaders of the Church, the Apostles, the Bishops, the cleric?Try the Holy Scriptures. The early Church was Charismatic.
There certainly are things that God reserved only for the leaders. Not everyone can forgive sins, baptize, call himself a priest, change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus… or are we to say that these are things every Christian can, will and should do?
The reason I don’t regard the Charismatic movement to come from the Holy Spirit is 1) its absence for 1900+ years, 2) where it reappeared and 3) the manifestations themselves, in other words chaotic gatherings, people rolling like snakes in the floor and things of that nature (these are the extreme cases).
I don’t deny the gifts from the Holy Spirit nor that charisma is truly from the Holy Spirit, but I don’t believe the ones we see now are from Him. Barking like dogs and oinking like pigs can’t be manifestation of the Holy Spirit, no matter how good one feels about it.
On the other hand, who did Jesus promised the Spirit would come to and speak through? To every one of his followers? Not a chance.
Matthew 10:20, “For it is not you who will speak; but it will be the Spirit of your Father in you.”
John 15:26, “From the Father, I will send you the Spirit of truth. When this Helper has come from the Father, he will be my witness.”
John 16:13, “When he, the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into the whole truth.”
John 16:15, “All that the Father has is mine; because of this I have just told you, that the Spirit will take what is mine and make it known to you.”
All these passages refer to private conversations between Jesus and the Apostles. They were not held in public appearances of Jesus like the Sermon of the Mountain. The Apostles knew this, the Church Fathers knew this. The early Church leaders were spreading the Gospel, they needed special assistance to communicate the Word of God to people from different languages and cultures.
continue…
P
Prieldedi
Guest
continue…
The gift of tongues was not needed when the Apostles preached the Jews, or was it? Are there any references of the Apostles speaking in tongues when they preached to the Jews? Plus, tongues of fire on top of heads have not been repeated since Pentecost. Why?
St. Augustine stated that Pentecost was a one time event. More from him:
“7. How then, brethren, because he that is baptized in Christ, and believes on Him, does not speak now in the tongues of all nations, are we not to believe that he has received the Holy Ghost? God forbid that our heart should be tempted by this faithlessness. Certain we are that every man receives: but only as much as the vessel of faith that he shall bring to the fountain can contain, so much does He fill of it. Since, therefore, the Holy Ghost is even now received by men, some one may say, Why is it that no man speaks in the tongues of all nations? Because the Church itself now speaks in the tongues of all nations. Before, the Church was in one nation, where it spoke in the tongues of all. By speaking then in the tongues of all, it signified what was to come to pass; that by growing among the nations, it would speak in the tongues of all. Whoso is not in this Church, does not now receive the Holy Ghost. For, being cut off and divided from the unity of the members, which unity speaks in the tongues of all, let him declare for himself; he has it not. For if he has it, let him give the sign which was given then. What do we mean by saying, Let him give the sign which was then given? Let him speak in all tongues. He answers me: How then, do you speak in all tongues? Clearly I do; for every tongue is mine, namely, of the body of which I am a member. The Church, spread among the nations, speaks in all tongues; the Church is the body of Christ, in this body you are a member: therefore, since you are a member of that body which speaks with all tongues, believe that thou too speakest with all tongues. For the unity of the members is of one mind by charity; and that unity speaks as one man then spoke.”
St. Augustine, Tractate 32 (John 7:37-39)
"21. But when it is said that “the Holy Spirit is given by the imposition of hands in the Catholic Church only, I suppose that our ancestors meant that we should understand thereby what the apostle says, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” (Romans 5:5) For this is that very love which is wanting in all who are cut off from the communion of the Catholic Church; and for lack of this, “though they speak with the tongues of men and of angels, though they understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though they have the gift of prophecy, and all faith, so that they could remove mountains, and though they bestow all their goods to feed the poor, and though they give their bodies to be burned, it profits them nothing.” (1 Corinthians 13:1-3) But those are wanting in God’s love who do not care for the unity of the Church; and consequently we are right in understanding that the Holy Spirit may be said not to be received except in the Catholic Church. For the Holy Spirit is not only given by the laying on of hands amid the testimony of temporal sensible miracles, as He was given in former days to be the credentials of a rudimentary faith, and for the extension of the first beginnings of the Church. For who expects in these days that those on whom hands are laid that they may receive the Holy Spirit should immediately begin to speak with tongues? But it is understood that invisibly and imperceptibly, on account of the bond of peace, divine love is breathed into their hearts, so that they may be able to say, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” But there are many operations of the Holy Spirit, which the same apostle commemorates in a certain passage at such length as he thinks sufficient, and then concludes: “But all these works that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will.” (1 Corinthians 12:11) Since, then, the sacrament is one thing, which even Simon Magus could have; (Acts 8:13) and the operation of the Spirit is another thing, which is even often found in wicked men, as Saul had the gift of prophecy; and that operation of the same Spirit is a third thing, which only the good can have, as “the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:” (1 Timothy 1:5) whatever, therefore, may be received by heretics and schismatics, the charity which covers the multitude of sins is the special gift of Catholic unity and peace; nor is it found in all that are within that bond, since not all that are within it are of it, as we shall see in the proper place. At any rate, outside the bond that love cannot exist, without which all the other requisites, even if they can be recognized and approved, cannot profit or release from sin. But the laying on of hands in reconciliation to the Church is not, like baptism, incapable of repetition; for what is it more than a prayer offered over a man?”
St. Augustine, On Baptism, Chapter 16.
Three hundred years after the fact St. Augustine describes “speaking in tongues” as speaking other languages. Whom should I believe is on target, St. Augustine, removed just 300 years from the Apostles, or Charles Parham, founder of the modern Pentecostal movement, removed 1900 years from the Apostles? The choice is obvious.
The gift of tongues was not needed when the Apostles preached the Jews, or was it? Are there any references of the Apostles speaking in tongues when they preached to the Jews? Plus, tongues of fire on top of heads have not been repeated since Pentecost. Why?
St. Augustine stated that Pentecost was a one time event. More from him:
“7. How then, brethren, because he that is baptized in Christ, and believes on Him, does not speak now in the tongues of all nations, are we not to believe that he has received the Holy Ghost? God forbid that our heart should be tempted by this faithlessness. Certain we are that every man receives: but only as much as the vessel of faith that he shall bring to the fountain can contain, so much does He fill of it. Since, therefore, the Holy Ghost is even now received by men, some one may say, Why is it that no man speaks in the tongues of all nations? Because the Church itself now speaks in the tongues of all nations. Before, the Church was in one nation, where it spoke in the tongues of all. By speaking then in the tongues of all, it signified what was to come to pass; that by growing among the nations, it would speak in the tongues of all. Whoso is not in this Church, does not now receive the Holy Ghost. For, being cut off and divided from the unity of the members, which unity speaks in the tongues of all, let him declare for himself; he has it not. For if he has it, let him give the sign which was given then. What do we mean by saying, Let him give the sign which was then given? Let him speak in all tongues. He answers me: How then, do you speak in all tongues? Clearly I do; for every tongue is mine, namely, of the body of which I am a member. The Church, spread among the nations, speaks in all tongues; the Church is the body of Christ, in this body you are a member: therefore, since you are a member of that body which speaks with all tongues, believe that thou too speakest with all tongues. For the unity of the members is of one mind by charity; and that unity speaks as one man then spoke.”
St. Augustine, Tractate 32 (John 7:37-39)
"21. But when it is said that “the Holy Spirit is given by the imposition of hands in the Catholic Church only, I suppose that our ancestors meant that we should understand thereby what the apostle says, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” (Romans 5:5) For this is that very love which is wanting in all who are cut off from the communion of the Catholic Church; and for lack of this, “though they speak with the tongues of men and of angels, though they understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though they have the gift of prophecy, and all faith, so that they could remove mountains, and though they bestow all their goods to feed the poor, and though they give their bodies to be burned, it profits them nothing.” (1 Corinthians 13:1-3) But those are wanting in God’s love who do not care for the unity of the Church; and consequently we are right in understanding that the Holy Spirit may be said not to be received except in the Catholic Church. For the Holy Spirit is not only given by the laying on of hands amid the testimony of temporal sensible miracles, as He was given in former days to be the credentials of a rudimentary faith, and for the extension of the first beginnings of the Church. For who expects in these days that those on whom hands are laid that they may receive the Holy Spirit should immediately begin to speak with tongues? But it is understood that invisibly and imperceptibly, on account of the bond of peace, divine love is breathed into their hearts, so that they may be able to say, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” But there are many operations of the Holy Spirit, which the same apostle commemorates in a certain passage at such length as he thinks sufficient, and then concludes: “But all these works that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will.” (1 Corinthians 12:11) Since, then, the sacrament is one thing, which even Simon Magus could have; (Acts 8:13) and the operation of the Spirit is another thing, which is even often found in wicked men, as Saul had the gift of prophecy; and that operation of the same Spirit is a third thing, which only the good can have, as “the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:” (1 Timothy 1:5) whatever, therefore, may be received by heretics and schismatics, the charity which covers the multitude of sins is the special gift of Catholic unity and peace; nor is it found in all that are within that bond, since not all that are within it are of it, as we shall see in the proper place. At any rate, outside the bond that love cannot exist, without which all the other requisites, even if they can be recognized and approved, cannot profit or release from sin. But the laying on of hands in reconciliation to the Church is not, like baptism, incapable of repetition; for what is it more than a prayer offered over a man?”
St. Augustine, On Baptism, Chapter 16.
Three hundred years after the fact St. Augustine describes “speaking in tongues” as speaking other languages. Whom should I believe is on target, St. Augustine, removed just 300 years from the Apostles, or Charles Parham, founder of the modern Pentecostal movement, removed 1900 years from the Apostles? The choice is obvious.
G
grannymh
Guest
If you would kindly give me the where and when this happened, and especially the context, I would like to check this out. I did google him so I know who I can contact in order to get a confirmation. However, I do need an accurate citation. Otherwise, it would be considered an urban myth.I’m referring to the present state. Look at this for example:
Catholic Charismatic pioneer Kevin Ranaghan told 7,500 Catholics in the audience that barking like dogs and oinking like pigs is a true manifestation of the Holy Spirit.
This sounds like an abuse of the true Gifts. No wonder there is confusion.I have examples from local experiences. At a Charismatic gathering a member of the community had a vision or message from the Holy Spirit: the mother of another member was healed, she had been hospitalized but the Holy Spirit just told the seer she would return home. In two weeks the lady was dead. This sort of “charisma” is so common now, so many people claim to have it, and then you see things like that of the lady. Also, the messages are trivial, and knowing how God has communicated with man throughout history and compare it with this outbreak of communication to all kind of people, that I just don’t believe it to come from the Holy Spirit.
This sounds like the Protestant Reformation.There is another reason, to me a very important reason not to accept it:
“What the soul is to man’s body, the Holy Spirit is to the Body of Christ, which is the Church. The Holy Spirit does in the whole Church what the soul does in all members of one body. But see what you must beware of, see what you must take note of, see what you must fear. It happens that in the human body, or rather, off the body, some member, whether hand, finger, or foot, may be cut away. And if a member be cut off, does the soul go with it? When the member was in the body, it lived; and off, its life is lost. So too, a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body; cut off, he is made a heretic; the Spirit does not follow an amputated member.”
St. Augustine (354-430), Bishop of Hippo, Sermons, 267, 4
You see, this charismatic movement comes from the member that was cut away 500 years ago, the amputated member the Spirit does not follow.
I don’t have the source with me, but I have read an article which referred to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal as coming from the years following the Protestant Reformation.
This is actually an historical error. The Catholic Charismatic Renewal traces its roots directly to Pentecost and the period following as recorded in Acts and the letters of St. Paul.
While I have been struggling with this post, you have added more posts.I don’t deny the gifts from the Holy Spirit, it’s just that these are not gifts from Him, no matter how good they seem to be.
I appreciate the opportunity of this discussion with you. You are in my prayers especially when I do a 2:00 AM hour of Eucharistic Adoration.
Blessings,
granny
“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert
S
StTommyMore
Guest
To put it bluntly, it does not matter what you think. The Charismatic renewal has the blessing of Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI. You can either accept the Church’s ruling or reject it.Are you saying that every single member of the early Church had these gifts? Or were these manifestations just among a few, the leaders of the Church, the Apostles, the Bishops, the cleric?
There certainly are things that God reserved only for the leaders. Not everyone can forgive sins, baptize, call himself a priest, change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus… or are we to say that these are things every Christian can, will and should do?
The reason I don’t regard the Charismatic movement to come from the Holy Spirit is 1) its absence for 1900+ years, 2) where it reappeared and 3) the manifestations themselves, in other words chaotic gatherings, people rolling like snakes in the floor and things of that nature (these are the extreme cases).
I don’t deny the gifts from the Holy Spirit nor that charisma is truly from the Holy Spirit, but I don’t believe the ones we see now are from Him. Barking like dogs and oinking like pigs can’t be manifestation of the Holy Spirit, no matter how good one feels about it.
On the other hand, who did Jesus promised the Spirit would come to and speak through? To every one of his followers? Not a chance.
Matthew 10:20, “For it is not you who will speak; but it will be the Spirit of your Father in you.”
John 15:26, “From the Father, I will send you the Spirit of truth. When this Helper has come from the Father, he will be my witness.”
John 16:13, “When he, the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into the whole truth.”
John 16:15, “All that the Father has is mine; because of this I have just told you, that the Spirit will take what is mine and make it known to you.”
All these passages refer to private conversations between Jesus and the Apostles. They were not held in public appearances of Jesus like the Sermon of the Mountain. The Apostles knew this, the Church Fathers knew this. The early Church leaders were spreading the Gospel, they needed special assistance to communicate the Word of God to people from different languages and cultures.
continue…
P
Prieldedi
Guest
It’s not my own thinking. What I said is based on the writings of a Doctor of the Church and a Saint, St. Augustine. As I said before he lived closer in time to the Apostles than the founder of the modern Charismatic movement. Both have opposing views. St. Augustine is from the Catholic Church, Mr. Parham comes from the Methodist and Holiness movements of the early 20th Century, both Protestant. The Holy Spirit cannot contradict itself. It’s either St. Augustine or Mr. Parham the one the HS is talking through. As a Catholic, knowing the HS doesn’t follow the member cut away (Protestants) is more than enough for me to accept that St. Augustine is the one the HS speaks through.To put it bluntly, it does not matter what you think. The Charismatic renewal has the blessing of Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI. You can either accept the Church’s ruling or reject it.
The blessing you mention from the Pope, is it a dogma? Was it stated “ex cathedra”? There has been no encyclical by any Pope addressing the issue of the Charismatic movement yet. Since there is nothing of the sort the Pope has stated only his personal opinion. The way I see it, the Pope has allowed or tolerated the movement to continue in the name of ecumenism.
In the past the Church has allowed for years, even decades, false apparitions of the Virgin Mary before finally giving its last word on them. In that sense, up to this moment, there is no “ruling of the Church” that commands me to accept the Charismatic movement as being true manifestations of the Holy Spirit. So there is no way I’m rejecting any ruling of the Church on this matter. On the contrary, after reading St Augustine, you are the one rejecting a Church ruling that has been in effect nearly 1600 years.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
I found it here. It says that happened in June 1977.If you would kindly give me the where and when this happened, and especially the context, I would like to check this out. I did google him so I know who I can contact in order to get a confirmation. However, I do need an accurate citation. Otherwise, it would be considered an urban myth.
I will stop for now.While I have been struggling with this post, you have added more posts.
I appreciate the opportunity of this discussion with you. You are in my prayers especially when I do a 2:00 AM hour of Eucharistic Adoration.
Blessings,
granny
S
StTommyMore
Guest
You are not speaking truth. We must give our assent to decisions of the Popes, ex cathedra or not. If the popes have given their belssing, and you say that it is of the devil, you accuse the Popes of heresy, and in doing so separate yourself from the Body of Christ. You are no successor of Peter, Pope Benedict is. I defer to him.It’s not my own thinking. What I said is based on the writings of a Doctor of the Church and a Saint, St. Augustine. As I said before he lived closer in time to the Apostles than the founder of the modern Charismatic movement. Both have opposing views. St. Augustine is from the Catholic Church, Mr. Parham comes from the Methodist and Holiness movements of the early 20th Century, both Protestant. The Holy Spirit cannot contradict itself. It’s either St. Augustine or Mr. Parham the one the HS is talking through. As a Catholic, knowing the HS doesn’t follow the member cut away (Protestants) is more than enough for me to accept that St. Augustine is the one the HS speaks through.
The blessing you mention from the Pope, is it a dogma? Was it stated “ex cathedra”? There has been no encyclical by any Pope addressing the issue of the Charismatic movement yet. Since there is nothing of the sort the Pope has stated only his personal opinion. The way I see it, the Pope has allowed or tolerated the movement to continue in the name of ecumenism.
In the past the Church has allowed for years, even decades, false apparitions of the Virgin Mary before finally giving its last word on them. In that sense, up to this moment, there is no “ruling of the Church” that commands me to accept the Charismatic movement as being true manifestations of the Holy Spirit. So there is no way I’m rejecting any ruling of the Church on this matter. On the contrary, after reading St Augustine, you are the one rejecting a Church ruling that has been in effect nearly 1600 years.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
You are putting in my mouth words I have not said. I said the manifestation are not from the Holy Spirit. I don’t know from which spirit they are: human or other. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I don’t have the authority nor the audacity to call a Pope heretic. I just say what I believe based on the words of two Doctors of the Church: that those manifestations are not from the Holy Spirit. Period.You are not speaking truth. We must give our assent to decisions of the Popes, ex cathedra or not. If the popes have given their belssing, and you say that it is of the devil, you accuse the Popes of heresy, and in doing so separate yourself from the Body of Christ. You are no successor of Peter, Pope Benedict is. I defer to him.
Catholics are not forced to follow the personal opinions of the Holy Father. When he does speak ex Cathedra on this issue I will comply. At this moment in time all I can say is that I respect the opinion of the Holy Father.
If the Pope likes soccer and I like baseball… should I stop following baseball and start following soccer? Not following soccer means I’m separating from the Body of Christ?
According to some, the Pope accepts evolution. I don’t. Even if that is true, I’m not separating from the Body of Christ for having a different opinion from the Pope.
Read St. Augustine. Find out who founded today’s Charismatic movement and where did he come from, you can even go a bit further in time to 1739 and John Wesley, a Methodists called “The Father of the modern Pentecostal movement”, and to some extent, a mentor for Charles Parham. Check their backgrounds, do your homework.
G
grannymh
Guest
Thank you for your reference to Mr. Parham. He is the one I read about.It’s not my own thinking. What I said is based on the writings of a Doctor of the Church and a Saint, St. Augustine. As I said before he lived closer in time to the Apostles than the founder of the modern Charismatic movement. Both have opposing views. St. Augustine is from the Catholic Church, Mr. Parham comes from the Methodist and Holiness movements of the early 20th Century, both Protestant.
The truth about Mr. Parham is that he lived and did what he did and that is that.
Mr. Parham never had control of the Holy Spirit as if the Holy Spirit had to be obedient to Mr. Parham. Who is it on earth that commands God?
Or should I ask – Who has knowledge so complete that he knows everything about God? Certainly not myself.
The point is that the Holy Spirit never, not once, had to depend on Mr. Parham or anyone else to guide the Catholic Church. Even St. Augustine could not control the movements of the Holy Spirit.
The point is that the Holy Spirit renewed His Gifts directly to the Catholic Church. The Holy Spirit did not have to check in with Mr. Parham first.
The Holy Spirit does not have to get approval from modern interpreters of St. Augustine, who by the way, is often taken out of context.The Holy Spirit cannot contradict itself. It’s either St. Augustine or Mr. Parham the one the HS is talking through.
Please check the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 1260. It is best to read the entire paragraphAs a Catholic, knowing the HS doesn’t follow the member cut away (Protestants) is more than enough for me to accept that St. Augustine is the one the HS speaks through.
“Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.”
Who is limiting the power of the Holy Spirit by saying He can’t get near Mr. Parham?
Who knows what happened between God and Mr. Parham at the moment of death?
Blessings are not the same as a duly defined and declared theological dogma.The blessing you mention from the Pope, is it a dogma? Was it stated “ex cathedra”?
The actual dogma involved is the one proclaiming the existence of the Three Persons as One God.
Correct.There has been no encyclical by any Pope addressing the issue of the Charismatic movement yet. Since there is nothing of the sort the Pope has stated only his personal opinion.
This is a common opinion which does not limit the Holy Spirit in any way.The way I see it, the Pope has allowed or tolerated the movement to continue in the name of ecumenism.
True. However, allowed is not the same as requiring belief.In the past the Church has allowed for years, even decades, false apparitions of the Virgin Mary before finally giving its last word on them.
Correct. The dogma involved is the coming of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost.In that sense, up to this moment, there is no “ruling of the Church” that commands me to accept the Charismatic movement as being true manifestations of the Holy Spirit.
St. Augustine in that that out-of-context quote was not acting “ex cathedra.”So there is no way I’m rejecting any ruling of the Church on this matter. On the contrary, after reading St Augustine, you are the one rejecting a Church ruling that has been in effect nearly 1600 years.
The actual Catholic Church ruling is contained in Paragraph 1260 above. Please read entire paragraph.
In closing, the Holy Spirit has presented directly to the Catholic Church an opportunity to renew His Gifts. Attacks on the Catholic Charismatic Renewal have failed to suppress the Holy Spirit’s power.
None of the attacks on the Catholic Charismatic Renewal have banished the Holy Spirit’s gifts of tongues from Catholic spirituality which dates to Pentecost, the birthday of the Catholic Church.
Blessings,
granny
John, Chapter 6
S
StTommyMore
Guest
My parents are Methodists, I know about John Wesley. He wasn’t a “Methodist,” but an Anglican. His push for renewal in the Anglican Church resulted in the Methodist Church. Furthermore, we cannot discount the Charismatic movement based on who you discern to be its founders. “The Spirit blows where it will.” If you want to discount the Charismatic movement because of Wesley, will you also discount Marian devotion? Wesley had a very strong Marian devotion as well. Let us desist form ad hominems against Wesley and Pelham and discuss the fruits of the movement, which have been good.You are putting in my mouth words I have not said. I said the manifestation are not from the Holy Spirit. I don’t know from which spirit they are: human or other. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I don’t have the authority nor the audacity to call a Pope heretic. I just say what I believe based on the words of two Doctors of the Church: that those manifestations are not from the Holy Spirit. Period.
Catholics are not forced to follow the personal opinions of the Holy Father. When he does speak ex Cathedra on this issue I will comply. At this moment in time all I can say is that I respect the opinion of the Holy Father.
If the Pope likes soccer and I like baseball… should I stop following baseball and start following soccer? Not following soccer means I’m separating from the Body of Christ?
According to some, the Pope accepts evolution. I don’t. Even if that is true, I’m not separating from the Body of Christ for having a different opinion from the Pope.
Read St. Augustine. Find out who founded today’s Charismatic movement and where did he come from, you can even go a bit further in time to 1739 and John Wesley, a Methodists called “The Father of the modern Pentecostal movement”, and to some extent, a mentor for Charles Parham. Check their backgrounds, do your homework.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
Wesley was a Methodist… and a former Anglican, just as Luther was a Lutheran… and a former Catholic.My parents are Methodists, I know about John Wesley. He wasn’t a “Methodist,” but an Anglican. His push for renewal in the Anglican Church resulted in the Methodist Church. Furthermore, we cannot discount the Charismatic movement based on who you discern to be its founders. “The Spirit blows where it will.” If you want to discount the Charismatic movement because of Wesley, will you also discount Marian devotion? Wesley had a very strong Marian devotion as well. Let us desist form ad hominems against Wesley and Pelham and discuss the fruits of the movement, which have been good.
“Good fruits” are not enough to say that something comes from God. Other faiths produce “good fruits” too.
Wesley’s devotion for Mary is good, but his explanation of gifts as being from the HS are wrong. Luther was also a Marian, but he rebelled against the Pope. Shall we erect him a statue for being a Marian and forget his rebellion? Remember that the weeds and the wheat grow together in the field and also in the minds of men. Good thoughts share the same brain with bad thoughts.
Of course we have to know where Wesley and Parham come from. I said that St. Augustine was 300 years removed from the Apostles. Parham, besides being removed 1900 years from the Apostles, was 400 years removed from the Catholic Church. This speaks volumes to me.
The HS is telling some church you can’t baptize children, and at the same time the HS tells another church that’s ok to baptize children. He tells another church that Mary is not a Virgin, and at the same time He’s telling other church that Mary is Ever Virgin. He tells yet another church that eating Jesus flesh and drinking His blood is symbolic, and to another church He tells them it’s not symbolic. Add, to all these contradictions of the HS, the messages everyone and anyone is receiving and hearing from the HS and giving them to us as truths. Can’t you see the confusion all this is creating? It’s chaotic. So I’m going to discern if it’s the HS doing all the talking using St. Augustine and St. John of the Cross advice on these matters.
I was told by a friend of a divorced individual (who is now living with his girlfriend) that says that on Sundays at his church celebrations the Holy Spirit comes to him. You said that the Spirit blows where it will, which is true. But Church history, God’s Word and common sense also tell us where He might not blow and why not. How come the HS doesn’t tell this individual he’s living in sin with his girlfriend? How come he doesn’t get word from the HS that it was wrong (and sinful) to divorce his wife? On the contrary, he says the HS is happy for him now that he is happier than ever and feeling good about his new found happiness. By the way, this individual is charismatic.
Where does it end? How can we be sure it’s the HS really speaking?
This are allegedly manifestations of the Holy Spirit:
youtube.com/watch?v=fhSdOtyERuI Holy Spirit or Bees attack?
youtube.com/watch?v=XSCuY7jyoTs Holy laugh
youtube.com/watch?v=h8pWtpOWQ-k Holy Ghost Power Display?
youtube.com/watch?v=07cmMhQxjfg Floor Rollers
In this following video a Protestant pastor describes Pentecostalism as demon possessions. It’s his opinion, not mine, ok? Don’t pay attention to his opinion, listen to his arguments.
youtube.com/watch?v=at9MZ54Hst4 Pentecostal Speaking in Tongues
S
StTommyMore
Guest
You cannot reject a thought based on the thinker. A thought should be accepted or rejected on its own merits.Wesley was a Methodist… and a former Anglican, just as Luther was a Lutheran… and a former Catholic.
“Good fruits” are not enough to say that something comes from God. Other faiths produce “good fruits” too.
Wesley’s devotion for Mary is good, but his explanation of gifts as being from the HS are wrong. Luther was also a Marian, but he rebelled against the Pope. Shall we erect him a statue for being a Marian and forget his rebellion? Remember that the weeds and the wheat grow together in the field and also in the minds of men. Good thoughts share the same brain with bad thoughts.
Of course we have to know where Wesley and Parham come from. I said that St. Augustine was 300 years removed from the Apostles. Parham, besides being removed 1900 years from the Apostles, was 400 years removed from the Catholic Church. This speaks volumes to me.
The HS is telling some church you can’t baptize children, and at the same time the HS tells another church that’s ok to baptize children. He tells another church that Mary is not a Virgin, and at the same time He’s telling other church that Mary is Ever Virgin. He tells yet another church that eating Jesus flesh and drinking His blood is symbolic, and to another church He tells them it’s not symbolic. Add, to all these contradictions of the HS, the messages everyone and anyone is receiving and hearing from the HS and giving them to us as truths. Can’t you see the confusion all this is creating? It’s chaotic. So I’m going to discern if it’s the HS doing all the talking using St. Augustine and St. John of the Cross advice on these matters.
I was told by a friend of a divorced individual (who is now living with his girlfriend) that says that on Sundays at his church celebrations the Holy Spirit comes to him. You said that the Spirit blows where it will, which is true. But Church history, God’s Word and common sense also tell us where He might not blow and why not. How come the HS doesn’t tell this individual he’s living in sin with his girlfriend? How come he doesn’t get word from the HS that it was wrong (and sinful) to divorce his wife? On the contrary, he says the HS is happy for him now that he is happier than ever and feeling good about his new found happiness. By the way, this individual is charismatic.
Where does it end? How can we be sure it’s the HS really speaking?
This are allegedly manifestations of the Holy Spirit:
youtube.com/watch?v=fhSdOtyERuI Holy Spirit or Bees attack?
youtube.com/watch?v=XSCuY7jyoTs Holy laugh
youtube.com/watch?v=h8pWtpOWQ-k Holy Ghost Power Display?
youtube.com/watch?v=07cmMhQxjfg Floor Rollers
In this following video a Protestant pastor describes Pentecostalism as demon possessions. It’s his opinion, not mine, ok? Don’t pay attention to his opinion, listen to his arguments.
youtube.com/watch?v=at9MZ54Hst4 Pentecostal Speaking in Tongues
P
Prieldedi
Guest
I already stated that I reject the present manifestations of the alleged HS based on the teachings of St. Augustine and St. John of the Cross. They are not the only ones that have teachings on the discernment of spirits. I believe there is also St. Theresa of Avila and still many more.You cannot reject a thought based on the thinker. A thought should be accepted or rejected on its own merits.
Of course I can reject a thought based on the thinker. Precisely that is one of the ways to discern if a spirit is of God or not. If a thinker comes from the Protestant camp, or for that matter, from no camp at all, and having read St. Augustine that the HS doesn’t follow a cut away member (the reformists, the heretics, the nonbelievers) of the Body of Christ (the Catholic Church), then based on that alone I can reject his thoughts on matters of Faith.
This movement started among Protestant that rejected the Catholic Church, that is the Body of Christ.
S
StTommyMore
Guest
Not according to the Angelic Doctor.I
Of course I can reject a thought based on the thinker.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
StTommyMore… I’ll keep my Doctor’s advice.Not according to the Angelic Doctor.
Can you share the quote from Thomas Aquinas regarding discernment of spirits coming from outside the Catholic Church?
S
StTommyMore
Guest
“never mind from who the lesson drops, but commit to memory whatever useful advice may be uttered”–From 16 Precepts for Acquiring KnowledgeStTommyMore… I’ll keep my Doctor’s advice.
Can you share the quote from Thomas Aquinas regarding discernment of spirits coming from outside the Catholic Church?
P
Prieldedi
Guest
Very important words I find in this quote:“never mind from who the lesson drops, but commit to memory whatever useful advice may be uttered”–From 16 Precepts for Acquiring Knowledge
LESSON… gibberish is not lesson at all.
USEFUL… what use can on give to nonsense noise?
ADVICE… how can we get advice from sounds like dogs barking or pigs oinking?
Even the title of the 16 precepts has the word KNOWLEDGE. How can one obtain knowledge from meaningless sounds? In the Apostles times people heard them TALK in their OWN LANGUAGES.
To me you are stretching the meaning of this quote. It doesn’t specifically addresses the gifts from the Holy Spirit coming from sources outside the Catholic Church. The way I read this is:
“never mind from who the lesson drops”, means a layman, monk, priest, bishop, man, woman, child… but given that all these individuals are members of the Catholic Church.
I got curious and I searched the internet for “16 Precepts for Acquiring Knowledge” and I found this very interesting conversation:
*Since I am a student and a Catholic one at that, I try to learn how to be a better student constantly. Thomas Aquinas once wrote a letter to a certain Brother John about the principles of good study. Aquinas lays out his philosophy of how to study. A lot of it has to do with avoiding social contact, which I find more applicable to a more monastic approach to study. It should be noted that Aquinas was not a monk, but a mendicant. Yet he did live a religious life in community as a priest. Despite the hermit/monk flavor of some of the precepts, this list is extremely helpful in learning to think like a professional. Some of the shortest maxims are the most helpful. Let me know what you think of it.
“My Very Dear Brother,
Since you have asked me how you ought to study in order to amass the treasures of knowledge, listen to the advice which I am going to give you.
As a mere stripling…*
and then he lists the 16 precepts, of which:
*12. Never mind from whom the lesson drops, but
- Commit to memory whatever useful advice may be uttered.*
The complete conversation and the 16 Precepts are here.
P
Prieldedi
Guest
Please read this paragraph in my previous Post #138 as follows:To me you are stretching the meaning of this quote. It doesn’t specifically addresses the gifts from the Holy Spirit coming from sources outside the Catholic Church. The way I read this is:
“never mind from who the lesson drops”, means a layman, monk, priest, bishop, man, woman, child… but given that all these individuals are members of the Catholic Church
To me you are stretching the meaning of this quote. It doesn’t specifically addresses the gifts from the Holy Spirit coming from sources outside the Catholic Church. But if St. Thomas is really referring to discernment from the spirits in this quote, the way I read this is:
… etc
- Status
- Not open for further replies.