Thoughts on Charasmatic Renewal

[TommyWommy]

First, there are two types of tongues, the prayer tongues which you hear more commonly from many individuals all at once, in a gathering, only edify the individual; according to St Paul. The Apostolic Tongues, in which one or many speak, and others hear in their own languages (The original Pentecost Experience, also known to have been later exhibited by certain saints, such as Anthony of Padua), and when one speaks a prophecy tongue, and another is given the gilt to interpret; edify the Church; according to St Paul.

The only public services in which tongues are manifested, are the designated prayer meetings, and the Masses for Healing, and ones specifically for charismatic gatherings; these must go through the Chancery Office, and receive the approval of the bishop. They should not be exercised loudly during a normal OF mass; it is actually an abuse to do so. One may quietly pray in tongues (as Paul suggested to the Corinthians), but one should not disturb others in the assembly with loud tongues.

As to how Apostolic Tongues edify the Church and unbelievers? I don’t think even St Paul answered that one. All we know is that the early Church benefited from many conversions, and this in turn was edify to the Church. I have seen many converts to the RCC from the Catholic Charismatic Renewal; in one parish I attended, the CCR was responsible for at least half of the participants in the parish RCIA program, typically more than 5 individuals per year.

You could explain to those you know who are exploring Catholicism, that the CCR is just one of many spirituality’s in the RCC, and that they are free to be involved, or not be involved, as well as free to believe, or not believe. And they do not have to attend or participate in any CCR-sponsored event. They should not let this be a stumbling block, any more than any other spirituality’s would be stumbling blocks. I’ve know nprotestants to have trouble with things such as DeMontfort’s whole Marian Slavery thing, to the extreme penances practiced by certain saints. Many are relieved to learn that they are not required to either believe or participate in such spiritual practices in their personal lives.

I think it’s because they are used to an either/or choice regarding tongues in Protestant denominations. Generally, either a denomination practices speaking in tongues or it doesn’t. They come from denominations that don’t see speaking in tongues as applicable today. It’s hard for them to accept a Catholic both/and position. To them it appears that the Catholic Church can’t make up her mind and either promote it or put a stop to it. To them, this seems wishy-washy for the Church that claims to be the pillar of truth. It makes them reluctant to trust the CC.

 

[Opie90]

Ok. This is my first post on CAF. I’ve been a silent reader off and on for awhile. I am 21 years old and am working on getting my own car so I can begin go to mass and go through RCIA.

I grew up in the assemblies of God, so the Protestant origin of “Catholic Charismatic-ism” seems pretty obvious to me. I looked up videos of Catholic Charismatic meetings and they are EXACTLY like what I grew up with (the tongues, the falling onto the floor after being prayed over, the raised hands, dancing with tamborines, the style of music…). arlingtonrenewal.org/history even acknowledges that this modern movement is Protestant in origin (although it ties its Protestant appearance to a prayer of Pope Leo XIII)

Also, “speaking in tongues” - as modern charismatic Protestants and Catholics are doing - is to my knowledge absent of (at the least) the majority of the history of the Church and it doesn’t “gel” with it. It doesn’t have the spirit of the mass, the liturgy of the hours, the prayers of the saints, all of which seem a solemn celebration, a quiet joy. Any traditional devotion if placed side by side with the mass would not seem incongruous but this DOES.

More broadly, the talk of a baptism of the Holy Spirit as something distinct from baptism and confirmation (which is definitely Protestant idea and a fairly new one at that), even if you are only saying that it is graces of confirmation being released (which I have read on CAF) has to my knowledge no historicity. Can anyone give an example in tradition of the idea that there was a baptism in the holy spirit that needed to take place to release these gifts? And if so, evidence that what is happening in the Charismatic renewal is what was meant?

Any movement claiming to be restoring something that was “forgotten” for a large chunk of Church history is rather suspicious.

I “spoke in tongues” (in the modern charismatic sense of the word) when I was younger and whether it was learned behavior or not I do not know, but I haven’t spoken in them in at least five years and haven’t felt any desire to. I do not think I have lost anything. I don’t think it was the “real deal”; I do not think it was the speaking in tongues that was exhibited in the early church.

 

[SanAgustin]

Opie90, as you correctly mention, there’s a lot of similarities between what goes on in a Catholic Charismatic prayer group/meeting and what goes on in say a Pentecostal Church. I went through a period that I would visit all kinds of Churches with a friend who is the son of a pastor (while still being Catholic the whole time) and as you point out, it is very similar and obvious that the whole thing comes from our evangelical brethren.

And yes, most people speaking in tongues are talking gibberish. I wish there was a more formal study, but it is clear at least from the Spanish speaking Charismatics and Pentecostals that I’ve observed, that they have a repeatable pattern in what they are saying (probably influenced by culture and the languages they know);

“sabara-bara-sabara…, etc”

As I mentioned in another thread, I had a cousin who admitted to me he was speaking gibberish just to fit in, although I think most people just go with the flow and don’t purposely fake it like that.

 

[gtrenewed]

Ok. This is my first post on CAF. I’ve been a silent reader off and on for awhile. I am 21 years old and am working on getting my own car so I can begin go to mass and go through RCIA.

I grew up in the assemblies of God, so the Protestant origin of “Catholic Charismatic-ism” seems pretty obvious to me. I looked up videos of Catholic Charismatic meetings and they are EXACTLY like what I grew up with (the tongues, the falling onto the floor after being prayed over, the raised hands, dancing with tamborines, the style of music…). arlingtonrenewal.org/history even acknowledges that this modern movement is Protestant in origin (although it ties its Protestant appearance to a prayer of Pope Leo XIII)

What I read in your link is that when the pope prayed, in that same day non-catholic christians who were also praying, received. Seems like it is Catholic in origin, in the deposit of faith and in modern times.

What you are missing is that in Scripture it took an apostle to pray for the Holy Spirit to come upon believers. While Peter was preaching on Jesus the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius’ household, devout people who had been seeking God. While it may have been protestants that were seeking, it took the prayer of an Apostle to bring it about.

Also, “speaking in tongues” - as modern charismatic Protestants and Catholics are doing - is to my knowledge absent of (at the least) the majority of the history of the Church and it doesn’t “gel” with it. It doesn’t have the spirit of the mass, the liturgy of the hours, the prayers of the saints, all of which seem a solemn celebration, a quiet joy. Any traditional devotion if placed side by side with the mass would not seem incongruous but this DOES.

Traditional devotions had a starting point in church history. Many of the saints practices were not accepted in their time because they were not traditional. Some practices are newer than others. It does not make them better or worse, right or wrong, just a practice that developed with church approval. The Catholic Charismatic Renewal is such a practice. You don’t have to embrace it, so why work so hard to discredit it? A question I have when I read the lives of the saints.

More broadly, the talk of a baptism of the Holy Spirit as something distinct from baptism and confirmation (which is definitely Protestant idea and a fairly new one at that), even if you are only saying that it is graces of confirmation being released (which I have read on CAF) has to my knowledge no historicity. Can anyone give an example in tradition of the idea that there was a baptism in the holy spirit that needed to take place to release these gifts? And if so, evidence that what is happening in the Charismatic renewal is what was meant?

In scripture we see water baptism and the fulfillment of Jesus’ words “you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit”. In some protestant circles it is a separate event but in Catholicism it is a renewal of what has already been received. Our faith is a journey and much of what we receive along the way is released in greater and greater measure as our faith grows. To release gifts takes faith, a belief we are endowed with them and an understanding of what they are. You can take whatever approach fits you, but the renewal is one approach.

Any movement claiming to be restoring something that was “forgotten” for a large chunk of Church history is rather suspicious.

The CCR is not restoring anything forgotten. It is a renewal of a deposit of faith that has been always there. By the way see post by claypots about a small charismatic village in the eleventh century.

I “spoke in tongues” (in the modern charismatic sense of the word) when I was younger and whether it was learned behavior or not I do not know, but I haven’t spoken in them in at least five years and haven’t felt any desire to. I do not think I have lost anything. I don’t think it was the “real deal”; I do not think it was the speaking in tongues that was exhibited in the early church.

Your experience and doubt does not add to your argument nor take away from the renewal. It proves nothing. Just like my experiences growing up catholic does not validate nor invalidate the churchs’ practices.

 

[gtrenewed]

Opie90, as you correctly mention, there’s a lot of similarities between what goes on in a Catholic Charismatic prayer group/meeting and what goes on in say a Pentecostal Church. I went through a period that I would visit all kinds of Churches with a friend who is the son of a pastor (while still being Catholic the whole time) and as you point out, it is very similar and obvious that the whole thing comes from our evangelical brethren.

And yes, most people speaking in tongues are talking gibberish. I wish there was a more formal study, but it is clear at least from the Spanish speaking Charismatics and Pentecostals that I’ve observed, that they have a repeatable pattern in what they are saying (probably influenced by culture and the languages they know);

“sabara-bara-sabara…, etc”

As I mentioned in another thread, I had a cousin who admitted to me he was speaking gibberish just to fit in, although I think most people just go with the flow and don’t purposely fake it like that.

Scripture says “What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it? May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, ‘That you may be justified in your words and prevail when you are judged’.” Romans 3:3,4

 

[vardaquinn]

. Can anyone give an example in tradition of the idea that there was a baptism in the holy spirit that needed to take place to release these gifts? And if so, evidence that what is happening in the Charismatic renewal is what was meant?

Acts 2. This experience should happen at our Confirmations. If it doesn’t, it has to happen sometime. Listen to what Pope Benedict says about it:

“Today I would like to extend the invitation to all:* let us rediscover, dear brothers and sisters, the beauty of being baptized in the Holy Spirit; let us recover awareness of our Baptism and our Confirmation, ever timely sources of grace.” Pope Benedict XVI, Regina Caeli Message, Pentecost, 2008, given in St. Peter’s Square, Rome

Any movement claiming to be restoring something that was “forgotten” for a large chunk of Church history is rather suspicious.

Sure, but it doesn’t mean it’s wrong. If the Popes agree with it, so do I.

Whenever the Spirit intervenes, he leaves people astonished. He brings about events of amazing newness; he radically changes persons and history. This was the unforgettable experience of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council during which, under the guidance of the same Spirit, the Church rediscovered the charismatic dimension as one of her constitutive elements: “It is not only through the sacraments and the ministrations of the Church that the Holy Spirit makes holy the people, leads them and enriches them with his virtues. Allotting his gifts according as he wills (cf. 1 Cor 12:11), he also distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank… He makes them fit and ready to undertake various tasks and offices for the renewal and building up of the Church” (Lumen gentium, n.12).

The institutional and charismatic aspects are co-essential as it were to the Church’s constitution. They contribute, although differently, to the life, renewal and sanctification of God’s People. It is from this providential rediscovery of the Church’s charismatic dimension that, before and after the Council, a remarkable pattern of growth has been established for ecclesial movements and new communities. Bl. Pope John Paul II, Saturday, 30 May 1998 vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1998/may/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19980530_riflessioni_en.html

I “spoke in tongues” (in the modern charismatic sense of the word) when I was younger and whether it was learned behavior or not I do not know, but I haven’t spoken in them in at least five years and haven’t felt any desire to. I do not think I have lost anything. I don’t think it was the “real deal”; I do not think it was the speaking in tongues that was exhibited in the early church.

Then it probably wasn’t. That doesn’t mean everyone claiming to speak in tongues isn’t speaking in the form of tongues exhibited in the early church, however.

And yes, most people speaking in tongues are talking gibberish. I wish there was a more formal study, but it is clear at least from the Spanish speaking Charismatics and Pentecostals that I’ve observed, that they have a repeatable pattern in what they are saying (probably influenced by culture and the languages they know);

While I’m sure many people are faking it, you can’t simply conclude off hand that it’s gibberish. Prayer is often repetitive (ex. the Rosary), so that still doesn’t prove anything conclusively.

 

[SanAgustin]

While I’m sure many people are faking it, you can’t simply conclude off hand that it’s gibberish. Prayer is often repetitive (ex. the Rosary), so that still doesn’t prove anything conclusively.

I don’t really have to prove anything conclusively, I’m just saying it seems like gibberish to me, and knowing a thing or two about patterns … at least for what I’ve seen it almost seems like I can recognize the patterns and they don’t seem to be a real language.

I’d be very interested in a study of this. You know if I claim to witness a miracle, the Church (if they don’t dismiss me right away) would try to find ways or proving it. I haven’t seen any such effort done with most Charismatic groups, my initial assumption to be quite honest is that it is gibberish.

Maybe one day I’ll go to a group and somebody will speak Latin, French, Chinese, German or something recognizable like the apostles during Pentecost.

I went to a group once were a lady stood up, they claimed she had the gift of prophesy, and said “The Lord is telling me to tell you that we might kneel right now”. I mean, seriously? What if I stood up and said the Lord told me something else?

 

[ltwin]

I went to a group once were a lady stood up, they claimed she had the gift of prophesy, and said “The Lord is telling me to tell you that we might kneel right now”. I mean, seriously? What if I stood up and said the Lord told me something else?

First off, you don’t seem to have a good idea of what biblical prophecy is. The idea is that a prophet is a spokesperson for God. Revelations can come in many forms. Every instance of prophecy or revelation does not have to be telling someone’s future, etc. Some revelations are more amazing than others, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t God. Maybe God did tell her that everyone should kneel. Is it that unbelievable that God could speak to someone?

 

[SanAgustin]

First off, you don’t seem to have a good idea of what biblical prophecy is. The idea is that a prophet is a spokesperson for God. Revelations can come in many forms. Every instance of prophecy or revelation does not have to be telling someone’s future, etc. Some revelations are more amazing than others, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t God. Maybe God did tell her that everyone should kneel. Is it that unbelievable that God could speak to someone?

I have a very good idea of what biblical prophecy is, thank you.

However, how will I be able to discern that in a room full of people making loud noises? If somebody were to get up next to her and say; “Wait, no the Lord to ME we need to stand up”. If then a third person says “the Lord told ME we need to jump up and down”, what should I do?

Also, where did I say prophecy is “telling someones’ future”, it sounds like you’re the one confused, we call those people psychics (or frauds to be more exact).

 

[ltwin]

I have a very good idea of what biblical prophecy is, thank you.

However, how will I be able to discern that in a room full of people making loud noises? If somebody were to get up next to her and say; “Wait, no the Lord to ME we need to stand up”. If then a third person says “the Lord told ME we need to jump up and down”, what should I do?

Also, where did I say prophecy is “telling someones’ future”, it sounds like you’re the one confused, we call those people psychics (or frauds to be more exact).

Forgive me if I offended or assumed you were expecting a prophet to say something more amazing than that person did. That is what I got from your response. The question I have is were there 3 people saying God told them different things? What happened in the meeting? How was what she said received? We can talk hypotheticals all day, or we can look at what actually happens.

 

[SanAgustin]

No problem.

No, it was only 1 lady that said “The Lord is telling me to tell you that he wants us all to kneel”, and said it with certain authority. I don’t recognize that authority.

My hypothetical is what if somebody else said the lord told them to stand up? How do we resolve that conflict?

I’m curious what you would think about this (I see you’re Pentecostal), in the same meeting before that event, there was a lady talking about some apparitions of the Virgin Mary in Georgia. She brought back pictures of cloud formations, that looked to me like regular cloud formations. She claimed one showed the gate to heaven, the other showed the sword of Michael the Archangel.

The guy next to me whispered to me “I don’t see anything”, I replied “Don’t worry me neither. There’s nothing to see”.

The presenter of course said you needed “faith” to see and believe what she was saying.

 

[waterbrook]

I did my research some years ago, back before the predominance of the Internet. My primary source was an actual book (remember those?) - namely the Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements by Burgess & McGee - a 914 page hardcover reference that is an absolute steal at the $1.12 price currently offered as for a “used” volume on Amazon. It is an indispensable resource for anyone interested in the development of “Charismatic Christianity.”

This is a protestant (Zondervan) publication intended to support the practice (so protestants have slim recourse to contest the factual aspects of this tome). Thus, I’m sure it is influential to many protestants. But informed Catholics can find much fault with this publication.

You make some very strong claims on the basis of a single book!

 

[ltwin]

No problem.

No, it was only 1 lady that said “The Lord is telling me to tell you that he wants us all to kneel”, and said it with certain authority. I don’t recognize that authority.

Classical Pentecostals tend to say “I feel led” or “I feel the Lord would have.” We don’t assume that anyone is speaking on behalf of God (or at least we shouldn’t). The Bible clearly says to test the spirits to see if they are from God.

My hypothetical is what if somebody else said the lord told them to stand up? How do we resolve that conflict?

Pentecostals would say that this is “confusion,” and we know from Scripture that God is not the author of confusion. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:

29Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. 31For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, 32and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.

If one “prophet” (classical Pentecostals don’t tend to call people “prophets” as titles though we do recognize that there are people who possess prophetic gifts) speaks and says the Lord would have everyone kneel, that does not mean that everyone automatically kneels. The leaders of the meeting should discern if indeed the Lord would have them do that. It is possible that someone who claims “thus saith the Lord” has “missed God” as they say.

Now if one person says God says kneel, but there are two other people saying God is telling them to do something else, then the first “prophet” should speak and the other “prophets” should stay quiet until the first “prophet’s” revelation has been discerned and acted on. Then one by one each “prophet” can tell what he’s hearing, it can be discerned and then acted on accordingly.

And just for the record, I’ve never encountered such a situation of “confusion” in a Pentecostal service.

I’m curious what you would think about this (I see you’re Pentecostal), in the same meeting before that event, there was a lady talking about some apparitions of the Virgin Mary in Georgia. She brought back pictures of cloud formations, that looked to me like regular cloud formations. She claimed one showed the gate to heaven, the other showed the sword of Michael the Archangel.

The guy next to me whispered to me “I don’t see anything”, I replied “Don’t worry me neither. There’s nothing to see”.

The presenter of course said you needed “faith” to see and believe what she was saying.

I don’t have an opinion on that. If it helps encourage her in her faith, I don’t begrudge her of that comfort. However, she nor anyone else should judge anyone’s faith or lack there of on the basis of whether they see the Virgin Mary in cloud formations.

 

[Servus_Matris]

I would like to add a few words of my own about this:

First, I can certainly understand the uncertainty that many people feel toward this form of prayer. I, myself, was leery of it for the longest time because the only instances I had heard of were the Protestant and Catholic groups who would fall into fanaticism. However, from my own experience, I quickly learned that those groups were not the ones who represented the true form of worship. Most small charismatic groups who practice genuine prayer and worship are not boastful and do not trumpet their activities everywhere we go. In fact, the leaders in our group make it clear to us that anything that comes to light during a meeting (especially since we have at least one member who has the gift of reading hearts) should not be discussed outside of the meeting except among the members themselves (and even that is rare) or with a priest. Also, the gift of tongues is not central in the genuine groups, although it is exercised. What is central is Jesus Christ and the ways in which He builds up His Church, which is done mainly through advice and encouragement and enlightenment through the members of the group.

My first experiences with this movement actually proved to be very grace-filled and have deepened my spiritual life, particularly my awareness of the Holy Spirit. The group that I now meet with is very supportive of the Catholic Church and are not boastful and forceful in any way, shape, or form. If someone chooses to be silent, then that is fine. If someone chooses to speak, that is fine is well. Nothing is forced upon anyone, and the only thought is to build up the Church by building up each other.

One thing that I am noticing among the threads that oppose the Charismatic Movement is that they get hung up on one Scripture verse alone rather than taking it within context (this is the reason for so many of the problems in Protestant beliefs). There have been many quotes not only from Scripture, but from Saints as well that would support the idea of spiritual gifts. Since many of these are within this thread, I won’t list them all again. I will say this, though, if two of our greatest pontiffs are in support of this movement (the genuine movement, not the fanatics) and it is mentioned favorably in Scripture (again, the genuine prayer, not the abuse thereof), and if many of the Saints exhibited the gifts that are often experienced in these groups (St. Francis Xavier had the gift of tongues; St. John Vianney could read hearts; St. Padre Pio seemed to have every gift across the board), then is this not a good sign?

 

[lisajulia]

Am i the only one sitting here waiting for a priest to reply after reading 12 pages of posts?:coffeeread:

 

[vardaquinn]

I don’t really have to prove anything conclusively, I’m just saying it seems like gibberish to me, and knowing a thing or two about patterns … at least for what I’ve seen it almost seems like I can recognize the patterns and they don’t seem to be a real language.

I’d be very interested in a study of this. You know if I claim to witness a miracle, the Church (if they don’t dismiss me right away) would try to find ways or proving it. I haven’t seen any such effort done with most Charismatic groups, my initial assumption to be quite honest is that it is gibberish.

Maybe one day I’ll go to a group and somebody will speak Latin, French, Chinese, German or something recognizable like the apostles during Pentecost.

I went to a group once were a lady stood up, they claimed she had the gift of prophesy, and said “The Lord is telling me to tell you that we might kneel right now”. I mean, seriously? What if I stood up and said the Lord told me something else?

Well, I know a thing or two about language myself, and I hang around people speaking languages I don’t know (particularly Spanish) fairly often. As far as I’m concerned, it sounds rather like gibberish (though of course, they’re both having a conversation, and I know a bit of Spanish now, so…). I really don’t think it sounds like gibberish. Speaking in gibberish, one usually has to pause for words and come up with sounds to say, and even then it doesn’t sound so much like language. Most people I’ve hear speaking in tongues, and of course when I myself speak in tongues, it sounds to me like a genuine language.

You weren’t meant to understand the language, or else it would have been in one you knew or God would have given you an interpretation. It’s a form of prayer, addressed to God and from God. It’s very contemplative!

I myself have heard of numerous examples of real contemporary languages used. A thorough study of this would be very nice, as yet there has been none that proves anything conclusively. A random study of a handful of folks doesn’t cut it.

LOL, that’s stupid. XD I’ve heard genuine prophecies before, but there really needs to be much more instruction on that on a wide scale (I’ve been to places where there is, though).

One thing that I am noticing among the threads that oppose the Charismatic Movement is that they get hung up on one Scripture verse alone rather than taking it within context (this is the reason for so many of the problems in Protestant beliefs). There have been many quotes not only from Scripture, but from Saints as well that would support the idea of spiritual gifts. Since many of these are within this thread, I won’t list them all again. I will say this, though, if two of our greatest pontiffs are in support of this movement (the genuine movement, not the fanatics) and it is mentioned favorably in Scripture (again, the genuine prayer, not the abuse thereof), and if many of the Saints exhibited the gifts that are often experienced in these groups (St. Francis Xavier had the gift of tongues; St. John Vianney could read hearts; St. Padre Pio seemed to have every gift across the board), then is this not a good sign?

Well said!

 

[fxcc]

Observation: About the only difference between the Ephesians in Acts 19 and so many modern Catholics, Episcopalians et alia is that, if properly catechized, they’ve at least heard of the Holy Spirit. But just like the Ephesians whom Paul is addressing, **they clearly haven’t **experienced or **received the Holy Spirit **yet. Again, it’s not a theoretical reception, but an actual one.

I beg to take issue with that statement, insofar as it relates to Catholics.

Catholics, in the Eucharist, receive the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ - literally, physically and sacramentally. Our Lord’s divinity consists of His Trinitarian personhood, which most definitely includes the Holy Spirit. Thus, any practising Catholic, who regularly receives Communion, receives the Holy Spirit again and again in his life - in **as real **a form as it is possible to receive Him. If the (Eucharistic) Lord dwells in a person’s soul, He is **always **accompanied by His Father and His Spirit. No question about it. “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him." The three are inseparable.

Now, as to the matter of outward manisfestations of the Presence or the Gifts of the Spirit, who is to say that a docile, quiet, seemingly inactive Christian is not doing more to further the Kingdom of God (by say, things like prayer, fasting, almsgiving, humility, love, faithfullness, self sacrifice, et al) than another who can be observed to be full of zeal and apparently gifted with divine powers to uplift the Church? Anyone know of fervent Charismatic Christians who came a cropper? Who were allegedly so filled with “discernment”, miraculous powers of “healing”, and ability to “prophesy” (about every matter, great and small), yet failed to realise/admit where they themselves had strayed significantly from major tenets of the true faith? I do! Many. And the sights are always depressing to behold.

Some time ago, I happened to be in the room of a Charismatic Franciscan priest, fixing his computer, when a mutual friend rang from interstate to request him for a healing prayer, as she’d just developed a migraine. Straightaway he launched into praying in tongues (over the phone), then assured her it’d be gone in 3 hours. I don’t know whether it did or didn’t, but I couldn’t help but wonder at that instant whatever happened to taking up one’s cross (yes, even in the form of a migraine) and following Jesus in offering it up in reparation for the sins of mankind. No, (this priest and our friend also firmly believed in the Gospel of Plenty, although they would deny it if challenged), the whole idea was to use the “anointed tongue” to exorcise that irksome, useless headache asap. I suspect a lot of people who’ve been close to Charismatics would have stories to relate such as this. “God doesn’t want us to suffer. That’s why, whenever we pray with enough faith (meaning in tongues, of course) we can always be assured of a healing.” Ever hear that one before?

Shucks, I’ll stick to seeking just the seven Gifts. Even a single one of them in good measure is comprehensively life transforming. Besides, I happen to know that if you receive even one of **those **seven with the proper disposition, and respond adequately to it, the others are also added unto you soon enough! Who could need or ask for more?

God’s Blessings/Gifts to all.
Francis

 

[LegoGE1947]

I don’t get why they are so defensive. I totally believe you about the lie part. I think they lie about it and do whatever it takes to protect that belief.

I met Jesus Christ in a Pentacostal church (Assembly of God) For this I am grateful, however I cannot any longer be supportive in any way of Charismatic “Christianity” regardless of what ever else they claim to believe. I have never felt at ease around this stuff. I have always had the suspician that “speaking in tongues” is just jibberish and not a real language at all. What finally broke the “camel’s back” for me was when I asked a pentacostal pastor a question he didn’t have a satisfactory answer for and he accused me of “having a spirit of intelligence” that needed to be “cast out” The first thing I noticed about the Catholic Church the first time I darkened the doorway of one was the unusual sense of peace and the feeling I was home even though I had never been to one before. Never in my entire life had I ever felt that way anywhere else. I also remember during RCIA a priest had all RCIA participants come forward and kneel at the altar for something called “scrutinies” Then he walked down the line and laid hands on each one’s head and when he laid his hand on me I felt such peace I can’t describe it. There was no feeling of embarrassment or anything weird. Just unbelievable PEACE.

 

[LegoGE1947]

Am i the only one sitting here waiting for a priest to reply after reading 12 pages of posts?:coffeeread:

I’m here too.

 

[SanAgustin]

Some time ago, I happened to be in the room of a Charismatic Franciscan priest, fixing his computer, when a mutual friend rang from interstate to request him for a healing prayer, as she’d just developed a migraine. Straightaway he launched into praying in tongues (over the phone), then assured her it’d be gone in 3 hours. I don’t know whether it did or didn’t, but I couldn’t help but wonder at that instant whatever happened to taking up one’s cross (yes, even in the form of a migraine) and following Jesus in offering it up in reparation for the sins of mankind.

I have a problem with this for different reasons. You call a priest and he prays for you over the phone, no problem. But then tells you you’ll be cured in 3 hours time??? And what happens if the migraine persists?

What I’ve seen in other churches, is that if you’re not cured often a faith healer will say, “well you have to have strong faith” implying you don’t. I have a problem with that. I also have a problem with praying about something and guaranteeing that something is going to happen, circumventing God’s will!!!