K
kpnuts2k
Guest
do catholics sing or pray in tounges
or do they lift their hands in worship? :bowdown:
kt
XxX
or do they lift their hands in worship? :bowdown:kt
XxX
- Status
R
robertaf
Guest
Good Morning Church
ABSOLUTELY!
At least us Charismatics do!
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/17/17_1_14.gif
ABSOLUTELY!
At least us Charismatics do!
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/17/17_1_14.gif
P
pnewton
Guest
Some who are part of the Charismatic Renewal do all three.
Most Catholics sing, even if its only in the shower.
The Holy Father is fluent in dozens of tongues.
Being an American, I only speak English (ref: this month’s This Rock)
Most Catholics sing, even if its only in the shower.
The Holy Father is fluent in dozens of tongues.
Being an American, I only speak English (ref: this month’s This Rock)
V
Vitus
Guest
Protestants have been praying in tongues for about 100 years now, while the Catholic movement is only about 40 years old. Of course, a slew of other religions speak in tongues also, and longer than practiced by this current trend in Christianity. I say current trend because before Azusa Street in 1901, tongues were not spoken or practiced in church history after the passing on of the apostles.
A
Archbishop_10-K
Guest
Most Catholic churches do not, since the Mass is typically supposed to be a structured, solemn liturgy.
However, there are some Charismatic Catholic churches. I’m not part of one, but I have no objection to them as long as there are no liturgical abuses.
However, there are some Charismatic Catholic churches. I’m not part of one, but I have no objection to them as long as there are no liturgical abuses.
M
Makerteacher
Guest
Well, I have to disagree with you, Vitus.
Most of this is taken from this website: catholic-jhb.org.za/tracts/renewal.htm
One example of the gifts appearing in the Church since the Apostles is St. Teresa of Avila. Often, in the Catholic Charismatic prayer meetings, occurs a gift that is called “Resting in the Spirit” or “Slain in the Spirit”. This usually occurs during deep prayer and often involves a sort of trance-like resting state, from which the person emerges in a state of deep peace and joy.
St. Therese of Avila used to call it “Flying in the Spirit”, and she experienced it often.
St Teresa of Avila also wrote of a form of prayer which she called “jubilation” — “a strange prayer I don’t understand.” She called it “a deep union of the faculties” and that “all [the soul’s] activity is directed to this praise (Interior Castle 6.6.10). Sounds like tongues to me and to many others.
Later one sees the gifts in evidence in the lives of St Francis of Assisi (1182-1226), St Dominic (1170-1221), St Catherine of Sienna (1330-1380) (known to regularly go into “ecstasies”, espcially after Communion, which sounds just like the Salin in the Spirit experiences of today) , St Teresa of Avila (1515-1582), St John Bosco (1815-1888), The Cure of Ars (St John Vianney – 1786-1859) and many others down the centuries. The Cure of Ars is known to have had the gift of tongues.
Between 1895 and 1903, Sister (now Blessed) Elena Guerra, foundress of the Oblate Sisters of The Holy Spirit in Italy, wrote 12 confidential letters to Pope Leo XIII, asking that he foster devotion in the church to the Holy Spirit.
As a result, the Pope published his encyclical on the Holy Spirit Divinum Illud Munus in l897. He also sent a private letter to all bishops, prescribing that the Novena for Pentecost be prayed at the dawn of the new (20th) century. On the night of December 31st, 1900, during the same time that the novena to the Holy Spirit was being completed in the Vatican, a group of Methodists of Topeka, Kansas, experienced an unexpected outpouring of the Holy Spirit after studying the Acts of the Apostles.
The call of Pope Leo XIII was picked up by Pope (now Blessed) John XXIII in April 1959 on beatifying Sister Elena Guerra. When convoking the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council later that year Pope John prayed specifically for “the Divine Spirit to renew his wonders in our time, as at a ‘New Pentecost’”. The Council, in essence, was to lay the foundation for this New Pentecost by providing “new wineskins” for the Church (see Mt 9:16-17).
A
agname
Guest
The Charismatic Movement is just Montanism revisited.
As far as the movement originating from Apostolic times…that’s a stretch. Granted, the Bible and the early Christians noted a gift of the Holy Spirit…known as “speaking in tongues.”
I would say the Charismatic Movement…or, as I call it – Neo-Montanism…was founded centuries and centuries later.
I do know that Paul preached…
"Tongues-speaking is only edifying in the Church if it is interpreted. “But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the Church.” First Corinthians 14:5, 27, 28
History shows that glossolalia (tongue speaking itself) did occur within the early Church…and I also do know the early fathers were incredibly divided. Chrysostom disapproved and Augustine was mixed…Ignatius believed in speaking in tongues, but believed also in its limited usage. The Montanist movement (which holds great similarities with the Charismatic Movement) of the late second century included prophetesses, speaking in tongues, etc… was declared heretical by 99% of the church (even though, Tertullian loved the movement)…it got so bad that excommunication became involved (Serapion, bishop of Antioch spoke out against it greatly). The Canon of Moratori (the oldest list of authorized New Testament books…written in Rome circa 170 AD) mentions Montanism among heresies and rejects its teachings and writings. Speaking in tongues was extremely rare within the church after this time.
The fact is…just as cancer has signs…so does this movement.
P.S. I believe it was Saint Epiphanius of Cyprus who wrote in “Panarion” a whole chapter on Montanism. He stated that Montanists receive the Bible in full… the Trinity…the resurrection of the dead…etc…but they mislead in their teachings on gifts.
The only reason the Charistmatic Movement is being allowed right now…is to attract Protestants to the faith.
As far as the movement originating from Apostolic times…that’s a stretch. Granted, the Bible and the early Christians noted a gift of the Holy Spirit…known as “speaking in tongues.”
I would say the Charismatic Movement…or, as I call it – Neo-Montanism…was founded centuries and centuries later.
I do know that Paul preached…
"Tongues-speaking is only edifying in the Church if it is interpreted. “But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the Church.” First Corinthians 14:5, 27, 28
History shows that glossolalia (tongue speaking itself) did occur within the early Church…and I also do know the early fathers were incredibly divided. Chrysostom disapproved and Augustine was mixed…Ignatius believed in speaking in tongues, but believed also in its limited usage. The Montanist movement (which holds great similarities with the Charismatic Movement) of the late second century included prophetesses, speaking in tongues, etc… was declared heretical by 99% of the church (even though, Tertullian loved the movement)…it got so bad that excommunication became involved (Serapion, bishop of Antioch spoke out against it greatly). The Canon of Moratori (the oldest list of authorized New Testament books…written in Rome circa 170 AD) mentions Montanism among heresies and rejects its teachings and writings. Speaking in tongues was extremely rare within the church after this time.
The fact is…just as cancer has signs…so does this movement.
P.S. I believe it was Saint Epiphanius of Cyprus who wrote in “Panarion” a whole chapter on Montanism. He stated that Montanists receive the Bible in full… the Trinity…the resurrection of the dead…etc…but they mislead in their teachings on gifts.
The only reason the Charistmatic Movement is being allowed right now…is to attract Protestants to the faith.
A
agname
Guest
The following is also a good read…
“Paul addresses the matter of ‘speaking in tongues’ as a possible problem in the church at Corinth. Although he acknowledges that the ability to speak in ‘various kinds of tongues’ and the ability to interpret these tongues are ‘spiritual gifts’ (1 Cor. 12:10), he is aware not all are to speak in tongues (1 Cor. 12:30), and advises his readers to seek ‘the higher gifts’ (1 Cor. 12:31). In 1 Corinthians 13, he makes it clear that he thinks of love as the greatest spiritual gift. Love is contrasted with speaking ‘in the tongues of men and of angels’ (1 Cor. 13:1); love endures, while tongues will cease (v. 8).”
“In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul gives a number of directions about the use of glossolalia. Speaking in tongues is not helpful to the community, he says, because it is incomprehensible (14:2). Only when there is interpretation is there edification (v. 5). When the community convenes, no more than three should speak in tongues, each in turn, and there must be an interpretation (v. 27). Paul feels that uncontrolled and uninterpreted speaking in tongues does not edify the community and that it gives outsiders the impression that believers are mad (v. 23). Yet, he allows this activity to take place, so long as it is done in orderly fashion and is accompanied by interpretation.”
“Acts 2 contains a narrative about the events of the first Pentecost after Easter. On that day, the apostles gathered together, and, after hearing a sound like wind and seeing tongues like fire, they began ‘to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance’ (Acts 2:4). The author of Acts goes on to list various nationalities of persons who heard the apostles speak, all hearing in their own languages. Although the story may suggest that the apostles spoke an incomprehensible language (v. 13), the truth is that they were speaking known foreign languages.”
So…we conclude…
“Paul addresses the matter of ‘speaking in tongues’ as a possible problem in the church at Corinth. Although he acknowledges that the ability to speak in ‘various kinds of tongues’ and the ability to interpret these tongues are ‘spiritual gifts’ (1 Cor. 12:10), he is aware not all are to speak in tongues (1 Cor. 12:30), and advises his readers to seek ‘the higher gifts’ (1 Cor. 12:31). In 1 Corinthians 13, he makes it clear that he thinks of love as the greatest spiritual gift. Love is contrasted with speaking ‘in the tongues of men and of angels’ (1 Cor. 13:1); love endures, while tongues will cease (v. 8).”
“In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul gives a number of directions about the use of glossolalia. Speaking in tongues is not helpful to the community, he says, because it is incomprehensible (14:2). Only when there is interpretation is there edification (v. 5). When the community convenes, no more than three should speak in tongues, each in turn, and there must be an interpretation (v. 27). Paul feels that uncontrolled and uninterpreted speaking in tongues does not edify the community and that it gives outsiders the impression that believers are mad (v. 23). Yet, he allows this activity to take place, so long as it is done in orderly fashion and is accompanied by interpretation.”
“Acts 2 contains a narrative about the events of the first Pentecost after Easter. On that day, the apostles gathered together, and, after hearing a sound like wind and seeing tongues like fire, they began ‘to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance’ (Acts 2:4). The author of Acts goes on to list various nationalities of persons who heard the apostles speak, all hearing in their own languages. Although the story may suggest that the apostles spoke an incomprehensible language (v. 13), the truth is that they were speaking known foreign languages.”
So…we conclude…
- Not every indiviual possesses the ability to speak in tongues.
- Only when there is interpretation is there edification.
- No more than three should speak in tongues, each in turn, and there must be an interpretation…if there isn’t…the individual should remain quiet.
A
agname
Guest
“I greatly fear what is happening in these times of ours: If any soul whatever after a bit of meditation has in its recollection one of these locutions, it will immediately baptize all as coming from God and with such a supposition say, ‘God told me,’ ‘God answered me.’ Yet this is not so, but, as we pointed out, these persons themselves are more often the origin of their locution.” (St. John of the Cross, The Ascent of Mount Carmel. Book II Ch. 29)
" The soul that attaches itself to these false consolations falls into very dangerous errors, for God justly permits the devil to have power to augment in it these kinds of spiritual tastes, to repeat them frequently, and to inspire it with sentiments that are false, dangerous, and full of illusions, but which the misguided soul imagines to be true. Alas! How many souls have been seduced by these deceitful consolations? The majority of raptures and ecstasies, or, to call them by their proper name, frenzies of these fore runners of Antichrist spring from this cause. Hence, the only consolation you should admit into your soul in time of prayer, is that which is produced by the consciousness of your nothingness and misery; a consciousness which will preserve you in humility, and inspire you with profound reverence and the desire that he may be honored and glorified. Consolations such as these cannot mislead. " - St. Vincent Ferrer (Life of St. Vincent Ferrer, By Fr. Andrew Pradel, London 1875, Pg. 183)
" The soul that attaches itself to these false consolations falls into very dangerous errors, for God justly permits the devil to have power to augment in it these kinds of spiritual tastes, to repeat them frequently, and to inspire it with sentiments that are false, dangerous, and full of illusions, but which the misguided soul imagines to be true. Alas! How many souls have been seduced by these deceitful consolations? The majority of raptures and ecstasies, or, to call them by their proper name, frenzies of these fore runners of Antichrist spring from this cause. Hence, the only consolation you should admit into your soul in time of prayer, is that which is produced by the consciousness of your nothingness and misery; a consciousness which will preserve you in humility, and inspire you with profound reverence and the desire that he may be honored and glorified. Consolations such as these cannot mislead. " - St. Vincent Ferrer (Life of St. Vincent Ferrer, By Fr. Andrew Pradel, London 1875, Pg. 183)
A
agname
Guest
Most theologians today, etc. believe that true tongue-speaking was a gift…to evangelize (ie, to communicate with individuals within foreign lands, etc.)…and that most of the gloss that transpires today is purely psychological, etc. Many of the apostolic fathers had similar feelings…I agree.
K
kpnuts2k
Guest
well i speak in tounges and i raise my hands in worship as paul commanded us to do but why is the mass so structured.
shouldnt it just be like a meal cos that is how jesus intructed it
plus
does the bread n wine turn into body n blood?
shouldnt it just be like a meal cos that is how jesus intructed it
plus
does the bread n wine turn into body n blood?
M
mrS4ntA
Guest
To answer your question, the Mass is structured to:
- Avoid liturgical abuses.
- It is a DIVINE LITURGY, related to the sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary AND the liturgy taking place eternally in Heaven
- Elaborating, it is based on the Apostles’ teaching (the Didache) and on the book of Revelation
- It is a meal celebration, because
- the Bread and Wine really do turn into the Body and Blood of Christ (that is, their substances changes – but their appearances/species remain the same! This is transubstantiation)
M
mrS4ntA
Guest
I would very much like to know where you get this information from…
K
kpnuts2k
Guest
1 tim 2I would very much like to know where you get this information from…
K
kpnuts2k
Guest
where in the bible does it say this?
it is only bread and wine it REPRESENTS the body and blood
S
SPOKENWORD
Guest
It doesnt. In john 6 ;63 Jesus says, It is the spirit that gives life,the flesh is useless. The Words I have spoken to you are SPIRIT AND LIFE.
M
mrS4ntA
Guest
where in the Bible does it say THIS?
Jesus said, “This IS my body… This IS my blood”! and when people left him saying that “this is a hard saying”, he didn’t elaborate as to explain he was talking figuratively!
V
Vitus
Guest
The whole Slain in the Spirit is exactly the same in the Pentecostal movement. I know it well.
One women’s experience does not a church teaching make. Not to sound sexist, but women tend to be over-emotional. I am not suprised at this account in the least. Paul warned about women keeping silent for a reason. It wasn’t because he hated women, but the abuses that over-emotionality by women can incur.
No offense, I’d really have to see an account of these evidence first hand.
And I do not claim that miraculous occurences could not have happened. But the CURRENT teachings in the Charismatic movement are just not supported. And highly emotional and dedicated people will have highly emotional responses.
Very commendable, nothing wrong with that.
You do realize that at the turn of every century things get a little wild, people’s expectations and emotions are running a little bit higher. There are all kinds of stories about things happening at the turn of every century.
I’m kind of confused, and please don’t think I’m being sarcastic. Was not your claim that the gifts were there throughout the centuries (although your dates start in the 1100s). Why woud their be a need for a New Pentecost then? And what purpose exactly would a New Pentecost serve?
In the OT, Babel was the story of God seperating the people throught the miraculous mix up of language. A sign that God was not pleased with the people and their actions. In the NT, Pentecost was the reversal of this, a uniting of the world through the miraculous understanding of language. A sign that God was pleased with the person of His Son and His actions for united the people with God.
Why the need for a New Pentecost?
V
Vitus
Guest
Johnathan Edwards was a famous preacher during the Great Awakening that swept over New England in the 1700s. Most people know him for his sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”. I personally do not like the sermon in the least, but in his day he had quite the emotional reaction from his sermons and in particular this one.
While preaching, many people in the congregation would become very emotional at Edward’s words. In some instances, the people would start fainting in the aisles, rocking back and forth and exibiting all kinds strange reactions.
This upset Edwards. He would stop and tell people to control their emotions. Charismatics claim (at least Protestant ones) that this was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit manifesting itself in the congregation. But that is hindsight, trying to fit occurences that happened then into their current teachings. Edwards saw it for what it was, emotionality running out of control.
There is nothing wrong with being emotional, as long as you don’t lose your mind while you do it. I think if the Beatles would have been a Christian band, Charismatics would claim that all the women crying and fainting in their presence was due to the Holy Spirit. But as we all know, it was due to their boyish good looks and crazy hair cuts. Well, I’m not so sure about that, but I know women being Slain in the Spirit of the Beatles wasn’t a movement of God.
While preaching, many people in the congregation would become very emotional at Edward’s words. In some instances, the people would start fainting in the aisles, rocking back and forth and exibiting all kinds strange reactions.
This upset Edwards. He would stop and tell people to control their emotions. Charismatics claim (at least Protestant ones) that this was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit manifesting itself in the congregation. But that is hindsight, trying to fit occurences that happened then into their current teachings. Edwards saw it for what it was, emotionality running out of control.
There is nothing wrong with being emotional, as long as you don’t lose your mind while you do it. I think if the Beatles would have been a Christian band, Charismatics would claim that all the women crying and fainting in their presence was due to the Holy Spirit. But as we all know, it was due to their boyish good looks and crazy hair cuts. Well, I’m not so sure about that, but I know women being Slain in the Spirit of the Beatles wasn’t a movement of God.
- Status