How is it an initiation rite? What experiences do you have of the Charismatics? Theirs is not a seperate rite, there are no seperate initiations. At best it is a spirituality that works within the framework of what can be allowable in the Eucharistic liturgy.
It is an initiation rite because through it one receives a release of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Before, one does not speak in tongues, prophecy, etc., but the Baptism in the Spirit is the marked beginning point of this new life in the Spirit.
I was involved in a local Catholic Charismatic prayer group for a little less than a year. I took part in the Life in the Spirit seminar and was “Baptized in the Holy Spirit.”
When I wrote rite, I did not limit the word to the rite of the Eucharistic Liturgy.
I am sorry, that is so self-servingly arbitrary. “For the sake of this discussion (and my point) we will act on the presumption we agree something accepted as a spirituality within the framework of a rite is equal to being a promulgated new Eucharistic liturgy”. I simply don’t agree.
Again, I did not mean by rite the rite of Eucharistic celebration.
I have followed that blog for some time, and have read it already at least twice before. I suppose we are best to leave this at an impasses as I feel the article I sight is as strong or stronger, I am sure you feel the same way about yours.
I haven’t read all the posts on the blog, so I can’t say with conviction one way or the other. I agree with several points made by the article though.
On that last score, I find the point telling. How we are to know wheter Saint (or Blessed) Augustine actually did err is largely predicated on which writes of the east, and which modern authors one is reading and listening to. More on that in a moment.
I’d be interested in what you have to say of St. John Cassian’s criticisms.
Do I need to? Until displaced by a council that could yet happen, it can be assumed that they are on the right side of what will become accepted thought? By and large, if and when this correction comes, I suspect it will be when the WRO are significant enough to be noticed and move those in objection to action. At this time, the smallish communities are largely confined to North America, with handfuls of small communities elswhere. A GOA priest I know speculates that most of his contemporaries are indifferent or even ignorant about the movement as they have no experience of it. Time will tell.
Does significance lie in numbers? It already has received a fair amount of attention from Orthodox bishops and theologians.
Cute way to get a dig in.
No, not a dig. I simply was stating why he is great. From the Orthodox position, it is good that people return to Orthodoxy and that non-Orthodox dangers are protected against. Like I wrote, this is probably not great for you (a Catholic I presume who would wish the Orthodox to become Catholic).
Oh, I would, if you could provide me a link to either an online or printed translation available for purchase.
The ones who hold the non-binding pious opinion.
What does speculative anti-western theology mean? It means that insasmuch as there is (or at least used to be - everyone under 45 seems to gravitating toward Romandides these days) a wide latitude in positions taken in the west that has allowed some parties to feel comfortable re-baptizing and ordaining Catholic priests who convert to Orthodoxy while the Antiochians have made allowances for intercommunion and even concelebration with Catholics and Oriental Orthodox… While some Orthodox have
venerated icons of Saint Francis of Assisi, and others denounce such as being
all foolishness as the West has lost grace…
see also
here.
I don’t fully get your description…
Many of these “irregularities” have similarities in the Eastern Catholic Churches.
Eastern Catholics venerate icons of St. Gregory Palamas (who was not in communion with Rome). Many Eastern Catholics support the Zoghby initiative. Other Eastern Catholics reject the Pope as having supremacy over the Church. Just recently, Cardinal Walter Kasper venerated the relics of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Many Latin Catholics (and even a number of Eastern Catholics) have issues with this.
I read the article from St. John the Baptist church (the “here” link you provided me). I could not find any statement saying that the West has lost grace.
Well until an acceptable quoram of Orthodox bishops (in the early councils they did it with >15% of the episcopate) can be convened (and then recieved, another issue altogether!) to spell out a definative and united position on these different matters… Well it all seems rather speculative.
Leave it to God. He’s kept the Faith intact all these years.
In another forum I am dealing with some enthusiastic disciples of the late Father J. Romanides who readily advance the late priest’s thinking on “the Franks” as authoratative… I am left to say with some humor and irony, who made him the pope?
Speculative anti-western theology, indeed.
That wouldn’t happen to be on
orthodoxchristianity.net, would it? Or is it somewhere on here?
Besides some snippets of his on the Franks, I haven’t really read much of Romanides.
jk, even though I do think that it is hooey)) is not an official rite of the Catholic Church, it is treated as a rite by the Pentacostals who practice it, and has tacit approval as such by those active in the Charismatic movement in the Catholic Church. What I mean by that last phrase is that, while it is certainly stated by Charismatics, that BinS is not essential to participation in the spiritual life of the Catholic Church, with in the movement itself, it is in practice fundamental. It is not explicitly (ie verbally) required, but is more than explicitly encouraged verbally and non-verbally. It is left as a free choice (verbally), but I think many are also coerced.
