What do you think of the charismatic gifts of Pentecost?

[po18guy]

I believe that there are two things that are being espoused here which may be incorrect.

First, one cannot handcuff the Holy Spirit. He will do what he wishes. To say that one cannot ask for the gifts is not right. On the other hand, to say that the Holy Spirit will give them to whomever asks, is equally wrong. Gifts are given for the perfection of charity. Therefore, they will be given to whomever and whenever, they are necessary for that end.

Second, to assume that because a few of us are conscious of the work of the Holy Spirit, the whole Catholic community is conscious, is incorrect too. Fr. Andrew Apostoli, CFR wrote a wonderful series of lectures on this point. I believe that it may have been during the early part of this century, around 2002. He raises this very point. He states that the Holy Spirit is in fact the forgotten member fo the Trinity. He goes on to say that Catholics (he’s writing for Catholics) . . . that Catholics do not have an awareness of the Holy Spirit, through no fault of the Holy Spirit. This, obviously, is very bad Christology. It is not the fault of the Holy Spirit.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Amen! We each have al least one gift - some have many. We are expected to use those gifts, always recalling the parable of the talents, for the building up of God’s Kingdom. Prudence enters in here, as we must seek to know the nature of our gift and apply it accordingly. We cannot go against the will of God, however, no matter how much we may desire the Spirit to act in a given situation. We have gifts - not omniscience.

Christ’s peace.

 

[EnchantedEve]

The Apostles healed, cast out demons and raised form the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit which they called up when needed. A truly spiritual person can very well call up the Spirit’s gifts as needed - but they are a rare individual indeed. But, the true use of the Holy Spirit is for others - not the building up of the self. But, we must not condemn a group because of the well known or publicized errors of some of its members. Our Church would then be gone. Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pope’s household, is charismatic. Because we see someone locally misusing the gifts does in no way affect the goodness of those gifts to the Church. Ask your Priest about the charisms - not the movement.

po18, I am afraid I am not following your point very well. My position, that charismatic gifts are the result of strong spiritual development that should probably not be sought aside from that, has nothing to do individuals. I agree these gifts are a good but they are just that, gifts. Catholics should definitely invoke the Holy Ghost, often and with ferver. If the Holy Ghost should impart His gifts as result, then so be it. Indeed, we may even expect that this will probably occur.

Where was there a questioning of the goodness of these gifts? My position is merely they should not be sought in a systemic way, i.e. like the charismatic movement. But if they come as the result of strong interior reflection and growth in holiness then by all means we should welcome them, as was the case of St. Anthony.

I am not confusing the movement with the gifts, and I am not sure where the idea came from that I was. So again, I am unclear as to what you are trying to say. Are you confusing the movement with the gifts? On the one hand, you say we should not condemn a movement, but thne you go on to say I should speak to a priest about the gifts, not a movement!? Which is it? I certainly favour charismatic GIFTS, but I am not a fan of the charismatic MOVEMENT. Does this help?

 

[EnchantedEve]

I believe that there are two things that are being espoused here which may be incorrect.

First, one cannot handcuff the Holy Spirit. He will do what he wishes. To say that one cannot ask for the gifts is not right. On the other hand, to say that the Holy Spirit will give them to whomever asks, is equally wrong. Gifts are given for the perfection of charity. Therefore, they will be given to whomever and whenever, they are necessary for that end.

Second, to assume that because a few of us are conscious of the work of the Holy Spirit, the whole Catholic community is conscious, is incorrect too. Fr. Andrew Apostoli, CFR wrote a wonderful series of lectures on this point. I believe that it may have been during the early part of this century, around 2002. He raises this very point. He states that the Holy Spirit is in fact the forgotten member fo the Trinity. He goes on to say that Catholics (he’s writing for Catholics) . . . that Catholics do not have an awareness of the Holy Spirit, through no fault of the Holy Spirit. This, obviously, is very bad Christology. It is not the fault of the Holy Spirit.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Certainly, you will admit Brother, that discerning the spirits without experience or knowledge can be an uncertain practice. I am skeptical that those who may have only a rudimentary faith to start especially can safely enter the world of spirit-discernment and not get lost in it. I again state we cannot always be truly sure it is the Holy Ghost present, though we would like it to be, we cannot know for certain. I think especially in today’s world it pays to be vigilant, and wait for the Holy Ghost to come to us, even as we pursue Him, rather than to try groping for Him in the dark uncertainty that is the other realm.

 

[po18guy]

po18, I am afraid I am not following your point very well. My position, that charismatic gifts are the result of strong spiritual development that should probably not be sought aside from that, has nothing to do individuals. I agree these gifts are a good but they are just that, gifts. Catholics should definitely invoke the Holy Ghost, often and with ferver. If the Holy Ghost should impart His gifts as result, then so be it. Indeed, we may even expect that this will probably occur.

Where was there a questioning of the goodness of these gifts? My position is merely they should not be sought in a systemic way, i.e. like the charismatic movement. But if they come as the result of strong interior reflection and growth in holiness then by all means we should welcome them, as was the case of St. Anthony.

I am not confusing the movement with the gifts, and I am not sure where the idea came from that I was. So again, I am unclear as to what you are trying to say. Are you confusing the movement with the gifts? On the one hand, you say we should not condemn a movement, but thne you go on to say I should speak to a priest about the gifts, not a movement!? Which is it? I certainly favour charismatic GIFTS, but I am not a fan of the charismatic MOVEMENT. Does this help?

I was directing the confusion comment at others, but could have made that a little clearer. I just find that there is a LOT of, um, animus let’s say, directed toward charismatics. Why? It seems like charismatics are the diametric opposite of the traditionalists. Animated joy vs. staid reverence. But, it’s not that simple or clear cut, since many cross the borders between those two characteristics.

The charismatic movement seeks to reinvigorate the Church, and has done a credible job, it seems. There are excesses, but that occurs in seemingly every area of the Church, no? But the movement is real, authorized and active - it’s just not for everyone.

 

[guanophore]

A lot here to respond to, but I shall do my best.

I appreciate your careful refections and have reread them, and am finding them very helpful. I very much appreciate the time you are taking.

I do not believe the charismatic gifts to do not belong in the Catholic Church, only that as a phenomena, I would expect that it would only occasional and even rare, not a common occurance as charismatics would have us believe.

I am curious about that, because it seems to me that the opposite is the case.

Why would this be? I will use your own example of St. Teresa of Avila, in the Interior Castle. Many charismatics seem to confuse the gifts the Holy Ghost with communion with the Holy Ghost. Just because one is in constant communion with the Divine internally does not mean that external manifestations will result.

Yes, this certainly seems to be one of the major elements of the heretical movements.
I have had personal observation of groups that believe one does not have the HS unless one has manifested tongues. This is a major source of peer pressure and people “faking it”.

Your example of St. Teresa indicates that you appear ot be saying that if we are in communion with the Holy Ghost, ipso facto, charismatic and ecstatic results will be produced.

She writes as if this is the case. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say that it is a normative expectation, and should not surpise anyone.

But we have scores of devout and holy saints who never manifested such gifts. Just as not all saints' holiness resulted in stigmata, not all saints' sanctity resulted in ecstatic manifestations.

This is a good point! However, I am wondering if we really know those saints did not manifest these gifts. I say this because it is becoming clear that the saints are quite humble about what are commonly called “consolations”, “graces” and make a point not to put them forward when they are writing, but focus instead on the disciplines of a healthy prayer life. Teresa does this also, but she also describes many experiences of her own, and those of her sisters that make it clear these gifts were functioning liberally.

I would expect that, like the stigmata, charismatic gifts would result only occasionally, as an indication of the existing holiness of the person. I do not expect we would find it as a normal means of pursuing sanctity, but only as an indicator of existing sanctity.

I think there are two categories of gifts, one category that emanates from sanctity and maturity (such as the character gifts in Isaiah) and the other that is given to rank amateurs that has no relation to those qualities in the recipient. Bear with me here, while I support my hypothesis from the letter of Paul to the Corinthians.

He opens his letter to them affirming that they have been given “every spiritual gift in the heavenly places” are “not lacking in any spiritual gift”, have received “all the graces”, and that the "witness of Christ has been strong among you. He then almost immediately launches into various criticisms of their immorality and imaturity, including factions (disputes and unforgiveness), eating meat offered to idols, a man sleeping with his father’s wife, arrogance, women getting out of hand during the gatherings, gross liturgical abuses of the Eucharist(drunkeness and gluttony) and several more.

After several chapters of exhortations on all these matters, he then turns to instruction on more proper use of the gifts, about which he says “each of you has been given a gift for the common good”. I Cor12:4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 7To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. "

He writes as if he expects that everyone in attendance may be able to manifest one of the gifts whenever they gather. I Cor14:26 “What should be done then, my friends?* When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.”

Clearly the audience to whom the letter is addressed are not in posession of these gifts as a reflection of their piety or maturity!

St. Anthony, for example, only showed the charismatic gifts after years of interior development of his soul, and not as an earlier indicator of his devotion.

I will do some more reading on Anthony. However, I also get the impression that persons who have the character set of gifts (the mature in faith) do not have need of, or find themselves lacking for the charismatic gifts. In reading the instruction of the Apostle, it seems that the opposite is true, and that the charismata are given to the immature in the course of moving them towards the deeper interior life.

Similar observations could probably be made of St. Teresa of Avila. I am skeptical of the idea that the charismatic gifts would be manifest in people who simply attend charismatic meetings and “let go to the Spirit,” and observe routine piety. I would think we would see these gifts genuinely after an extraordinary level of piety was reached, and not before.

Am I correct to understand that your skepticism is founded on the understanding that the charismatic gifts are available to the mature, rather than the immature? If so, perhaps when you have time you can read I Cor. and give me your impressions of that community. It appears that they are “rich” in gifts, but quite poor in piety.

 

[guanophore]

It is like a burning fire that engulfs a bush, only after the fire has burned for a while does it envelope the whole of its subject, not at the beginning. Ecstasy is a great blessing, and certainly achievable, even desirable, but not necessary. It is not a prerequisite of holiness, nor even an indicator, but a great blessing if given.

Yes, this is what Teresa says, almost word for word! she calls it “consolation” also, or “graces of comfort”. However, her instruction seems to presuppose that such experiences are normative in prayer, and she gives examples of her own experience as well as those of her sisters. She also describes that some of her sisters were quite inexperiences in prayer, and became frightened of the manifestations until they were further instructed. She describes a great variety of gifts, and there are some accounts that do not appear to match any of those mentioned in I Corinthians.

I make the comparison to narcotics because charismatics I have met seem to get hooked on the “high” of the experience, and seem to feel that ALL their devoted prayers should be blessed with such a result.

Thank you for clarifying this. Yes, I have not come across any writings of the saints that don’t speak about dry periods, dark nights(weeks and months) or in the case of Mother Teresa, years! It is a mistake to think that all prayer will be blessed with such results. I ordered the Interior Castle on mp3 so I could meditate on it more and had your reference to narcotics in mind, when Teresa described just such an experience. Basically, she was givng an example of one of the sisters who was so caught up in such a “narcotic” state that she was no earthly good, and could not perform her duties. I will find the passage and post it.

Again, I feel that if the soul reaches that level of devotion to where they receive this grace, that is fine. But to seek it as a manner of course I think is not advisable, and I believe St. Teresa’s confessor mentioned to her about not get too caught up in the experience, lest she lose herself in it.

Yes, I was surprised to learn that sometimes she disobeyed the instructions of the confessor, and advised her sisters to do the same, when she was pursuaded that their experiences were authentic, and the confessor did not understand what they were for lack of experience. This was the advice, though, that she gave over the sister who could not perform her duties due to her trancelike state of ecstacy (sounded very narcotic like!).

If I have not addressed anything, let me know. I tried to express myself as best I could.

You are very helpful, and I greatly value your points and reflections.

 

[guanophore]

That is my point, there is a confusion between the gifts of the Holy Ghost and charismatics who claim to espouse them.

When you speak of “claims” it seems that you are referring to that which is not authentic. I think we would all agree that there are people “faking it” (partly because of peer pressure brought on by heretical ideas) and possibly manifestations from a downright ungodly source. How do you think it could be determined whether the gift is authentic? Given your previous post, I would expect you to look at piety and degree of sanctity. But if the gifts are given (as it appears in 1 Cor.) to the immature and immoral as well, then what might be a sign of authenticity? When you read I Cor. 12 an 14, do you get the impression that any of the manifestations are not authentic, even though they are not bein used correctly?

By being "on-call," I mean that there is a perception that at the drop of a hat the Holy Ghost will manifest Himself in ecstatic and charismatic ways if the subject reposes himself correctly. With this I do NOT agree. Just because we are sealed with the gifts of the Holy Ghost at Holy Confirmation and Holy Baptism, does not mean they will always manifest automatically or on command, just as prayer does not always result in what we want (i.e. the "Health & Wealth" gospel).

I am a bit puzzled by this, one because my own personal experience is opposite, but also because it seems to me that the teaching of the Church with regard to receiving grace indicates that we be properly disposed (attempting to always remain in a state of grace) and that we be in a constant state of openness to the presence and action of God in our lives.

I think one reason that more American Catholics do not receive the graces of the sacraments is that they do not repose themselves correctly for them (if you notice the communion lines are easily 20 times as long as the confession lines ).

It also seems to me that the Scriptural record indicates that there was an expectation that the HS would manifest Himself at any given moment according to the need. For example,when Peter and John were walking to the temple, and came across the cripple, Peter stepped forward and offered healing. This ability to be able to respond to the Spirit’s gift at a random encounter seems to be predicated on being in the state of grace, and expectation that the HS can, and will, act.

Just because the Holy Ghost, our Consoler, is manifest when we need Him, does not mean He will always manifest in a predictable or external way.

Yes, I can certainly agree on this. But do you think it is presumptuous to assume that He is always there, ready and waiting to act if we are properly reposed? This passage:

I cor14: 26 What should be done then, my friends?* When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up.

seems to indicate that everyone has a gift, and that each shold be ready to use it for the building up of the body.

Thank you for your time and feedback, may God richly bless you for your assistance given to His flock.

 

[guanophore]

I believe that there are two things that are being espoused here which may be incorrect.

First, one cannot handcuff the Holy Spirit. He will do what he wishes. To say that one cannot ask for the gifts is not right. On the other hand, to say that the Holy Spirit will give them to whomever asks, is equally wrong. Gifts are given for the perfection of charity. Therefore, they will be given to whomever and whenever, they are necessary for that end.

I appreciate this Brother JR. This is consistent with how I read I Cor. It seems that those who have been given an abundance of gifts also have an abundant lack of charity and morals. I can only conclude that the HS is using these gifts to lead them into a more mature spiritual life.

I have a theory and would like your thoughts. What if, in baptism, every believer receives the capacity for every gift? I wonder this because the Scriptures say "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, **but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. **7To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. "(I cor 12)

Perhaps the potential for all of them is present when we are sealed, then the HS brings out the manifestation that is needed for the time and place. This would explain why some people have only manifested a particular gift once in a lifetime.

Second, to assume that because a few of us are conscious of the work of the Holy Spirit, the whole Catholic community is conscious, is incorrect too.  Fr. Andrew Apostoli, CFR wrote a wonderful series of lectures on this point.  I believe that it may have been during the early part of this century, around 2002.  He raises this very point.  He states that the Holy Spirit is in fact the forgotten member fo the Trinity.  He goes on to say that Catholics (he's writing for Catholics) . . . that Catholics do not have an awareness of the Holy Spirit, through no fault of the Holy Spirit.  This, obviously, is very bad Christology.  It is not the fault of the Holy Spirit.

Whereas, there seems to be an overcompensation for this neglect among our Pentecostal separated brethren, who have focused almost exclusively on the manifestations.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I love fraternizing with you.

 

[guanophore]

My position, that charismatic gifts are the result of strong spiritual development that should probably not be sought aside from that, has nothing to do individuals.

I am having trouble reconciling this idea that the are the result of strong spiritual development with what I am reading in I cor.

I am having a little difficulty with your sentence construction above. I think you mean that the gifts should not be sought aside from strong spiritual development, is that right?

If so, I think this is consistent with what JR is saying about the purpose of the gifts being to lead us into spiritual strength, and with what po is saying that the gifts strengthen the individual to walk according to the HS while serving the common good. Or do you understand it differently?

 I agree these gifts are a good but they are just that, gifts. Catholics should definitely invoke the Holy Ghost, often and with ferver. If the Holy Ghost should impart His gifts as result, then so be it. Indeed, we may even expect that this will probably occur.

Yes, I think we are in agreement on this point, and as is taught in the Life in the Spirit Seminars, “seek the Giver, not the gifts”.

Where was there a questioning of the goodness of these gifts?

I don;t doubt that you consider authentic gifts as good, but you have made several references to "supposed’ gifts, which leaves the impression you think some of these manifestations are not good, or not authentic (or both more likely).

My position is merely they should not be sought in a systemic way,

Can you shed some light on what this might look like? Or give an example?

Are you familiar with the Life in the Spirit Seminar, and if so, do you consider that a “systematic way” of seeking the gifts?

But if they come as the result of strong interior reflection and growth in holiness then by all means we should welcome them, as was the case of St. Anthony.

Yes. My understanding about the LISS was that it is seeking to educate the faithful, so that if these things occur, they will recognize them.

I should speak to a priest about the gifts, not a movement!? Which is it? I certainly favour charismatic GIFTS, but I am not a fan of the charismatic MOVEMENT. Does this help?

I did not garner that you had any need or lack that you needed to speak to a priest on this matter, either. In fact, I appreciate your participation, as it seems clear that you did not come to this thread looking for anything for yourself, but to assist me, who is the one looking.

 

[guanophore]

Certainly, you will admit Brother, that discerning the spirits without experience or knowledge can be an uncertain practice.

Absolutely. How does one gain such experience and knowledge? St. Teresa writes that many of the confessors had less experience than her sisters - even novices, and sometimes gave advice that led them in the exact wrong direction. ( I found it rather cheeky of her to note this).

 I am skeptical that those who may have only a rudimentary faith to start especially can safely enter the world of spirit-discernment and not get lost in it.

I think this is entirely valid, and the truth of this statement is what lies at the root of the abuses we see in the Pentecostal movement today. Since they are not within the boundaries of authorized shepherding, and lack the structure of the sacraments, there is rampant abuse and a lot of “lost” people. However, I don’t want to derail my own thread! I just wanted to point out that the evidence confirms your statement.

I again state we cannot always be truly sure it is the Holy Ghost present, though we would like it to be, we cannot know for certain. I think especially in today’s world it pays to be vigilant, and wait for the Holy Ghost to come to us, even as we pursue Him, rather than to try groping for Him in the dark uncertainty that is the other realm.

So, one is left with the question, how does one rightly repose oneself in waiting?

I do think that seeking God at times is a matter of groping in the dark uncertainties, but I think there are ways to protect oneself from getting lost. And Jesus was clear “how much more with the Father give the HS to those who ask”?

I think there are a great many properly disposed persons who do not manifest the gifts because they have not been given instruction, and because of fear. The work of the HS is spontaneous, and many Catholics have not been taught how to spontaneously interact with God. I never knew anything but rote prayers until I left the church. The Baptists taught me how to pray spontaneously. I think I am not alone in lack of appropriate spiritual formation in the realm of spontaneity.

 

[Layman]

Traditional Catholicism: Wanting the TLM, the other older sacraments, the old cathechism and devotions available locally.

Charismatic Renewal: Wanting the same experience as the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles.

Not much overlap there, so I recommend people don’t talk at cross-purposes.

I think the Charismatic Renewal is dodgy because of one basic thing: quality control. How does one decide who’s truly inspired, who’s deluded, who’s oppressed by a demon and who’s just joining in with the others?

My opinion: the Apostles spoke and were immediately understood by foreigners. That’s different to speaking gibberish.

The dangers: 1. Charismaticism becoming an end in itself 2. Enjoying supernatural phenomena of the kind spiritualists evoke but which is useless or harmful to genuine spiritual progress.
**
An observation: Charismatic services tend to the free-form whereas Traditionalists are trying to get away from exactly that. **

 

[guanophore]

In my case, not at all! The Holy Spirit lives within us, as we received Him at Baptism and were sealed in Him at Confirmation via the laying on of hands and the anointing. As to Him being “on-call”, is not the strength that we need from our Lord “on-call”? That strength arrives via the Holy Spirit, through Whom God’s will is accomplished on earth.

I guess I am understanding the “on - call” objection as a lack of appreciation for the omnipotence and transcendance of the HS. It reminds me of what Jesus said about the angels being “on-call” for him. We are not to think of the HS or the angelic beings as our servants or slaves, or that we are "over’ them. At the same time, angels are ministering spirits that are sent to help us, and await our plea for help so that they can joyfully serve. This does not take away from their transcendent nature.

In the same way, the HS is spoken of as the “helper”, and we are told that “in Him we live, and move, and have our being”. It seems that we are in relationship, and within the context of relationship, can ask for help at any moment.

In my present studies of the ecstatic experiences of the saints, I note that all of the saints had the HS “on - call”, in the sense that they would spontaneously speak out an immediate prayer without thinking first. In some of the older texts, it is referred to as a “pious ejaculation” - a term that would no doubt be misunderstood in our modern age.

The two must be separated for the sake of this thread. We possess the gifts whether there was any "charismatic movement" or not.

I believe this is true, which is why the rejection of the gifts, along with the “movement”
is disconcerting.

 

[guanophore]

The Apostles healed, cast out demons and raised form the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit which they called up when needed. A truly spiritual person can very well call up the Spirit’s gifts as needed - but they are a rare individual indeed.

I wonder if it might be helpful to distinguish between “calling up” the gifts, as opposed to “calling up” the HS. If all of the gifts we need are sealed within us at baptism, then it is more a matter of unwrapping and using what has been placed within us. To me, this is quite different than have the HS at our beck and call like some kind of porter. Does that make sense?

I am thinking that this condition should not be “rare indeed”, but normative for the Christian, just as it is demonstrated in the NT. I think this is what it means to be baptized in with fire and power.

But, the true use of the Holy Spirit is for others - not the building up of the self.

I think there is an important distinction that must be made in order for our skeptical traditional brethren to be reached on this matter. This phrase “the use of the Holy Spirit” may come across sounding impious and arrogant. I hope to hear from some more traditional Catholics on this point.

On the other hand, the true use of the Gifts of the HS is clearly for the building up of the Body.

I disagree on the point of “not the building up of the self”, but I will get to that later.

But, we must not condemn a group because of the well known or publicized errors of some of its members. Our Church would then be gone.

This is, in fact, the contention of many of our separated brethren, who seem to believe that God abandoned the Church, and the Spirit caused the Reformation as a result of teh well known and publicized errors of the corrupt clergy at the time.

Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pope’s household, is charismatic. Because we see someone locally misusing the gifts does in no way affect the goodness of those gifts to the Church. Ask your Priest about the charisms - not the movement.

I need to look into more of Cantalamessa’s homilies and writings. What a privilege, to be the preacher to the Pope!

 

[guanophore]

Traditional Catholicism: Wanting the TLM, the other older sacraments, the old cathechism and devotions available locally.

Charismatic Renewal: Wanting the same experience as the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles.

Not much overlap there, so I recommend people don’t talk at cross-purposes.

Why do you not see any overlap here? What is it about the Apostolic experience of Pentecost that is contrary in any way to sacraments, catechism, and devotions?

This is the part I don’t understand, since from my point of view, all these came from the Apostles as well.

I think the Charismatic Renewal is dodgy because of one basic thing: **quality control.** How does one decide who's truly inspired, who's deluded, who's oppressed by a demon and who's just joining in with the others?

Without going off into any commentary on “the movement”, I will agree with you entirely on the point you are making. So, my question is, how might “quallity control” be done appropriately? Can you respond to any of my questions posted above on this point?

For example, how is a person trained in discernment?

My opinion: the Apostles spoke and were immediately understood by foreigners. That's different to speaking gibberish.

Clearly.

The dangers: 1. Charismaticism becoming an end in itself 2. Enjoying supernatural phenomena of the kind spiritualists evoke but which is useless or harmful to genuine spiritual progress.

Indeed. Do you see any proper place in the lives of Catholics today for the gifts of Pentecost?
**

An observation: Charismatic services tend to the free-form whereas Traditionalists are trying to get away from exactly that.

**

By"services" are you talking about Divine Liturgy, or a prayer meeting?

I think there are horrible liturgical abuses even without any charismania, and I think we ALL need to get away from that!

Do you see anything inherintly wrong with Catholics having a prayer meeting outside of Mass where the gifts may be operating?

 

[po18guy]

I wonder if it might be helpful to distinguish between “calling up” the gifts, as opposed to “calling up” the HS. If all of the gifts we need are sealed within us at baptism, then it is more a matter of unwrapping and using what has been placed within us. To me, this is quite different than have the HS at our beck and call like some kind of porter. Does that make sense?

However, we are Tabernacles of the Holy Spirit, as He lives within us - being not only sealed within us at Baptism and Confirmation, but also in the reception of the Eucharist, which brings not only Christ, but the Father and Holy Spirit with Him. He is not a remote Person, Who must respond from a far off Kingdom to assist us. We are part of that Kingdom, and He dwells within us.

I am thinking that this condition should not be “rare indeed”, but normative for the Christian, just as it is demonstrated in the NT. I think this is what it means to be baptized in with fire and power.

Indeed! The charismatic movement was neither made up out of whole cloth, nor was it designed to capitalize on the non-Catholic Pentecostal movement - or to re-capture those Catholics lost to it. It was instituted to release the gifts which we already have - gifts which, in many cases, are not being used for God’s purpose. It was intended to revive and re-animate the Church. If the Church is always sober and staid, exhibiting only reverence in her demeanor, who will be attracted, or attracted back? It is the joy, which must be manifested in our very beings that remains the best proclamation.

I think there is an important distinction that must be made in order for our skeptical traditional brethren to be reached on this matter. This phrase “the use of the Holy Spirit” may come across sounding impious and arrogant. I hope to hear from some more traditional Catholics on this point.

I have seen animus toward charismatics. Why? How many think hat the gifts died with the Apostles? The catechism teaches that the gifts of the Spirit are never ending. Faith the size of a mustard seed can uproot a tree and cast it into the ocean. But how? Through the power of the Holy Spirit. Where did this idea that the Spirit is no longer needed come from? I have my suspicions, but will reserve comment.

On the other hand, the true use of the Gifts of the HS is clearly for the building up of the Body.

Christ did not teach a faith with personal ends - other than to enter through the narrow gate. No, He taught the building up of His Body, and that is accomplished, as all good is, via the Holy Spirit. But, the Holy Spirit is not an external force that acts according to His will while we remain bystanders. We are called to be active participants in this bullding up, sweating like blood if necessary, as our Lord did at Gethsemane.

I disagree on the point of “not the building up of the self”, but I will get to that later.

Clarification: Not primarily or selfishly for the building up of the self. That building up of the self is a natural consequence of allowing the Spirit to use us for His purposes.

This is, in fact, the contention of many of our separated brethren, who seem to believe that God abandoned the Church, and the Spirit caused the Reformation as a result of teh well known and publicized errors of the corrupt clergy at the time.

Such thinking condemns each and every human effort on earth, since we are flawed at our core and can only struggle toward perfection. Everything we do has some fault or flaw in it. Must we then avoid all good because of the possibility of failure or sin being carried along? Certainly not! Paul revealed that we persist even through our failures, as a greater good is at stake. Once you fall into the pit of judging by the exception, you can “justify” avoiding every manner of good.

I need to look into more of Cantalamessa’s homilies and writings. What a privilege, to be the preacher to the Pope!

Sadly, much of what you find is attack pieces which issued forth upon a reflection in one of his homilies. However, there is so much more that is worth examining. Our Pope has his choice from the over 408,000 Priests on earth. He chose this one for an inspired reason.

Traditionalists are needed in the Church, for their contribution of great piety (a gift of the Holy Spirit), and the restoration of reverence in the liturgy. However, charismatics are also needed, to give life and the realization of the other gifts of the same Spirit. The Church would be in great trouble if she lacked either group.

 

[Layman]

To: Guanophore.

I think what’s happened is that Catholics and Protestants have rediscovered something our spiritual forefathers probably dumped a long time ago: ecstatic worship. Quality control would come from an advanced mystic who could ‘see’ who was divinely inspired and who was not. Also, the fruits.

e.g. Some psychics will tell you things you already know about yourself - not useful. Some will tell you true things which are not about yourself but which are ultimately small beer. Some speak gibberish which the temple assistants will ‘interpret’. Some are outright charlatans. Some are genuine sooth-sayers (‘sooth’ is an old Anglo Saxon word for truth). Along the way, seekers get rooked and led astray.

I think this generation is making some very old mistakes and is proud: we think we’re the cleverest and most educated people who’ve ever lived. I also think that the Israelites, for example, saw priestess-led ecstatic cults around them, saw they didn’t lead people to the true God and decided to have nothing to do with that sort of thing.

It’s a simple fact: Christ is here, right now. Now, how can we get ‘near’ him? In silence, peace, knowledge, sacrifice, prayer and works of charity. And also simply by asking. I think the problem is not that He has distanced himself from us, but that we are focussed away from Him with our petty obsessions and half-cracked ideas.

For me, Charismatic Renewal is not a great new thing; it’s an old diversion come 'round again.

 

[guanophore]

To: Guanophore.

I think what’s happened is that Catholics and Protestants have rediscovered something our spiritual forefathers probably dumped a long time ago: ecstatic worship.

Why do you suppose it was “dumped”? I am guessing maybe the abuses we read about in I Cor? they don’t sound a lot different than the ones we see today in communities without proper authority and discernment. Maybe no gifts is better than abused gifts?

 Quality control would come from an advanced mystic who could 'see' who was divinely inspired and who was not. Also, the fruits.

I think all of us can see fruits, but how does one become an “advanced mystic”? Obviously St. Teresa needed one, but did not often have one. I think she is considered one (which is why I started researching her writings), but it seems that she learned “the hard way” pretty much seeking God on her own in prayer, then sorting through her strange experiences, culminating in writing about them at the end of her life.

  Along the way, seekers get rooked and led astray.

This would be a good reason to “dump” such experiences. Do you think there is any way to prevent this from happening if there is no “advanced mystic” around?

It’s a simple fact: Christ is here, right now. Now, how can we get ‘near’ him? In silence, peace, knowledge, sacrifice, prayer and works of charity. And also simply by asking. I think the problem is not that He has distanced himself from us, but that we are focussed away from Him with our petty obsessions and half-cracked ideas.

I agree with all this you write here. I think it is not so much a matter of “calling down the HS” to us, as it is us putting ourselves in awareness that He is already present, as po has written above.

For me, Charismatic Renewal is not a great new thing; it’s an old diversion come 'round again.

At the risk of derailing the thread, what was the last “diversion”?

 

[guanophore]

However, we are Tabernacles of the Holy Spirit, as He lives within us - being not only sealed within us at Baptism and Confirmation, but also in the reception of the Eucharist, which brings not only Christ, but the Father and Holy Spirit with Him. He is not a remote Person, Who must respond from a far off Kingdom to assist us. We are part of that Kingdom, and He dwells within us.

For this reason, I have trouble understanding the “calling down” concept. It seems that there is no need to “call down” that which has already been sealed within us sacramentally. To me, it seems more like opening and releasing the gift that is already present and waiting.

  It was instituted to release the gifts which we already have - gifts which, in many cases, are not being used for God's purpose. It was intended to revive and re-animate the Church. If the Church is always sober and staid, exhibiting only reverence in her demeanor, who will be attracted, or attracted back? It is the joy, which must be manifested in our very beings that remains the best proclamation.

What do you say to those who claim it is an infiltration from Protestantism?

I have seen animus toward charismatics. Why? How many think hat the gifts died with the Apostles?

That is one of the reasons I started this thread. I have heard Catholic say this, but it seems to directly contradict the Teachings in the Catechism and of the Holy Fathers.

The catechism teaches that the gifts of the Spirit are never ending. Faith the size of a mustard seed can uproot a tree and cast it into the ocean. But how? Through the power of the Holy Spirit.

I do think the gifts will cease, but not till Jesus comes for His Bride!

Where did this idea that the Spirit is no longer needed come from? I have my suspicions, but will reserve comment.

I don’t think anyone (even the strongest nay-sayers) believe the Spirit is no longer needed. I think they believe the charismatic gifts are not. I mean, if you think about it, the vast majority of Catholics have managed to get along without them just fine for centuries…

Christ did not teach a faith with personal ends - other than to enter through the narrow gate. No, He taught the building up of His Body, and that is accomplished, as all good is, via the Holy Spirit. But, the Holy Spirit is not an external force that acts according to His will while we remain bystanders. We are called to be active participants in this bullding up, sweating like blood if necessary, as our Lord did at Gethsemane.

Don’t most Catholics think this can happen without any charismata?

Clarification: Not *primarily* or selfishly for the building up of the self. That building up of the self is a natural consequence of allowing the Spirit to use us for His purposes.

I think that, when individuals are strong spiritually, they are more capable of building the Body. Specifically Scripture states that the gift of tongues strengthens the individual.

Traditionalists are needed in the Church, for their contribution of great piety (a gift of the Holy Spirit), and the restoration of reverence in the liturgy. However, charismatics are also needed, to give life and the realization of the other gifts of the same Spirit. The Church would be in great trouble if she lacked either group.

I wonder what it would look like if they overlapped! What would a traditional charismatic be like? I think the Apostles were…

 

[EnchantedEve]

I have a theory and would like your thoughts. What if, in baptism, every believer receives the capacity for every gift? I wonder this because the Scriptures say "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, **but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. **7To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. "(I cor 12)

Perhaps the potential for all of them is present when we are sealed, then the HS brings out the manifestation that is needed for the time and place. This would explain why some people have only manifested a particular gift once in a lifetime.

I agree with your theory. Just as we are often told we are all potential saints, I believe the Gifts of the Holy Ghost abide in us always, and the exist in potentiality, even to a degree that I would say they are eager to manifest.

I appreciate your thoughts, guanaphore. I am cautious about the charismata for various reasons, which I have described before.

However, I believe they can be authentic. I will express to concerns and reflections I have for your consideration, and give me your feedback.

I have read of the use of these gifts in the immature believer, but generally, as in the St. Paul’s example, as a cautionary and even as a short-lived tale. Certain Jansenists at Port Royal, for example, claimed the charismatic gifts, though they proved short-lived and shallow. I would assume we would expect the gift to manifest in recently renewed souls, as the Fires of Light still burn hotly in the spirit. We would even see them as sign of the Holy Ghost’s providential blessing on pious pursuits. But again, often in the spiritual life these eventually burned out, only to resurface again when the soul reached a more mature state. Even then, it was often observed that the ecstasy of the mature believer differed, often signicantly, from the neophyte one. Compare the ecstasies of the young St. Joseph of Cupertino, with his incredible flights of levity, to the older St. Padre Pio, who would almost literally get lost in the Holy Eucharist while saying Mass. Note also the correspondence of the Holy Eucharist to St. Padre Pio’s stigmata, which was at first only invisible in pain and discomfort, and later grew to fully visible. His love of the Holy Eucharist increased his ecstatic passion, to the point of visible manifestation. An increased love of the Holy Ghost I presume would have the same results.

However, I am still troubled by the relative consistancy and even uniformity of how the charismatic gifts manifest in the movement. I would expect that the Holy Ghost would be less consistant in His manifestation (custom made, perhaps?) and I am tempted to believe, especially in heretical sects, that we are not always seeing the Holy Ghost at work.

As po18 recommended, speaking to a priest or experienced spiritual director can be a great help in discerning the Holy Ghost, and Ignatian retreats can be a boon as well. St. Ignatius Loyola wrote a book called “Rules in Discerning the Spirits,” which may be good to acquire and study in a charismatic study group. Having a personal spiritual guide can often be more helpful and productive in safely seeking the Holy Ghost then trying to do it, or learn to do it, in the more common group setting, where sprititual anticipation and excessive enthusiasm can lead to uncertain and even heterodox approaches.

I personally find the prayer “Come, Holy Ghost,” and the Chaplets of the Holy Ghost and the Precious Blood to be wonderful sources of ecstatic meditation.

Thoughts?

 

[EnchantedEve]

Thank you for your time and feedback, may God richly bless you for your assistance given to His flock.

Thank you for your kind words, and openess.