We don’t lose the gifts. Even when I was unable to attend a prayer group because there was none in the area, I could still pray as the Spirit led me.This book, now on line, will bring back memories.
May it remind us that we can pray in Tongues forever.
A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church
Msgr. Vincent M. Walsh
ISBN: 0-87029-033-9
brendancase.com/uploads/Key_to_the_Charismatic_Renewal.pdf
They were still following a ritual, just one they created themselves and all agreed with among their new group. [/QQUOTE]And your point is?
SyroMalankara;12733912:
It can also be said for the real charismatic.That can be said for any practice, including the so-called charismatic.
You paint with an extremely wide brush, particularly as your comments seem to indicate that you have far less experience about these matters than you have opinions shared with others who dismiss the movement. Me - I think John Paul 2 had it right; but then, again, there are those who outright rejected that too, from him.That’s because they considered the charismatic practice/form more important than belief or doctrine. “Deeper relationship” seems to mean “feelings”.
It was never large to begin with, nor id it need to be; and it is still alive, although less noticeable.I think that ship has pretty much sailed, except for some small pockets here and there.
SyroMalankara;12733912:
My point is, it is strange to denigrate those following Traditional rituals for not ‘getting it’ when the charismatics are following their own traditions that they made up and is easy to ‘get’ because it’s whatever they one experiences makes of it. It would be much better to learn a bit about the Traditional rituals so that one could ‘get it’ instead of making a new one up.They were still following a ritual, just one they created themselves and all agreed with among their new group. [/QQUOTE]And your point is?
I have a pretty good experience with it actually. Like I originally stated. Very sincere people, who are socially full of energy. However, in general many have a ways to go to be doctrinally sound and rooted in Sacred Traditional practices.You paint with an extremely wide brush, particularly as your comments seem to indicate that you have far less experience about these matters than you have opinions shared with others who dismiss the movement.
JP2 was polite and over and again told the charismatic movement to stay attached to true faith, their bishops and not to go on wild tangents. Of course, we know he said this because it occurred too often.Me - I think John Paul 2 had it right; but then, again, there are those who outright rejected that too, from him.
In my opinion it was a kind of fad. Many have gone to other denominations or learned more about their faith and become Traditional. Others remain Catholic and search after other experiential movements, some keep up their charismatism within some small groups. I find much of it to be deviant in following the actual rubrics of the Church, especially when it comes to Liturgy. If it is of the Spirit, then the Spirit will lead men not to deviation, but to a deeper more beautiful participation in the Liturgy. Those who cannot sing will suddenly yearn to sing the authentic prayers of the Church and will do so beautifully; those who are afraid of public speaking will suddenly feel the shackles lifted and lector like they were professional readers; those who were always tone-deaf will suddenly chant like monks – I’ve yet to see this occur in any large charismatic gathering, however, I have seen this in more Traditional communities.It was never large to begin with, nor id it need to be; and it is still alive, although less noticeable.
Zeal can of course be a really good thing, but how is it that the words (homily) of a charismatic priest can carry a special authority?There is no mistaking the zeal that comes from a homily that has been preached by a Charismatic priest, even if a person never hears that priest pray in tongues. His words carry a special authority.
Who speaks through the priest? It is the same authority that any priest carries.Zeal can of course be a really good thing, but how is it that the words (homily) of a charismatic priest can carry a special authority?
Alright, but I don’t see that your thoughtful response has answered my question regarding why you believe that the words of a charismatic priest carries a special authority. Special when compared to what, exactly?Who speaks through the priest? It is the same authority that any priest carries.
When the congregation understands and is motivated to make changes in their lives it can only be because the Holy Spirit is at work.
Each of us have been given certain gifts as a result of our Baptism and Confirmation. We may be unaware of these gifts, having put them in the back of a closet shelf. Either that, or we have never learned to use the gifts and talents that we have been given. Most of us know how to read, but to a person who does not know how to read, the letters on a page are meaningless, just as Arabic writing has no meaning to me.
One of the charisms that a priest receives as a result of his Holy Orders is increased zeal. I have heard the testimony of priests about to leave the priesthood, only to rediscover their love of God as a result of the Charismatic Renewal.
The main difference between Catholics and non-Catholics when it comes to charismatic gifts is that because of the Sacraments, we already have them. They are just waiting for our openness in order to be released. As Catholics, we also understand that salvation is a lifetime time process, not a one-time event. The Charismatic Renewal draws us closer to the Sacraments, not further from them. We need to continue to grow and mature.
Sometimes that maturity means we are not able to attend prayer meetings either because we are busy “working in the fields” or because there are none in the area.
The reason is simple, in the United States, 1960-70s were when protestants were getting into their charismatic movements. Some Catholics - including clergy - attended and/or observed this (see the so-called “Toronto blessing”) and declared that they too had been ‘filled with the Spirit’. I’m sure some felt they were, others wanted to be, many were charlatans, and others just thought if it don’t hurt why not.
I’d say it’s the opposite. Out of those who went after charismatic movements in the 60s and 70s, very few remained. Many stayed Catholic and became traditional after self-study or theology cohorts, others left Catholicism for protestant sects to find the next ‘experience’, many others left Christianity altogether.
I have nothing against Charismatics per se - personally, though, I feel some pity toward them. They seem extremely sincere, but lack Apostolic foundation. Even those who are leaders, I’d say, really have to create a certain duality within themselves to balance what they know to be authentic tradition and this form of worship that came out of the 60s/70s era. In addition, there are many who play fast and loose with the Liturgy, how can that be ‘of the Spirit’, if it’s truly authentic.
Which renewal movement or movements are you speaking of? Charismatic Renewal? Neocatechumenal Way? Communion and Liberation? Opus Dei? Taize? Couples for Christ? Marriage Encounter?In the 1970s there were several movements extremely active in my diocese and nationally. They still exist, but involve far fewer people. Why the decline?
I was a leader in one movement. I can’t rule out the possibility that leaders’ spiritual life was lacking. OK, besides that, I also think we were affected by the doctrinal context. In the early 70s we had Life in the Spirit seminars, people came in with already a solid foundation in Catholic doctrine. Contrary to my expectation, people who got their Catholic education prior to Vatican II understood the ideas of renewal better than young adults.
By the 1980s the young adults we were seeing knew almost nothing of Catholic doctrine, we had to keep backtracking to explain the whole context of doctrine, before we could even begin to talk about a point of renewal. Even people who had gotten a good doctrinal foundation years earlier seemed to forget a lot of it, or it seemed less relevant to them. My theory is that this is because basic Catholic doctrine was never reinforced in sermons, in the diocesan newspaper, etc. So (according to my theory) they regarded our renewal movement, and Catholic dogma too, as a’la’carte items on a menu, anyone could choose whatever from. Some would say our renewal activity had more authority than the Pope, which certainly did not please me. Eventually it seemed that “renewal” without a doctrinal foundation did as much harm as good, so I dropped out.
Right now I am involved in an independent Catholic school to spread orthodox Catholic doctrinal content. My old renewal movement still exists in my area, but very tiny. Other (shrunken) renewal movements exist as well, ironically all the renewal movements attract the same few, mostly elderly participants, and I bless them. I am interested in the experiences of anyone else who was in the “boom” years.