FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Church Approved Charismatic Movement
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
What do you all make of the Charismatic Movement and it's Church approval?

I find a lot in the movement good, but some of it just off the wall and not of history, scripture, or tradition.  

I ask because this is the group I am surrounded by most, and working with them can be great at times, until the questionable stuff comes into play or discussion.  Then we seem to have a problem.  I reject it based on history, they get to embrace it because our bishop does - and I'm at a loss.
It's the work of Satan
(05-28-2019, 07:20 AM)For Petes Sake Wrote: [ -> ]It's the work of Satan

I have seen literal examples of this where they record people speaking in tongues, and blaspheming Jesus or Mary and they didn't know it.  Someone there knew the language they were speaking - I believe Hebrew and Aramaic.

Video examples of this are both on Church Militant and The Fatima Center.

I shared these with our Charismatics and they blew it off.  Our priest did nothing, and our bishop is coming to host a "Charismatic Mass" soon. The entire diocese has been run like this a long time now, and as a result I can't find a single person that can tell something is wrong with this. The only one is our former seminarian that was sent to my area for a year - he knew this stuff was bunk and we laughed together at what they do, and at the same time shook our heads in sadness.

They got rid of him.
The charismatics I knew seemed to have the attitude that the Mass is “nice,” as is Marian devotion, Eucharistic adoration, confession, and other elements of Catholicism, but the real spirituality, the things that really matter are found in the charismatic experiences. Those charismatics have since left the Church.
I have to say the Charismatics I know are pretty dedicated, life long Catholics for the most part. Like really good Christians I'd say, so I do respect them.

It's an odd mix.
It really is a mix.

There's nothing in principle against the concept of people being granted those charismatic gifts as were given in Apostolic times, but it's worth reflecting on why only -- but all of -- these certain people, who all happen to be part of this one modern movement, which itself originates from a Protestant movement, are the select few who have be given them to exercise on cue.

I've been to many charismatic services over my lifetime.  I've seen what I believe to be authentic manifestations of it, including a crippled man being healed.

But I've seen much more which seems entirely fake, and more of an emotional feeling not dissimilar to the Steubenville experience for children, where "getting some spiritual feeling from it" seems to be the primary end.

There's a simple, logical method to disprove the majority of these "healing Masses", where the Mass is frequently interrupted by communal tongue-speaking.  Consider the following logic.

They assert that the Holy Spirit inspires them to speak in tongues, all in a group, on cue, including during the celebration of Mass.  Yet they also profess the validity of Vatican II and assert that the Holy Spirit guided the Council and the documents which came from it.

Yet, Sacrosanctum Concilium n.22 clearly states that regulation of the liturgy is the sole authority of the Church and the conferences of bishops, and that "no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority."

So if we accept both of their assertions, then we must accept that the Holy Spirit, who guided the documents of the Council to say that no one may add anything to the liturgy, is inspiring these same people to disobey the authority of the Church and of the Council and add their communal tongues into the liturgy against the document which the same Holy Spirit guided.

So we end up with these options. Either:
-The Holy Spirit is inspiring disobedience to the Church of Christ, thus is contradicting Himself and is a liar, or
-The Church is not actually the regulator of the liturgy, and people may add things of their own preference and will, or
-The charismatics are making up their tongues, which occur during the Mass, for the sake of some emotional experience.

Of these three options, I think it's clear that the latter is the case. Therefore, insofar as they attempt to manifest these "gifts" during the Sacred Liturgy, we can conclude that they are necessarily fake.  Outside of the liturgy, I advise heavy caution and scepticism, but do not universally dismiss.
I am reminded of a story. An Orthodox Priest friend. a hieromonk who was my Pastor at the time, was asked why Orthodoxy did not have a 'Charismatic Renewal'. His answer was simple , The Holy Ghost never left the Orthodox.' 

The problem, as I see it, is that the whole 'pentecostal'/'charismatic' movement implies that Christ lied in John 
25-26, when He said,

Quote:25 I have said these things to you while I am still with you. 26 But the Advocate,[d] the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you.


If the 'renewal' didn't start until 1900 (for the prots) or 1967 (for Catholics) where was the Holy Ghost for the 1800+ years since the end of the Apostolic Age? I don't for one minute believe that He had deserted the Catholic Church anymore than I believe that the prots have ever been led by Him, before or after January 1900!

I also remember what a 'Catholic' charismatic friend told me in the early days of the movement. He was convinced that John Paul II was not Pope because he wasn't 'baptised in the Holy Spirit'. He believed that Leo, Cardinal Suenens, a radical liberal heretic, was because he had received the 'gift of tongues'!

So, me? I have absolutely no doubt that it is a tool of Satan for the destruction of the Church.
That is one thing I found - the Eastern Church has really fended off this particular nonsense so much better. I wonder why?

It seems the Eastern leaders avoided this, yet even the Vatican has put a stamp of approval on it.
It is worth noting that the often (mis)quoted First Corinthians Chapter 13 is actually an answer to the Charismatic movement.

After speaking about all the charismatic gifts (the gratiæ gratis datæ), St Paul says he will show us a better way, which is to realize that all of these gifts are unimportant unless they lead us to true Charity.

In fact he says we should not desire those charismatic gifts, but rather Charity.

The Holy Ghost gave those gifts in the early Church (and not in the way the Charismatic movement performs these), in order to give an extreme evidence of the Faith when the institutional Church was not yet clearly seen and Apologetical arguments were not well-developed. Once the institution Church is well-established and developed, those gifts are far less necessary. Already in Corinth, apparently, people were wanting these gifts as signs of their holiness, and losing sight of the goal, hence St Paul's rebuke.

Read a Catholic version of Chapter 12 and 13 (they are meant to run together) and you'll see exactly this (and never again would you ever think that 1 Cor 13 is appropriate for a wedding reading).
(05-28-2019, 06:54 AM)Markie Boy Wrote: [ -> ]What do you all make of the Charismatic Movement and it's Church approval?

I find a lot in the movement good, but some of it just off the wall and not of history, scripture, or tradition.  

I ask because this is the group I am surrounded by most, and working with them can be great at times, until the questionable stuff comes into play or discussion.  Then we seem to have a problem.  I reject it based on history, they get to embrace it because our bishop does - and I'm at a loss.

 St. Augustine stops the modern Charismatic Movement in its tracks and  explains that speaking in tongues (authentically) was for a time only :

 “ whereas even now the Holy Ghost is received yet no one speaks in tongues of all nations, because the Church already speaks in the languages of all nations. Since whoever is not in the Church, receives not the Holy Ghost” (Tract. XXXII, in Joan). 

"These [glossolalia] were miracles suited to the times.... Is it now expected that they upon whom hands are laid, should speak with tongues? Or when we imposed our hand upon these children, did each of you wait to see whether they would speak with tongues? and when he saw that they did not speak with tongues, were any of you so perverse of heart as to say "these have not received the Holy Ghost"? --St. Augustine, Ep. Joan., tr. vi.)

The notion of a "2nd" Pentecost is problematic, as Pentecost gave birth to the Church.  A second one, could only birth another Church, which would therefore by necessity not be the Catholic one....

Are You Charismatic or Catholic?

http://catholicapologetics.info/modernpr...harism.htm

The 'Catholic' Charismatic Movement:
A Book that Shows Why It Is Not Catholic


https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkrevi...Horvat.htm

Charismatics, Devils and Modernists

https://www.traditioninaction.org/bkrevi...maraes.htm
Pages: 1 2 3