Posted on 02/17/2011 7:35:48 AM PST by verdugo
In the meantime, I'll take a university where people speak in tongues over a university where people get drunk and fornicate (which is almost every university, including the so-called Catholic ones) any day.
Not wanting to get into a big hoo-haw, but I don’t see the “certainty” in a religion that teaches that one can never know whether or not one is “saved” or even whether or not one is in the “state of grace.”
Beware of wolves in sheeps clothing.
1997?
My nephew was a guard at that college for a couple of years and even he talked about how devout they were there.
Speaking in tongues is Biblical. So, what?
Your standards are quite low, you are down to working on a "grade curve". In the 1950's 80% of Catholics went to mass.
re:20% of the graduates go on to vocations in the priesthood or religious life
More effeminate, feelings oriented, non-Catholic religious is all that can come from charismatism, and more dumb down Catholic laity.
All that you wrote is a ridiculous reason to defend a CRAZY Protestant practice that was always condemned by the Church.
"Why God would allow these "ambiguities" to occur in Vatican II. (and other magisterial documents)?
Considering all that I have said thus far, especially concerning the ulterior motives of the liberal prelates and their virtual hijacking of Vatican II, I think Scripture has an answer as to why God would allow these "ambiguities" to occur. In short, there is an interesting working principle in Scripture. As a punishment for your sin, God will allow you to pursue, and be condemned by, what you sinfully desire. This is what I believe happened at Vatican II. The progressivist bishops and theologians sought for a way to push their heterodox ideas into the Church, so God allowed them to do so, as a witness and judgment against them. He would allow the Council to have its "ambiguities" so that those who would interpret them contrary to nineteen centuries of established Catholic dogma, would lead themselves into sin, and ultimately into God's judgment. Unfortunately, as is always the case, the sheep suffer for what the shepherds do wrong, and as a result, we have all been wandering in the spiritual desert of liberal theology for the past 40 years. (Article from Catholic Family News, Feb 2003, by Robert Sungenis)(1)
(1) In fact, the bad shepherds may be a chastisement for the sins of the sheep. Saint John Eudes, basing his words on Sacred Scripture, says that when God wants to punish his people, he sends them bad priests. See The Priest, His Dignity and Obligations, by Saint John Eudes, Chapter 2, "Qualities of a Holy Priest". (New York: P.J. Kenedy and Sons, 1947).
We have a Charismatic group that meets in our chapel. They’re a little too “groovy” for me.
I have never felt comfortable with this kind of charismatic “worship” inside the Catholic Church. Too often, not enough emphasis is put on orthopraxy. Even if they are faithful to Catholic teaching, this kind of “Reformed” activity ultimately ends up sending a mixed message, along the lines of, “We believe what the Catholic Church teaches, but we will worship like our Reformed brethren.”
IMO, this article shows how often wrong priests are when mistakenly assuming the role of spokesperson for the Church.
Wrong on both sides of the issue, from those like Msgr. Ronald Knox to Msgr. Vincent Walsh, they don't add much more than confusion to discussion of the subject.
One thing seems certain - endorsement of anyone or anything associated with the Toronto "blessing" has always been a catastrophe. I had no idea before reading this article that anyone in the Priesthood had publicly endorsed the Toronto Blessing. That movement wrought destruction on everyone.
Who could look more devout than the Dalai Lama? Yet his god is the Devil.
The all the gods of the heathens are devils.(Psalms 95-5)
Practically all religions have devout looking groups. Charismatism is not Catholic. Those people your nephew saw are just like any other devout looking non-Catholics.
Besides, who is your nephew?
Who could look more devout than the Dalai Lama? Yet his god is the Devil.
For all the gods of the heathens are devils.(Psalms 95-5)
Practically all religions have devout looking groups. Charismatism is not Catholic. Those people your nephew saw are just like any other devout looking non-Catholics.
Besides, who is your nephew?
Your reading comprehension is quite poor. I said DAILY Mass. 30% of the student body attends DAILY Mass.
Everyone at Steubenville attends Sunday Mass, from what I can see.
You really know nothing about what you're talking about.
Our "Reformed brethren" don't speak in tongues. Pentecostals aren't "Reformed". Presbyterians are "Reformed".
Steubenville, through Scott Hahn, gave birth to CHN. They're bringing Protestant ministers into the Church by the dozens.
I'm using the "Reformed" term as a catch-all for all the various branches of Protestantism and its offshoots, since some object to the term "Protestant." I also use it with a bit of irony, as there is nothing "Reformed" about them, but in reality, they are all revolutionary to one extent or another.
Steubenville, through Scott Hahn, gave birth to CHN. They're bringing Protestant ministers into the Church by the dozens..
I don't doubt that. But I still repeat how there's a disconnect. Over the past 40 years ago, the Church has made a bad prudential judgment in allowing all kinds of deformities to orthopraxy, and, as the old rule goes, "lex orandi, lex credendi." If these people are still praying/worshiping as they did before they entered the Catholic Church, then there's a problem.
One thing seems certain - endorsement of anyone or anything associated with the Toronto "blessing" has always been a catastrophe. I had no idea before reading this article that anyone in the Priesthood had publicly endorsed the Toronto Blessing. That movement wrought destruction on everyone.
Those are just your opinions, you could be wrong. The author of the article would disagree with you on your point one, but agree with you on point two.
By what you wrote you revealed that you do not posses the knowledge of the Catholic hierarchy of truth. The Catholic Church does not follow the writings of one or two priests. Notice that the writers are all quoting the consistent opinions of the Church (scripture,tradition, Fathers of the Church, Popes, councils) from the beginning till before Vatican II.
Has anyone ever recorded these episodes and compared the "tongues" to any known language?
In the Bible, is it clear whether the apostles "spoke in tongues," or that their audiences heard their words in their own language?
I guess my real question is "If I hear someone speaking in tongues, and I do not understand, is it because The Holy Ghost has not come to me, or that I lack faith?"
In re, Franciscan University and the Catholic Charismatics: Is this a strictly American movement, or is it international in scope?
Personally, I have always thought that the American church would do well to adopt the rigorous bible studies of some of the Protestants, and the homiletic style of their ministers. More important, the personal religious experience of many of the members is something somewhat lacking among Anerican Catholics. My opinion.
BWA HAHAHAHAHA
Have you ever attended a healing Mass and witnessed people slain in the Sporot and healed?
If not you need to.....the Holy Spirit does the will of the Father and Son, remember? In our world today! Remember?
I've posted more than enough (too much for most to read) information from those that do know what they are talking about, quoting from all of Church history.
I will be following up with more sources like Mortalium Animos, which by itself condemns the whole Charismatic movement.
So tighten up your seat belt, by the end of this thread I hope that everyone knows "everything about what we are talking about".
Yes, I made it clear that I was offering opinion. How about you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.