Posted on 02/17/2011 7:35:48 AM PST by verdugo
As Mark Levin is famous for saying, THAT’S RIGHT, I SAID IT! ;-)
The Charismatic Renewal within the Church has been acknowledged by two Popes; Paul VI and John Paul II;
Pope John Paul II to Catholic Charismatics
Are we allowed to quote JPII? Or is he also on the anathema list?
The present Pope, as then Josef Cardinal Ratzinger, and Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, also had some things to say about it in the forward to a book by Card. Suenens:
At the heart of a world imbued with a rationalistic skepticism, a new experience of the Holy Spirit suddenly burst forth. And, since then, that experience has assumed a breadth of a worldwide Renewal movement. What the New Testament tells us about the charisms - which were seen as visible signs of the coming of the Spirit - is not just ancient history, over and done with, for it is once again becoming extremely topical.
What is the relation between personal experience and the common faith of the Church? Both factors are important: a dogmatic faith unsupported by personal experience remains empty; mere personal experience unrelated to the faith of the Church remains blind.
. ...to those responsible for the ecclesiastical ministry - from parish priests to bishops - not to let the Renewal pass them by but to welcome it fully; and on the other (hand) ... to the members of the Renewal to cherish and maintain their link with the whole Church and with the charisms of their pastors.[Renewal and the Powers of Darkness, Leo Cardinal Suenens (Ann Arbor: Servant Books, 1983)]
As always, we're to test the spirit and use it to build up the body of Christ.
Pope Benedict XVI, addressing two charismatic groups, affirmed and promoted the charismatic emphasis of the young movements in the Church on October 31, 2008:
"The ecclesial movements and new communities, which bloomed after the Second Vatican Council, are a unique gift of the Lord and a precious resource for the life of the Church. . . . They should be welcomed with trust and valued in their various contributions. . . . The charisms arise as visible signs of the coming of the Holy Spirit, not as a historical event of the past, but as an always living reality. . . ."
"The Spirit himself, soul of the Church, acts in her in every age, and his interventions, mysterious and efficacious, manifest themselves in our times in a providential way. The movements and new communities are like an inrush of the Holy Spirit in the Church and in contemporary society. . . ."
"One of the positive elements and aspects of the communities of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is precisely the importance given by them to the charisms and gifts of the Holy Spirit and their merit lies in having reminded the Church of the actuality [of these gifts] . . ."
The Pope emphasized the value and the importance of the new charisms in the Church, whose authenticity is guaranteed by the willingness to submit themselves to discernment from ecclesiastical authorities.
Prophecy | Deliverance | Tongues | Teaching
Healing - Miracles | Discernment
Apparitions | Messages
>> Your standards are quite low, you are down to working on a “grade curve”. In the 1950’s 80% of Catholics went to mass. <<
Read a little more carefully. 1/3 the student body attends DAILY mass.
>> More effeminate, feelings oriented, non-Catholic religious is all that can come from charismatism, and more dumb down Catholic laity. <<
You’ve obviously never met a Steubenville-graduated priest.
I think Christendom College and Thomas Aquinas College already exist. They are not “traditional” per se, but they are more traditional than Steubenville and produce many vocations.
I think Steubenville is a good Catholic school. One thing I worry about, however, is the growing idea that Steubenville is the same thing as Catholicism as if former is not just a part of the latter but is the exact equivalent of the latter. I keep running into that idea among Steubenville devotees.
I remember reading a book years ago, when I was a teenager: “Father McCartney Smokes a Pipe and Speaks in Tongues.”
Actually I did attend one, and I noticed that the audience consisted exclusively of of dumb down, feelings oriented (almost all women) persons. It was a sad spectacle, I was embarrassed for them.
If you read the article, the author, John Venarri is precisely describing as an eye witness, attending himself.
In 150+ years of miracles at Lourdes only 68 have been declared a scientifically inexplicable miracle by both the Lourdes Medical Bureau and the Catholic Church. Can you produce one person that has been verified by equally reliable competent authorities? AND, even if there were miracles, it is not Catholic, it is condemned by Mortalium Animos and all of Church history.
Truly, the Charismatics are condemning themselves!: As a punishment for your sin, God will allow you to pursue, and be condemned by, what you sinfully desire... 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. .
"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).
I think we run the risk of just going along with everything just because the Pope made a prudential judgment about something. Popes aren’t infallible in their prudential judgments, and I think this has been a blind spot for them over the recent decades. As I explained above, I think there’s a definite disconnect between the orthodoxy of many who are attached to and/or sympathetic with the charismatic movement inside the Catholic Church, and the questionable, at the very least, orthopraxy of these charismatic “worship” services.
Both of them were founded and are run by orthodox Catholics, not by schismatic or semi-schismatic "traditionalists" falsely-so-called -- sedevacantists or others -- those who reject Vatican II or the 1970 Missale Romanum as invalid.
SSPX has founded no universities. Neither has the SSPV, neither has "Pope Michael", or "Pope Pius XIII" or any of the other numerous sedevacantist groups.
I would never say that Steubenville is the same thing as Catholicism (neither would they -- that's why they take the oath to the Magisterium, not to Steubenville!).
I was at one Charismatic Mass one time. It seemed very protestant like to church for lack of a better word. It wasn’t what I’m used to.
I was at a Charismatic Mass one time. It seemed very protestant for lack of a better word. It wasn’t what I’m used to in a church.
Is verdugo a sedevacantist?
I think this sort of accusation is vile. Why resort to character assassination? Pose you arguments and opinions and let them stand.
The personal likes and dislikes of EVEN popes, when opposed to ALL of 1900 years of POPES, are simply not Catholic (universal in time). Honorius I was excommunicated 45 years after he died, for "seeming to go along" with heresy.
THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT AND THE WHOLE ECUMENISM MOVEMENT HAS BEEN CONDEMNED BY ALL OF CHURCH HISTORY
"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).
Careful, now. Getting into the business of cherry-picking papal prudential judgments can be dangerous. Many have gone down that road and come to grief. That's why we're Catholics, isn't it? His "prudential judgments" guide the Church. If we're not comfortable with that, then we're staring into the wide world of Protestantism.
You "run a risk" no matter whose judgment you go along with, including your own.
If the Pope's words and writings require your approval, then you are the Pope, right?
Don't go there.
I thought you knew.
See if you can grasp this.
If the Pope's words and writings require your approval, than you are the Pope.
It's as simple as that.
Ubi Petrus, Ibi Ecclesia.
That's why I'm Catholic.
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.