SSPX.org: The Catholic Charismatic Renewal - Fruit of the Second Vatican Council, seed of destruction
This is the second reference for a short upcoming article on the CCR.
P^3
The Catholic Charismatic Renewal
Fruit of the Second Vatican Council, seed of destruction |
||||
Fr. Scott
Gardner Published originally in the March 1998 issue of The Angelus magazine |
||||
|
||||
Introduction Baptized in the "Spirit" "Baptized in the Spirit," "Praying in tongues," "The gift of prophecy," and "A personal relationship with Jesus" are all indispensable buzz-words of the so-called Catholic Charismatic Renewal (hereafter referred to as the CCR), a movement which traces its roots to an unsupervised student "retreat" at Pittsburgh’s Duquesne University in 1967. By 1990, the movement claimed 72 million adherents worldwide and official organizations in 120 countries.1 Such rapid growth both here and abroad, coupled with the movement’s almost complete abandonment of even nominally Catholic practices, beliefs, and modes of discourse, has been a cause of concern for Catholics for quite some time. In light of the CCR’s 30th anniversary last year, a closer look at its beliefs, practices, and underlying assumptions is in order. The following typical quotation from the charismatic literature concerns one of the lynch-pins of the CCR, "Baptism in the Holy Spirit," a "faith experience" in which one feels the release of the graces already received in Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Eucharist and experiences God’s presence in a deeply personal way. It offers a taste of the startlingly unorthodox view of the sacraments held in common by most of the movement’s adherents:
Doctrinal Irregularities The implications of this statement should be lost on no one with even a cursory knowledge of his catechism. From an orthodox standpoint and to give the author the benefit of the doubt, one could see this statement as a reference to the sacrament of Confirmation, the sacrament in which the Holy Ghost comes to us in a special way to make us true Christians and perfect soldiers of Christ. Were their thinking more sacramental, one might suspect that they posit an "eighth sacrament" needed to complete the other seven. On the contrary, charismatics deny any clear connection between "Baptism in the Holy Spirit" and the Catholic sacraments since "sacramental rite and religious experience are complementary parts of the basic Christian initiation." 3 Since these features of "Christian initiation" are complementary, Charismatics see no reason to exclude non-Catholics or even non-Christians from the chance to experience the "charisms," as they usually refer to the charismata, the extraordinary manifestations of the Holy Ghost which so aided the expansion of the early Church and dwindled soon after the Apostolic Age. Indeed, they hold that the complementary nature of the two parts of "Christian initiation" makes them easily reversible, i.e., that the unbaptized may even experience this "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" and become, ipso facto, Christians, merely needing the "sacramental rites" to "complete" their "Christian initiation." 4 The status of these people theoretically would be the same as that of a Catholic who, having received the sacraments, still awaits a conscious manifestation of invisible graces. It is obvious that many people, sometimes even great Saints, are never given notable consolations in their Faith, much less extraordinary manifestations of the Holy Ghost. To say that an unbaptized person who has experienced this "Baptism in the Holy Spirit" is somehow as close to God as (or even closer than) a pious, baptized Catholic who has never had such an experience is clearly absurd. The root of this absurdity is the false assumption that emotional experience always accompanies the conferral of grace —or at least its "release." On the contrary, as far as sacramental grace goes, often the only sensible indication of the conferral of grace is the sacramental sign itself. The Catechism of the Council of Trent defines a sacrament as "a visible sign of an invisible grace, instituted for our justification." It is, moreover, a sign which effects what it signifies. Since the visible signs of all the sacraments are completely objective and fixed by the Church according to Our Lord’s command or inspiration, one’s personal feelings have no bearing whatsoever on the conferral of grace in the sacraments (as long as no contrary intention is held, of course). Scope: to expose the basic charismatic ideas and to show their incompatibility with Catholicism "Baptism in the Holy Spirit," this primary component of the CCR, rests, along with most of the others, on the false ideas about grace, experience, and their mutual relationship, held by its adherents. The major planks in the Charismatic platform, along with the false principles upon which they rest, will be examined one by one in the light of Catholic doctrine. Some of the errors, such as phenomenalism, gnosticism, ecumenism, Protestantism, and antiquarianism, have already been dealt with by the Church’s magisterium at length. The CCR’s faulty ecclesiology and major errors on grace, the will, and the sacraments will require a considerably deeper treatment. It will become clear that, despite the modern Churchmen’s enthusiasm for this movement, the CCR is fundamentally un-Catholic and irreconcilable with 20 centuries of Catholic teaching. After a brief look at its roots, the entire tree will be examined branch by branch and all of its bitter fruit sampled in order to heed the Apostle’s command: "Test all things; hold fast to that which is good" (I Thess. 5:21). Brief history of the movement Protestant Roots However much the Charismatics try to trace their overt manifestations of "the Spirit" to an unbroken Apostolic tradition, they are bound to fail. Some concede that the early phenomena ceased because of the "stifling" attitude of the hierarchy. Nonetheless, the fact that the charismata were not known to exist after the Apostolic Age is demonstrated by this statement of St. Augustine’s, made in the fourth century:
With the Apostolic tradition of the charismata ruled out, one must look elsewhere for the origin of these modern phenomena. Most writers trace the beginning of modern Pentecostalism to John Wesley, the famed ex-Anglican minister and founder of Methodism, in the 18th century. Wesley, himself the son of an Anglican minister, grew up trying to "spiritualize" the still-too-"Catholic" Anglican religion. He stressed a strongly emotional personal piety, a "personal relationship" with God. One day, after a long illness, Wesley felt an overwhelming manifestation of the "Spirit" and realized that all of his former religious works had been as so much rubbish. Thus "empowered," baptized in the Holy Spirit, having received his "second blessing," as he called it, he was able to go out and win the cold-hearted Anglican masses of nominal Christians to a deeper sense of the presence of God through his Methodist "prayer meetings." The parallel between the birth of Methodism and the origins of the CCR becomes even more apparent when one considers the next step in the development of the former. Wesley began his movement as a supplement to the Anglican Church’s Sunday worship. The prayer meetings were held, usually with clerical supervision, during the week. The Anglican authorities soon grew apprehensive about the directions they perceived the Methodists to be taking, and they refused to designate more clergy for them. Thereupon, Wesley broke the movement away from the Anglican hierarchy, starting his own church under his own authority, although not renouncing his Anglican "priesthood." The number of apostate Catholics whose apostasy —formal or material —is due to the CCR is significant. The writer knows of one Protestant Charismatic church made up almost entirely of apostate Catholics. Pentecostalism proper began in the 19th-century Revivalist movement, which spawned, among others, the sect of one Charles Parham in Topeka, Kansas, in the year 1900. Catholic Charismatics trace the beginning of the "outpouring of the Spirit" in modern times to this heretical sect. A brief synopsis of the history of this sect can be found in William Whalen’s book Minority Religions in America:
After its firm establishment in the soil of Protestantism, Pentecostalism began to grow quickly. It was always looked upon by Catholic writers as a new heretical sect, never as a "sister-church." The Revolution’s entry into the Church at Vatican II was to change this attitude, and "opening the windows to the world" was to mean also an opening to the religions of the world —and of its Prince, Satan. Catholic "Transplant" In 1967, during the early post-Vatican II turmoil of ecumenical frenzy and widespread apostasy, students at Pittsburgh’s Duquesne University began exposing themselves to Pentecostal influences because of spiritual aridity; they were envious of the "changed lives" among many Protestant friends and decided to pray for similar "graces." A weekend "retreat" —of sorts —proved to be the key to their answer. Various people approached various Protestant ministers, laity, and prayer groups; all received "Baptism in the Spirit" after having heretical hands laid on them in prayer. The importance of this action cannot be overestimated. These Catholics submitted themselves to a non-Catholic quasi-sacramental rite —obviously a mockery of the sacrament of Confirmation —and the emotional thrill brought about by this sin (objectively speaking, of course) convinced them of the holiness of the entire experience. They came away as "Catholic" Charismatics, and their influence spread like wildfire all over the country —first on college campuses and then to the world at large. If ever there were an argument for listening to the Church, this is it. The Church has warned her children to stay away from heretical "worship" for almost 2000 years because she knows what the consequences will be, both for the individuals involved and for the Mystical Body at large. Yet the CCR unabashedly admits —even praises —its ecumenical, PROTESTANT roots! The tacit assumption is that the Church —the Body of Christ —had lost a major part (Charismatics would say the major part) of the Faith while the Holy Ghost maintained that aspect in Protestantism. Protestants, hence, were restoring to the Church her lost patrimony. This is an audacious and clearly false position which flatly contradicts two dogmas of the Faith: extra ecclesiam nulla salus —outside the Church, no salvation, and the indefectibility of the Church. Both will be addressed below. Today, practically every diocese has an official Charismatic liaison office. There are Charismatic prayer groups, seminars, conventions, retreats, etc., all across the country and the world. No level of the hierarchy is without its contingent, and Charismatics are numerous among the clergy —especially the Regulars [i.e., the monastic clergy; webmaster’s note]. As will be shown, even Rome is not immune to their influence. Firm establishment in the soil of the Church The Authorities Despite Charismatic attempts to make personal endorsements of high-ranking Church officials into official approbation by the Church, no such approbation exists. Popes Paul VI and John Paul II have received Charismatics many times in audience and spoken of them in their addresses on many occasions; in 1990, the Pontifical Council for the Laity recognized the Catholic Fraternity of Covenant Communities (an international Charismatic organization) as a private association of the laity;7 nonetheless, no official pronouncement has been made on the CCR. Charismatics, like all liberal Catholics, tend to ascribe "creeping infallibility" to unofficial papal pronouncements in their favor as much as they disregard authoritative condemnations of other liberal practices and beliefs. Nevertheless, there is no dearth of Charismatic adherents at any level of the hierarchy or clergy. Deacons, priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes have been and are great enthusiasts for the Charismatic cause, if not members themselves of the CCR. That people supposedly well trained in the sacred sciences should be taken in by such sensational and utterly groundless beliefs and practices is a great reproach to this age. The quasi-official "studies" by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops have never been accepted by that body as official positions; they have been accepted merely as "pastoral guidelines" for the individual dioceses. The 1969 report claimed that:
The conclusion of the 1969 report recommends allowing the movement to develop under episcopal supervision and with priestly participation. It is interesting to note that, here, the bishops accept without argument one of the most glaringly dangerous underlying assumptions of the CCR: That today’s phenomena which resemble the descriptions of the true charismata in the New Testament are the true charismata simply in virtue of this resemblance and that the Holy Ghost is the author of these current phenomena simply in virtue of the fact that He was the author of the true charismata 2000 years ago. To their own peril and to that of the whole Church, they completely discount the possibility that these extraordinary phenomena (which the CCR is trying to make ordinary) could be deceptions of the Devil, who does not mind in the least that people pray more in the short term if he is more likely to take them to hell in the end. In 1975, the US bishops issued a "Statement on the Catholic Charismatic Renewal" which characterized itself as "pastoral in tone and content" and "not an exhaustive treatment." This document recognizes some of the dangers inherent in the movement: elitism, biblical fundamentalism, exaggeration of the importance of the gifts, reckless ecumenism, and the so-called small faith-communities. It encourages sound leadership and guidance of the movement. It is interesting that the bishops specifically do not commit themselves to say that the CCR is the work of the Holy Ghost, although they do admit to encouraging signs of this in some quarters.9 Perhaps the most outspoken advocate for the CCR among the hierarchy was His Eminence Leo Jozef Cardinal Suenens, Archbishop Emeritus of Malines-Brussels, who was, incidentally, one of the outstanding liberal voices heard at Vatican II. In the years after his mandatory retirement in 1979, Card. Suenens spent himself endlessly in travel and writing in support of the CCR. For the 25th anniversary of the CCR, the Cardinal wrote the following as part of a commemorative article:
As with most liberal statements, this is ambiguous enough to be interpreted in an orthodox way; however, the Protestant terminology used should escape no one. Pope John Paul II addressed the 6th International Assembly of the CCR in 1987 as follows, combining in an unbelievable way the tacit assumption mentioned above in regard to the US Bishops (which will presently be shown to have its roots in phenomenalism), an admission of the movement’s grounding in the "Spirit of Vatican II," and the Holy Father’s own perennial preoccupation with the coming New Millennium:
One positive result of the total crisis of authority in which modern Catholics find themselves is a healthy appetite for the history of the Church and the study of her magisterial documents. The wisdom exhibited by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, prelates truly guided by the Holy Ghost, is both astoundingly deep and overpoweringly clear and concise. "Spiritualist" sects have arisen before in the history of the Church, and a look at how their contemporary Churchmen dealt with them will shed much light on the modern situation. Historic Parallels It is undeniable that extraordinary manifestations of the Holy Ghost occurred during the Apostolic Age and were quite helpful in spreading the Faith throughout the known world at that time. Anyone can see this simply by reading the Acts of the Apostles. Such manifestations had specific purposes: to spread the Gospel to hearers of a different language (e.g., St. Peter on the Day of Pentecost) or to prove the credibility of a speaker or his holiness. However, it is also undeniable that these extraordinary phenomena dwindled considerably and disappeared after the Apostolic Age. The Church had by then achieved a moral universality and was established in such a way that these manifestations were no longer either useful or necessary. Nonetheless, at times, "spiritualist" groups have arisen and merited by their strange beliefs and practices the condemnation of the Church. Chief among these were the Joachimites, followers of Joachim of Fiore in the 12th century, the Fraticelli, schismatic Franciscans in the 13th and 14th centuries, and the Molinists (or "Quietists") in the 17th century. Joachim (c. 1132-1202) was a Cistercian abbot who specialized in scripture study. He was of quite a mystic mindset and spent many years pouring over the Sacred Scriptures searching for the hidden meanings of the most minute passages. (This practice, "led by the Spirit," is a hallmark of modern-day Charismatics.) At the end of his life, his work completed, he submitted his writings to Rome. Joachim had first posited errors concerning the Blessed Trinity, although he had retracted them when they were anathematized by the Fourth Lateran Council. His mystical idea of history, however was more problematic. Joachim held the history of the world to be divided into three distinct phases, each corresponding to a Person of the Blessed Trinity. Thus, the first age of the world was marked by God the Father’s majestic rule, the second (our age) by the Wisdom of the Son and his Church, and the third (still to come) by the Holy Ghost in an outpouring of universal love and the waning of all formal religion in favor of a world ruled by the spirit of the Gospel. This teaching was condemned by Pope Alexander IV after Joachim’s death, in the 13th century.12 The similarity between this rather odd teaching and the constant Charismatic chatter about a "new age of the Spirit" hardly needs comment. Rather more worrisome is the Holy Father’s fascination with the New Millennium. Speaking of the preparation for the Great Jubilee Year 2000, Pope John Paul designates 1998 as the "Year of the Spirit":
The Holy Father goes on:
These startling quotations reveal the Pope’s clear association of ecumenism, secularization, and laicization with the New Millennium and the work of the Holy Ghost. The similarity between this type of thinking and Joachim’s (that the "rule of the Spirit through universal love" will bring about the waning of formal religion under the spirit of the Gospel) is quite alarming to say the least. Joachim’s chief disciples were a group of "spiritualist"15 Franciscans. The direct philosophical descendants of this group became, within a century of Joachim’s death, the Fraticelli, and their personal interpretation of the Gospel got them into major trouble with their order and with the pope. They ended by saying that the Church was corrupt and carnal, in contrast to their own "spirituality," and that they were the only true followers of the Gospel. They were excommunicated by Pope John XXII in 1318.16 The Charismatics talk about being "full Catholics" and make such statements as the following, made by a certain Betty Nunez: "I’m not saying that other Catholics don’t believe, but when you’re renewed by baptism in the Holy Spirit, your faith comes alive." 17 Now, giving Mrs. Nunez every benefit of the doubt, this is quite an insult to non-Charismatic Catholics. It is tantamount to saying that they have a dead faith and that the Charismatics have a living faith. This typical statement is painfully close to the position of the Fraticelli. Michael of Molinos (1628-1696) misunderstood Catholic teaching on nature and grace. Rather than believing that grace builds on nature, he taught that the only path to sanctification was complete abandonment of one’s soul to the actions of God (the Holy Spirit, of course). Once again, this sounds orthodox at first, when heard in an orthodox context, but it contains grave error. Molinos would have the soul completely passive while God works through it. His fourth condemned principle sums up all the others: "Natural activity is the enemy of grace, and impedes the operations of God and true perfection, because God wishes to operate in us without us." This is not a question of conforming one’s own will with the Divine Will but of annihilating one’s will and replacing it with the Divine Will. After this "annihilation" takes place, one is freed from all responsibility for his actions because he is, essentially, an automaton.18 The common Charismatic question is "Is Jesus Lord of your life?" Catholics, of course, want Our Lord to be "king and center of all hearts" and King of the whole world —the Social Reign of Christ the King should be one of our banner causes. It is important, however, to understand the difference between these two positions. Catholics want to form their wills to be in accord with the Divine Will. The natural achieves its fullest perfection only when guided by and ordered to the supernatural. Molinists (and Charismatics) want to annihilate their own wills and to be completely passive vessels of the Divine Will’s action. The following is a typical quotation from the Charismatic literature on the subject:
One must imagine this to be the disposition that a Charismatic enters into before giving a physical manifestation of "the Spirit." How else could one account for the capacity of seemingly ordinary people to writhe, cavort, and gush forth garbled gibberish in church? Either one of two explanations seems probable: that the subject really wills —perhaps unconsciously —to perform this act because of group dynamics (or mass hysteria) or that his utter relaxation of the will leaves him open to a true manifestation of the "spirit" —and not the Holy Spirit! Speaking a language one does not understand is a classic sign of diabolical possession, after all. The Offshoot One offshoot of the Charismatic tree not to be overlooked is the phenomenon known to its adherents as the Marian Movement and to Catholic outsiders as "apparition mania." While a thorough examination of this blight on our times is beyond the scope of this article, the largest and most poisonous fruit should certainly be sampled.21 The Charismatics have always had a special (but not too special) place for the Blessed Virgin Mary, calling her "the First Charismatic" who "conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and was present among Jesus’s disciples at Pentecost when they were filled with the Spirit." 22 As admitted by many Charismatics, the movement began to wane in the early 1980’s. So-called apparitions were happening in several places around the world, and another was announced two weeks before its onset at a Charismatic prayer meeting in Rome. A "prophecy" was given concerning an apparition which would begin soon in the Balkans —in Bosnia-Herzegovina. As promised, "Our Lady" appeared as scheduled and has been coming around every single day since! Obviously, the supposed spiritual manifestations claimed by Charismatics and the supposed apparitions claimed by the "visionaries" of Medjugorje fall into two different categories of supernatural phenomena, but the overlap between the Charismatics and the Medjugorje adherents is almost complete in the experience of the writer. Charismatics flock to Medjugorje despite the Church’s ban on pilgrimages and the diocesan bishop’s judgment that the phenomena supposedly occurring there are not supernatural at all. One would assume that "the Spirit" leads them to disobey this explicit ban placed by Rome just as "Our Lady" leads the Franciscans in charge of the local parish to disregard the diocesan bishop’s censures resulting from their own overt sinful behavior. As long as the rosaries still turn to gold, no one seems to give these things much thought. "Our Lady" gives periodic messages to the world which usually sound strangely like the "prophecies" uttered by Charismatics in prayer meetings. The content is usually a platitude on the level of a grade-school catechism, and the style is usually a gibbering mish-mash of sentimental tripe. Here are two examples, side by side.
The lies, deceit, disobedience, and open clerical immorality surrounding this supposed apparition should be enough to convince anyone of its falsity. Rome’s prohibition on pilgrimages and the bishop’s decision on the authenticity of the phenomena should keep any obedient Catholic away, but people still come, thousands per year, because of the "good fruits "—so-called conversions, healings, miracles of the sun, etc. The Catholic Faith teaches that truth has no admixture with error, good with evil, truth with falsehood. As stated above, Satan minds not in the least if people go on "pilgrimage," pray more, and feel more emotional about God and the Blessed Virgin Mary; on the contrary, he helps them onto the airplane, if he can only be sure of taking them to hell in the end. Charismatic ideas and Catholic doctrine: a comparison The orthodoxy of any given practice or belief in the final analysis depends not on how one feels about it, or what the priest, the bishop, or even the pope (teaching as a private theologian) says about it; it depends, rather, on the teaching of the Church’s magisterium. The constant teaching of the popes and the councils throughout its 2000-year history determines whether a particular belief is Catholic or not. The denial of this basic fact by liberal Catholics is a central factor in the crisis in which the Church finds herself now, and it is not surprising to find Charismatics holding beliefs which, even 50 years ago, would have caused them no small amount of trouble with Church authorities. In order to have a clear picture of what is wrong with the CCR, it is necessary to examine its underlying principles in the light of Catholic doctrine. While it is certainly beyond the scope of this article to undertake a detailed theological analysis of the movement, several basic points will be raised which should invite further study by competent theologians. Although the CCR is a vast, nondescript, intentionally imprecise group of groups from a doctrinal standpoint, certain specific principles may be distilled from the vast amount of literature available. These principles may not be held consciously by all, or even most Charismatics, but they are to be found —explicitly or implicitly —in their writings. Phenomenalistic Ideas Phenomenalism, with its roots in the so-called Enlightenment of the 18th century, is a major underlying factor of the Charismatic movement. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines phenomenalism as follows:
Thus, to the Charismatic, one does not truly "know" God until one has experienced Him consciously, i.e., until one has had a sensory experience (usually emotional, sometimes overtly physical as in the case of the glossolalia —or speaking in tongues) of "His Spirit" at work in one. Indeed, spiritual experience over-rules public revelation and the 2000-year teaching of the magisterium in matters such as, to name only one example, ecumenism (see below). To the Charismatics, the very presence today of phenomena supposedly identical to the true charismata present in the early Church proves their divine origin. The experience is what matters, not the intellect’s legitimate questions, such as "Why the 2000-year lapse? Is this experience really the same as the phenomena described in Scripture? Is ‘the Spirit’ leading us toward a more fully Catholic life or toward apostasy?" The failure of Charismatics to "try the spirits" [I Jn. 4:1] is possibly their most dangerous blunder since the Devil can produce prodigies which mimic truly supernatural phenomena from God. Indeed, the intellect is radically discounted by members of the CCR. There is widespread talk of a so-called "18-inch drop from the head to the heart" among Charismatic literature on the first stages of "spiritual growth." "It isn’t so much the ‘head knowledge’ that counts; it’s the ‘heart knowledge’ that’s important here. The former is theological, while the latter is spiritual." 25 As stated previously, such "heart knowledge," warm, cozy feelings about God, are not spiritual at all; they are, on the other hand, purely emotional —which means physical! These Charismatic "spiritual writers" degrade the intellect as if God had not given it to Man: "Intellectum tibi dabo" (Ps. 31). To the Charismatic phenomenalist mind, even the sacraments are not immune to subjectivist thought on grace. Catholics know that the sacraments produce grace ex opere operato, without regard to the spiritual state of the minister or the recipient. Of course, the recipient may be more or less well-disposed to receive the graces produced, but the grace is produced notwithstanding either party’s subjective dispositions. To the Charismatic, anything in the spiritual life which does not produce subjective "consolation" or emotion is not a valid "faith experience" and, hence, does not confer grace. Thus, the following excerpt from a Charismatic priest’s article on the "Healing Sacraments" explains confession fully:
Even Holy Communion is not immune from such subjectivist prattle:
To the phenomenalist, as to the Charismatic, the object has no true existence apart from the subject. At its logical extreme, the question becomes one of the relationship of the consciousness to itself. It is, therefore, not difficult to see why the modern religion, Conciliar Catholicism, has become, according to some accusations, the religion of Man worshipping himself. Gnostic Tendencies Various forms of gnosticism have plagued the Church through the centuries; they have differed in detail, but the central underlying factor among them has been the alleged existence of a "secret knowledge," or gnosis, which makes its possessors the true believers and, thus, the only ones really bound for heaven. With Charismatics, this gnosis becomes the experience of God through interior or exterior manifestations of "His Spirit," which makes those experiencing these strange phenomena the "true believers" (See the above quotation concerning "Baptism in the Spirit."). Ecumenism The Charismatic phenomenalist philosophy has interesting repercussions in the area of ecumenism. To the Charismatic, at Vatican II "The Catholic Church committed herself irrevocably to following the path of the ecumenical venture...." 28 The fact that non-Catholics have shared the same Charismatic experiences independently of the Church supposedly proves the validity of their heretical sects. This attitude is phenominalism, pure and simple: God’s Spirit is producing phenomenon "x" in Charismatic Catholics; phenomenon "x" is also present in Protestant sect "y"; therefore, Protestant sect "y" shares the true Faith with Charismatic Catholics. The fact that the least experienced elementary logic student could debunk this false syllogism bears no relevance to the problem from the Charismatic standpoint since logic falls into the category of "head knowledge" rather than the truer "heart knowledge" which they boast because of their experience. As this rather lengthy quotation demonstrates, Charismatics think that mutual charity based in experience is the principle of Christian unity:
Catholics know that true Christian unity means only one thing: the return of all those in error to the one true Church, founded and headed by Christ and administered by his Vicar on earth, the Roman Pontiff. The unity of the Church is based on objective Truth, guarded and proclaimed by the Papacy, which is the principle of the unity of the Church. Those not in unity of faith and communion with the Church are, at least objectively speaking, heretics because of the former and schismatics because of the latter point. The unbroken Tradition of the Church bars them, objectively speaking, from salvation as long as their disunity persists:
Contrary to the Charismatic position, Pope Pius XII writes, in his magnificent encyclical Mystici Corporis:
Regarding membership in the one Church, the same holy Pontiff has this to say:
Thus, from a Catholic standpoint, one must admit that the existence of true charismatic phenomena among Protestants is highly unlikely. If these true phenomena were present at all, they would be so in such a way as to be clearly exceptional and not normative, and they would have one and only one end —the conversion of the Protestants involved to Catholicism. Therefore, if even true charismatic phenomena would not be the basis of true unity among Catholics and Protestants (as Protestants), the idea that such suspect phenomena as are now occurring might be the basis of a false and irenistic "unity" between disparate faiths is clearly un-Catholic and betokens a certain loss of the Faith on the part of those who think in this way. Protestantism Given the CCR’s ecumenical Protestant roots, it should surprise no one that the Charismatics’ thinking is slanted markedly towards Protestantism. One of the hallmarks of Protestantism is the proposition sola scriptura (scripture alone), e.g., personal interpretation of scripture based on the "inspiration of the Holy Spirit." At the root of this problem lies the Charismatics’ typically Protestant rejection of Tradition as a source of Revelation. As the following quotations demonstrate, Charismatics share wholeheartedly in this dangerous teaching:
Of course, Catholics know that the interpretation of Sacred Scripture belongs exclusively to the Church —which is truly led by the Holy Ghost —and not to the individual reader. The following excerpt from the proceedings of the Council of Trent explains this principle clearly, and the punishment promised to those sharing in this heretical belief and practice should give Charismatics pause, to say the least:
This teaching was reaffirmed by the profession of Faith of the Council of Trent and by the Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith of the First Vatican Council.36 Antiquarianism A common liberal tendency is to feign a desire to return to the practices of the early Church. Luther, Huss, and countless heretics have used the same ploy to mask their innovations. Catholics know that the Faith of the early Church was entirely orthodox and that the liturgical forms and practices of the Church followed a genuine development (not evolution!) toward the point where the outward form of the cult of the Church was most appropriate to express its inward belief. Thus, the supposed "accretions" into the sacred liturgy posited before Vatican II were not really accretions at all but legitimate organic developments of the liturgy which brought greater external solemnity to the worship of the Godhead. Pope Pius XII dealt with this error, already widely expressed during his reign:
Analogically, to those who argue that the presence of the charismata in the early Church proves their suitability (or even necessity) today, Catholics can reply that one does not follow from the other. The charismata served a very specific purpose at a very specific time —to give impetus to the worldwide expansion of the fledgling Church. As Pope Pius XII says:
As previously stated, the end of these external manifestations of the Holy Ghost corresponded roughly with the Church’s achievement of moral universality. The desire to return to practices which were suited to an earlier time and never intended to be ordinary is antiquarianism pure and simple. As pointed out previously, the discounting of Tradition, such as that exemplified in the quotation of St. Augustine above concerning the charismata, is a Protestant trait —as is the justification of this disregard based on the "inspired" Bible reading of each individual Charismatic. False Ideas About the Church Her Mission Charismatics assert that the mission of the Church is praise: "Praise is the raison d’être of the Church." 39 Although praise is certainly and undeniably something which men owe to their Creator in justice, this can hardly be considered the reason, sine qua non, for which Christ instituted his Church. On the contrary, Our Lord did not found the Church in order to procure for Himself a ready-made fan club; He founded it in order to perpetuate his work of Redemption for all time. As the Fathers of the First Vatican Council explain in their First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ (Pastor Aeternus):
This teaching of the Church’s Magisterium resoundingly contradicts the Charismatics’ false notion of the mission of the Church and explodes the ecumenical basis of the entire movement. Although, undeniably, the ultimate purpose of every external action of the Blessed Trinity is the increase of the glory of God, the immediate purpose of the founding of the Church was to apply the fruits of the Redemption to man. "The sanctification of men by the communication of the truth, of the Commandments, and of the grace of Christ is the immediate purpose of the Church." 41 Objectively speaking, God’s glory is shown forth more brightly because of this act; subjectively speaking, man wishes to praise Him more ardently as a result. This confusion of the subjective with the objective is a hallmark of the CCR and has its roots in phenomenalism. Her Indefectibility The Charismatics’ assertion that the charismata, despite their disappearance for almost 2000 years, are essential to the mission of the Church (see above) is a direct assault on the indefectibility of the Church, one of her indirectly essential attributes. This indefectibility is a corollary of Our Lord’s promise to St. Peter (Mt. 16:18). "The Church instituted by Jesus Christ is given to endure forever at least in its essential attributes" (emphasis added).42 This doctrine guarantees only that the Church will remain forever, but it does not rule out the destruction of major portions of the Church. Still, these must be considered as non-essential to the fulfillment of her divine mission.
Thus, every facet of the Church which has not been constant and universal (at least according to its nature) is not essential to the accomplishment of the Church’s mission. The charismata are unarguably such a facet, and they are, therefore, non-essential to the Church’s mission and not protected by her indefectibility. In fact, the Charismatics’ assertion of the essential nature of the charismata is, as previously stated, an assault on the very principle of her indefectibility; for, if an essential element of the Church has disappeared for almost 2000 years, Our Lord’s promise is a lie. Her Magisterium Our Lord Jesus Christ founded a visible Church that is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. He told His Apostles, the first bishops, "Going therefore into all the world, teach all nations" (Mt. 28:19), and "He who heareth you heareth Me" (Lk. 10:16). The magisterium, or teaching office of the Church, is infallible either when:
The question of the magisterium is central to the entire modern crisis in the Church because the liberals think that they can blithely sweep away 20 centuries of Catholic teaching on the whim of the contemporary Churchmen. To this criterion the Charismatics would add the "personal inspiration of the Holy Spirit." One often hears talk of the difference between "pre-Conciliar" teaching and "post-conciliar" developments in theology, morals, etc. It must be stated unequivocally that a given pope or council cannot —by divine guarantee —unilaterally eradicate a previously defined infallible teaching of the Church’s magisterium. Once again, it is not a question of what one feels Catholicism to be; on the contrary, infallible Catholic teaching is a matter of historical fact completely independent of the personal "inspirations" of the individual —be he pope, cardinal, bishop, priest, cleric, or layman. As Pope Pius XII says:
The root of the problem Catholic teaching on grace Perhaps it is in the area of the concept of grace that Charismatics make their most striking departure from Catholic doctrine and reveal the taproot of their entire system of errors. As previously stated, Charismatics posit the necessity of a sensible phenomenon to accompany and signify the reception of grace by (or at least its "release" in) the soul. In other words, Christians in whose soul God really works always sense His work. This is utterly false. Sanctifying grace, which "sanctifies the soul," "bestows supernatural beauty on the soul," "makes the just man the friend of God,...a Temple of the Holy Ghost,...a child of God,...[and] gives him a claim to the inheritance of heaven," 45 is entirely insensible to the soul. This does not discount a special divine revelation to the individual about his state of grace, but such a revelation would certainly fall into the realm of the unusual and not be, despite what the Charismatics claim, normative. As the Council of Trent says:
Of course, God may grant sensible actual graces (although certainly not all actual graces need be sensible) to whomever He wills, but, even among actual graces, sensibility is not the sine qua non. Since many actual graces are sensible and the Charismatics insist on the sensibility of grace, the practical result is that they confuse sanctifying grace with actual grace, in effect denying the former altogether. A practical denial of sanctifying grace actually means a denial both of the Catholic doctrine of justification (as infallibly expressed in the canons of the Council of Trent) and, consequently, the Catholic doctrine concerning the external operations of the Holy Trinity, which will be discussed below. The seriousness of this should be lost on no one. It has been said truly that seemingly small errors in the principles lead to major errors in the conclusion. Thus, the Charismatic insistence on the sensibility of graces is the taproot of their entire system of errors. Catholic teaching on the charismata It is undeniable that God sometimes gives sensible actual graces, even extraordinary phenomena, to certain people. The true charismata, present in the early Church, are examples of these extraordinary phenomena. One of the Charismatics’ biggest blunders is to try to make something extraordinary ordinary —even necessary for all (see above).
Gratia gratum faciens is used to describe the grace of personal sanctification for all men; both sanctifying grace itself and actual grace which prepares one for justification fall into this category. These graces are necessary for all, unlike the gratuitous graces. St. Thomas Aquinas, pointing out this distinction, deals with both categories of grace in the Summa in two separate sections of the II-IIæ called the "Treatise on Grace" and the "Treatise on Acts Pertaining Especially to Certain Men." The charismata are discussed in the latter. It is interesting to note that St. Thomas never refers to the charismata as being contemporary phenomena. He speaks about them only in regard to Apostolic times. For a thorough theological explanation of these phenomena, see his writings. Basically, the true charismata were gifts which enabled the early Church to spread to the ends of the known world rapidly and become well established before the death of the Apostles. As stated previously, and as elucidated in St. Paul’s second epistle to the Corinthians, the purpose of the gifts was the building up of the Church, not the sanctification of those to whom the gifts were given. Glossolalia, or speaking in tongues, was given to enable the Gospel to be preached to everyone in attendance regardless of his language. Prophecies, healings, miracles, etc., were given to prove the claims of the Church and to foster conversions. With the achievement of the Church’s moral universality, the need for such phenomena ceased for several reasons, primarily because of the presence in the Church of people of every nationality and because of the Church’s proven record as the true religion, short though it was. The same argument can be made today against the true charismata’s contemporary presence. Since the Church is now both morally and physically universal, containing people —even clergy —of every nation, what need could there possibly be of the glossolalia for evangelization? Since the Church has a 2000-year record as the true religion, what further need has she to prove her claims? As St. Augustine says:
On the other hand, St. Thomas admits the possibility of the gross diabolical caricature of the true charismata in questions which the reader is free to peruse:
It is well known that the Devil and his demons can produce prodigies which appear as miracles to unwary men, as in the story of Simon Magus and his "miraculous" levitation debunked by St. Paul. Therefore, it is extremely dangerous to accept any such extraordinary phenomena as divine on face value alone. The great mystical doctor of the Church, St. John of the Cross, so oft-quoted and misunderstood by modernist spiritual "gurus," had these things to say concerning supposed personal "revelations from God" experienced among his contemporaries:
Indeed, Our Lord Jesus Christ warns the Church of the dangers of taking supposed miracles at face value:
Far more chilling is His warning:
Catholic teaching on the Holy Trinity Of course, a thorough dogmatic exposition on the Holy Trinity is beyond the scope of this article, but, in order to grasp the gravity of the Charismatics’ errors, it is essential to understand the so-called external missions. A mission, or sending, presupposes a sender, one sent, and a place to which one is sent. Regarding the sender and the sent, theologians speak according to "appropriations" of God the Father as He-who-sends, God the Son as He-who-is-sent-and-sends, and God the Holy Ghost as He-who-is-sent-but-does-not-send. Catholic doctrine on the Trinity teaches that (by "circumincession") all external operations of the Holy Trinity are common to the three divine Persons. Regarding the place to which one of the divine Persons is sent, it must be made clear that, although God is present everywhere in the universe, His mode of presence in any given place changes when one of the divine Persons is sent. There are two types of external mission of the Holy Trinity: the visible and the invisible. The invisible mission is, fittingly, insensible to the person to whom the divine Person is sent, the visible mission sensible. The invisible mission follows on the bestowal of sanctifying grace and has as its object the indwelling of God in the soul of the just. In Holy Writ the indwelling is generally ascribed to the Holy Ghost, but with the Holy Ghost the Father and the Son also come to dwell in the souls of the just.51 The visible mission of the Holy Ghost has encompassed such sensible phenomena as His appearance as a dove at Our Lord’s baptism, His descent in the form of tongues of fire upon the Apostles at Pentecost, and the true charismata in the Apostolic Age of the Church. By its very nature, the visible mission is transitory.52 The invisible mission is accomplished in the conferral of sanctifying grace; this takes place most normally in the worthy reception of the sacraments:
Thus, the insistence on the sensibility of grace, in its practical denial of sanctifying grace, denies also the invisible mission of the Holy Ghost and reduces the sacraments from their exalted status as the ordinary channels of grace to being merely ecclesiastical rites whose role is "complementary" with the sensible "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" in the process of "Christian initiation" (see above). Catholic teaching on sanctifying grace and the will Catholic doctrine teaches that sanctifying grace, which the Charismatics practically deny, is a certain participation in the Divine life. In thinking about this fact, two extremes must be avoided. The first is that rationalistic error which sees participation in the Divine life as a mere moral union with God, brought about by human imitation of His perfections. The other extreme is a quietistic, pantheistic idea that the soul is annihilated and transformed into the Divinity. This is the logical end of the Charismatic ideas on the will described above. Catholics know that grace perfects nature without destroying it. God positively shapes the soul into His image and assimilates it into His Divine life by a power transcending all created powers of the soul but utilizing those created powers in free cooperation with the Divine will. It is neither laudable nor necessary to annihilate the will; it must be subdued, with the help of grace, and ordered toward the Divine will. Concerning the will and the operation of the Holy Ghost in the human soul, Pope Pius XII sums up the Catholic position: No less far from the truth is the dangerous error of those who endeavor to deduce from the mysterious union of us all with Christ a certain unhealthy quietism. They would attribute the whole spiritual life of Christians and their progress in virtue exclusively to the action of the Divine Spirit, setting aside and neglecting the collaboration which is due from us. No one, of course, can deny that the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ is the one source of whatever supernatural powers enter into the Church and its members. For "The Lord will give grace and glory" as the Psalmist says. But that men should persevere constantly in their good works, that they should advance eagerly in grace and virtue, that they should strive earnestly to reach the heights of Christian perfection and at the same time to the best of their power should stimulate others to attain the same goal, all this the heavenly Spirit does not will to effect unless they contribute their daily share of zealous activity. "For divine favors are conferred not on those who sleep, but on those who watch," as St. Ambrose says. For if in our mortal body the members are strengthened and grow through continued exercise, much more truly can this be said of the social Body of Jesus Christ in which each individual member retains his own personal freedom, responsibility, and principles of conduct. For that reason he who said: "I live, now not I, but Christ liveth in me" did not at the same time hesitate to assert: "His [God’s] grace in me has not been void, but I have labored more abundantly than all they: yet not I, but the grace of God with me." It is perfectly clear, therefore, that in these false doctrines the mystery which we are considering is not directed to the spiritual advancement of the faithful but is turned to their deplorable ruin.54 Undeniable Contradiction Given these comparisons of Charismatic ideas and Catholic doctrine, it should be clear that, whatever the individual adherent’s dispositions toward the Church and the Faith might be, the CCR as a whole is not a Catholic movement at all but a deception of the Devil. The average Charismatic may well deny that he holds errors concerning grace, the Holy Ghost, the external missions of the Blessed Trinity, etc., but his deliberate renunciation of intellect and will renders his implicit errors explicit. Charismatic thinking closely parallels errors from the earlier days of the Church and frankly admires the heresies of Protestantism. Charismatics’ evolutionary idea of the Church’s magisterium guarantees that they will defend themselves against all such allegations as have been raised here by scoffing at such "pre-Conciliar" thinking. Their nearly-Protestant disregard for Tradition will lead them to an entirely Biblically-based defense of their so-called charismata, which they received, of course, after scandalously submitting themselves to a non-Catholic quasi-sacramental rite performed by heretics. The fact that the Churchmen have not condemned the CCR will go down in history as a blight on the 20th century’s record of similar proportions to the failure of Vatican II to condemn Communism. Indeed, one may legitimately wonder whether the "Spirit" the Charismatics claim adherence to is the same as the "spirit of Vatican II," i.e., the spirit of the world. The Catholic response: apologetics Since the Charismatics’ beliefs and practices are undeniably based in heresy, one may be allowed a legitimate doubt concerning the orthodoxy of those who profess affiliation to the movement. Of course, only God can judge souls, but one cannot, out of motives of so-called charity, call someone orthodox whose actions and words reek of heresy. To do so would be an injustice as well as a lie equal to that of those who maintain an attitude of religious indifferentism. "By their fruits ye shall know them," said Our Lord to His Apostles (Mt. 7:20). From the poisonous fruits of the Charismatic movement, anyone can see its inherent incompatibility with Catholicism and the grave danger it poses to the Faith. The ignorance or complicity of high-ranking Churchmen notwithstanding, one must be truthful about the movement and the danger it represents to countless souls. Obviously, unless there is a miraculous shift in the prevailing ecclesiastical winds, the duty of fighting the blight of the CCR must remain at the level of the orthodox clergy and laity. The apologetic offense must be three-fold:
Summary The Catholic Charismatic Movement is a blighted tree bearing poisonous fruit, sown by the Devil among Protestants and transplanted into the Church after Vatican II. The delirium of contemporary Churchmen has watered it, and the lack of an adequate Catholic formation among priests and laity has cleared and tilled the fertile soil in which it has grown. More people eat of its deadly fruit yearly, and the vulnerable young, so eager for the profound knowledge of God and the sense of the supernatural denied them by the Conciliar Church, are especially at risk. A generation of children is growing up thinking of Charismatics as perfectly normal (or even superior) Catholics. This fruit is truly a seed of destruction and one of the most perilous fruits offered to man since the first fruit offered to the first Eve by the same serpent. May the new Eve, the Blessed Virgin Mary, to whom it has been given to crush the serpent’s head, intercede for the Church and free the world from the peril in which it now lies as a result of the Catholic Charismatic Movement! |
||||
|
||||
|
Comments
Post a Comment