Did the Church recognize the Charismatic Renewal as an authentic movement of the Holy Spirit or not?
As Catholics we know truth by what the Catholic Church has infallibly defined. Also "No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident" [Can. 749 §3].
"[W]e teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals" [Pastor aeternus 4].
If we followed charismatic logic - that John Paul II and Benedict XVI approved the Charismatic Renewal, simply because they officially welcomed their delegations, we would have to raise similar disproportionate claims.
Did either one of these popes sanction Buddhism, present day Judaism, Voodoo, Islam etc? The Pope, both as religious leader and head of state, conducts all his meetings with genuine warmth and collegiality, that’s just how these things go. But these meetings do not include official approval or sanctioning of ANYTHING. It would be illogical to assume that based on the events depicted by these photographs the popes would have endorsed the various religions, special interest groups, individuals or whatever they represent - and yet charismatics do just that! They keep bringing up the various papal addresses to charismatic delegations as if they were conclusive confirmations of papal support. It just doesn’t work that way!
To date the Church has not even made an “official definition” about the Charismatic Renewal. You see… there is a difference between an official statement and an official making a statement. An official statement (at least in the Catholic Church) must be true. An official making a statement could be true or in error. (And we are all familiar with popes making errors in their ordinary Magisterium.)
Papal audiences are NOT official statements; when the Pope welcomes a group or when the Pope converses with individuals representing a group. The statements made by the Pope at these events are private statements and they cannot be construed as “official statements”. Besides there are lots of quotes attributed to popes out of context, sometimes fabricated... But even if John Paul II had fondness for the Charismatic Renewal… well, what of it? He also liked Polish sausage. Does it mean that we are to eat Polish sausage? No it doesn’t. When a Pope makes an official statement, he makes it clear so it can be perceived as such. Official statements are meant for the entire Church. There are no such statements in existence concerning the Charismatic Renewal and for a good reason. The renewal contradicts the Magisterium, but a Pope cannot. To quote Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger on the Supreme Pontiff's authority:
"…the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope's authority is bound to the Tradition of faith... Even the pope can only be a humble servant... The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition. . . ." (Unbeliebigkeit). (pp. 165-166, THE SPIRIT OF THE LITURGY, by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger)
Of course the Pope does not mandate everything and individual bishops have a lot of power themselves. But much of that power has been taken out of context, even abused, since “grave reasons” and “original directives not withstanding” seem incomprehensible to the bishops of our day.
There are a number of popes who have, on their own, directly made comments about the Charismatic Renewal. Of course popes making private statements are NOT official statements. The faithful is not required to follow private statements, not even from popes, and certainly not when these are in contradiction to Sacred Tradition or the Scriptures.
People don’t seem to appreciate the difference between Doctrines and disciplines (which are really customs) and even less between Dogmas and Doctrines. Every Dogma is a Doctrine, but not every Doctrine is a Dogma. Dogmas are infallible truths; incapable of failure or error while doctrines are fallible and could possibly fail or be inaccurate. So when people jump up and down insisting on some supposed “Catholic Doctrine”, be aware that unless a Doctrine is also a Dogma it may or it may not be an infallible truth.
Dogmas are the divinely revealed truths of our faith that were infallibly proclaimed by the Church. For example: Jesus instituted the Sacrament of Matrimony and this was later proclaimed infallibly by the Council of Trent. (It was NOT invented by the Church later.)
"Doctrine" literally means teaching that has never been "officially" defined by the Magisterium of the Church. There is no document we can point to and say, "Look here it is, this is where it says it’s infallible!"
If something is not in the Catechism, we are not required to follow it. There is certainly no “Charismatic Renewal”, or "baptism in the spirit" or "getting slain in the spirit" or "praying in tongues” in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And there is nothing about the Charismatic Renewal or any its hokie practices in the Canons or in the Papal Encyclicals either.
Any deviation from the established norms would require more than just a handful of papal comments or welcome addresses to some interest group. Any deviation or addition to the faith or to its practice would have to be PROCLAIMED UNIVERSALLY, and a comment such as “I am convinced” fails to meet that criteria. It is but a private opinion of someone who happens to be pope. Certainly, we owe His Holiness respect every time he speaks, but we are required to give our filial obedience only to those of his statements which do not contradict Holy Tradition or the Scriptures.
In 1990 the Pontifical Council for the Laity recognized the Catholic Fraternity of Covenant Communities as a private association of the laity, but to date no official pronouncement has been made on the Charismatic Renewal! None! Nada! But that does not stop the charismatics from attributing infallibility to unofficial papal statements in their favor as much as they pay no attention to authoritative pronouncements made to the contrary.
Everything can be given a spin to manipulate truth. Governments do it, business does it, interest groups do it and the Charismatic Renewal is no different.
As Catholics we know truth by what the Catholic Church has infallibly defined. Also "No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident" [Can. 749 §3].
"[W]e teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals" [Pastor aeternus 4].
If we followed charismatic logic - that John Paul II and Benedict XVI approved the Charismatic Renewal, simply because they officially welcomed their delegations, we would have to raise similar disproportionate claims.
Did either one of these popes sanction Buddhism, present day Judaism, Voodoo, Islam etc? The Pope, both as religious leader and head of state, conducts all his meetings with genuine warmth and collegiality, that’s just how these things go. But these meetings do not include official approval or sanctioning of ANYTHING. It would be illogical to assume that based on the events depicted by these photographs the popes would have endorsed the various religions, special interest groups, individuals or whatever they represent - and yet charismatics do just that! They keep bringing up the various papal addresses to charismatic delegations as if they were conclusive confirmations of papal support. It just doesn’t work that way!
To date the Church has not even made an “official definition” about the Charismatic Renewal. You see… there is a difference between an official statement and an official making a statement. An official statement (at least in the Catholic Church) must be true. An official making a statement could be true or in error. (And we are all familiar with popes making errors in their ordinary Magisterium.)
Papal audiences are NOT official statements; when the Pope welcomes a group or when the Pope converses with individuals representing a group. The statements made by the Pope at these events are private statements and they cannot be construed as “official statements”. Besides there are lots of quotes attributed to popes out of context, sometimes fabricated... But even if John Paul II had fondness for the Charismatic Renewal… well, what of it? He also liked Polish sausage. Does it mean that we are to eat Polish sausage? No it doesn’t. When a Pope makes an official statement, he makes it clear so it can be perceived as such. Official statements are meant for the entire Church. There are no such statements in existence concerning the Charismatic Renewal and for a good reason. The renewal contradicts the Magisterium, but a Pope cannot. To quote Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger on the Supreme Pontiff's authority:
"…the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope's authority is bound to the Tradition of faith... Even the pope can only be a humble servant... The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition. . . ." (Unbeliebigkeit). (pp. 165-166, THE SPIRIT OF THE LITURGY, by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger)
Of course the Pope does not mandate everything and individual bishops have a lot of power themselves. But much of that power has been taken out of context, even abused, since “grave reasons” and “original directives not withstanding” seem incomprehensible to the bishops of our day.
There are a number of popes who have, on their own, directly made comments about the Charismatic Renewal. Of course popes making private statements are NOT official statements. The faithful is not required to follow private statements, not even from popes, and certainly not when these are in contradiction to Sacred Tradition or the Scriptures.
People don’t seem to appreciate the difference between Doctrines and disciplines (which are really customs) and even less between Dogmas and Doctrines. Every Dogma is a Doctrine, but not every Doctrine is a Dogma. Dogmas are infallible truths; incapable of failure or error while doctrines are fallible and could possibly fail or be inaccurate. So when people jump up and down insisting on some supposed “Catholic Doctrine”, be aware that unless a Doctrine is also a Dogma it may or it may not be an infallible truth.
Dogmas are the divinely revealed truths of our faith that were infallibly proclaimed by the Church. For example: Jesus instituted the Sacrament of Matrimony and this was later proclaimed infallibly by the Council of Trent. (It was NOT invented by the Church later.)
"Doctrine" literally means teaching that has never been "officially" defined by the Magisterium of the Church. There is no document we can point to and say, "Look here it is, this is where it says it’s infallible!"
If something is not in the Catechism, we are not required to follow it. There is certainly no “Charismatic Renewal”, or "baptism in the spirit" or "getting slain in the spirit" or "praying in tongues” in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And there is nothing about the Charismatic Renewal or any its hokie practices in the Canons or in the Papal Encyclicals either.
Any deviation from the established norms would require more than just a handful of papal comments or welcome addresses to some interest group. Any deviation or addition to the faith or to its practice would have to be PROCLAIMED UNIVERSALLY, and a comment such as “I am convinced” fails to meet that criteria. It is but a private opinion of someone who happens to be pope. Certainly, we owe His Holiness respect every time he speaks, but we are required to give our filial obedience only to those of his statements which do not contradict Holy Tradition or the Scriptures.
In 1990 the Pontifical Council for the Laity recognized the Catholic Fraternity of Covenant Communities as a private association of the laity, but to date no official pronouncement has been made on the Charismatic Renewal! None! Nada! But that does not stop the charismatics from attributing infallibility to unofficial papal statements in their favor as much as they pay no attention to authoritative pronouncements made to the contrary.
Everything can be given a spin to manipulate truth. Governments do it, business does it, interest groups do it and the Charismatic Renewal is no different.
