Intro
In Part I of this series, I argued that supernatural gifts, signs, and wonders are ordinary and essential expressions of the Christian faith, and that the Church is not fully equipped for her mission without them. The term “charismatic” has a variety of meanings and connotations among different groups of Christians. For this reason, it’s true that not everything that people associate with being “charismatic” is easily or fully compatible with Catholic teaching. By charismatic I mean welcoming the Holy Spirit’s movement and inspiration in a way that animates one’s identity, prayer, and actions, and also finds expression through various spiritual gifts. In this sense, I’m convinced that to be Catholic—fully and consistently—one must be open to the charismatic dimension. In other words, I don’t want to say, “charismatic equals Catholic,” but I will confidently say, “Catholic equals charismatic.”
For many people, welcoming the Holy Spirit to work through them in powerful and concrete ways will be something very new. But of course, contained in the very name of the Charismatic “Renewal” is the claim that this way of living the Christian life is not new. If it were completely new, one would be right to be suspicious of it. But the truth is that it is thoroughly biblical and part of the Church’s lived experience throughout history. What is new is the rediscovery of the spiritual gifts in our time, and the recognition that they are the inheritance of every Christian, not a privileged or exceptionally holy minority.
In this second post, I want to continue the introduction of this charismatic dimension by addressing some of the most common objections, concerns, and obstacles. Here, I will focus on charismatic Christianity and the spiritual gifts in general, and in later posts dedicated to specific gifts I will address more specific objections to those (e.g., speaking in tongues, prophecy, healing, deliverance). I already addressed a few of these objections in the first post, so I will try not to be redundant. In my experience, strongly held objections to spiritual gifts and other manifestations of the Holy Spirit are not so common. I think these objections are more often concerns or obstacles for people. They are ideas or assumptions that can "quench the Spirit," that is, prevent people from being open to the Holy Spirit and hesitant to pursue his gifts.
Lack of awareness: the greatest obstacle of all?
Before I go through a list of common objections and concerns, I want to quickly address this most basic of problems, which I already mentioned in Part I. Many people, I think especially many Catholics, are simply unfamiliar with charismatic Christianity and everything it involves. As I noted in Part I, it wasn’t until late in my seminary formation that I discovered a serious discussion of the spiritual gifts. Today, however, I think awareness is rapidly growing as people hunger more and more for the spiritual gifts and Church leaders continue to affirm their great importance for the life of the Church and her mission. Hopefully, these articles can contribute in some small way to this increased awareness, especially in our diocese.
Objections, Concerns, and Obstacles
“It’s wrong to desire and pray for supernatural signs”
“Signs" or “signs and wonders” are miraculous deeds that God accomplishes to manifest His power and authority. In the New Testament, signs and wonders are manifestations of the kingdom of God that Jesus is establishing on earth. These miraculous signs and wonders are attributed to Jesus himself (see Acts 2:22) and to his disciples, who work them in his name (see Acts 5:12; Rom 15:18-20; 2 Cor 12:12).
In Part I, I discussed the role of miracles in moving people to believe. I noted that, while some intellectually inclined people look down on miracles as a motive for faith, the Church herself has always affirmed the importance of miracles for demonstrating Christianity's divine origin. From a theological perspective, one cannot deny the role of miracles without throwing out most of the New Testament, especially the public ministry and resurrection of Jesus himself.
In addition to these more theological reasons about the importance of signs and wonders, we always have to look to the clear example of the apostles and the early Church. In their desire to bring more people to Christ, and in response to growing persecution, the first Christians explicitly prayed for more signs and wonders. Their prayer is recorded in Acts 4 and includes the following:
“And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness, while you stretch out your hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness (Acts 4:29-31).
I think we should make this prayer our own in the Church today! It would be wrong to pray for and expect signs and wonders if Jesus had not promised them—but he did. We don’t have to ask God whether or not it is His will to fulfill His promises! If it’s good enough for the apostles, it’s good enough for me. Like them, we need to pray boldly and then trust.
Sometimes people worry that if they pray for a certain outcome, such as a miraculous physical healing for a sick person, this means they are trying to control or manipulate God. I constantly hear people say, “Prayer doesn’t change God, it changes you.” Obviously, it’s true that God Himself cannot change and that we cannot change Him. But whether and how God decides to intervene in certain situations is not part of God’s unchanging nature. Jesus repeatedly says that if we ask for something in faith and in his name, the Father will give it to us: “Ask, and you shall receive.” This implies that if we don’t ask, we won’t receive. God can choose to make some part of His plan conditional upon the free response of human beings, and this does not undermine His authority or power. If praying for something to happen couldn’t change the course of history, then all petitionary prayer would be merely a façade, since we would be praying for something that God was going to do anyway. Our prayer doesn't change God, nor does it need to change God. What prayer can do, however, is change reality by opening us to God’s grace and the Holy Spirit. When we allow ourselves to be transformed, we are empowered to change the world around us. And this is not some vague or New Age idea of empowerment. Jesus said that those who believe “will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover” (Mk 16:18). That is very concrete. It is not wrong to pray for the miracles that God has already promised—it is simply obedient!
“It’s presumptuous to desire particular spiritual gifts”
This objection is related to the previous one, with the emphasis being on possessing a particular gift rather than desiring to witness miracles. This is easy to refute. In his first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul exhorts them three times to “earnestly desire” the spiritual gifts:
“…earnestly desire the higher gifts” (1 Cor 12:31).
“Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy” (1 Cor 14:1).
“…earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues” (1 Cor 14:39).
With any good thing, there is always the possibility of wanting it for the wrong reason. The most obvious example would be spiritual pride or vanity: wanting spiritual gifts in order to feel superior and to be sought out by others. However, the possibility of abuse is not necessarily a sufficient reason to avoid something altogether; as the Latin maxim has it, abusus non tollit usum (abuse does not take away use). With any great task, there are always risks involved. Evangelization—proclaiming the Good News of salvation through Jesus Christ—is certainly no exception. I think there is a widespread myth of a safe Christianity, a risk-free way to live the Christian life and share the Gospel. We sometimes believe that we can have it both ways, that we can live our faith fully and still be respected by non-Christians. But St. Paul says, “it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe” (1 Cor 1:21). If you’re living the Christian life fully, some people are going to think you’re weird and foolish. So what?
Now, is it possible for people with mixed motivations, insufficient formation, or bad theology to do damage by trying to use spiritual gifts such as healing, deliverance, and prophecy? Absolutely, and it’s true that people claiming (sincerely, we may assume) to minister in Jesus’ name have done spiritual and emotional damage. This is a real risk that we have to take seriously and do our best to mitigate. However, not welcoming and pursuing the spiritual gifts is not a safe alternative. Everything worthwhile involves risks; the question is, “Is this action or this approach worth the risk?” In the case of the spiritual gifts, I think the answer is a resounding “Yes!” I’m convinced that there is a greater risk in not exercising the spiritual gifts. Salvation is on the line, and we desperately need the gifts in order to proclaim the Gospel as Christ modeled and commanded, that is, in St. Paul’s words, “in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor 2:4).
Can Satan deceive people who try to pursue these gifts? Yes. But what are we going to put our faith in, the ability of Satan to deceive us, or the ability of God to protect us? Upon their return from doing ministry (which included driving out demons), Jesus commended and encouraged the 72 disciples, saying, “Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you” (Lk 10:19). Was this spiritual protection reserved for them? No, so let’s claim it and live knowing that we have it! We have to be cautious, yes, but without letting caution become cowardice.
“Emphasizing spiritual gifts promotes an unhealthy focus on certain individuals”
We’ve all seen how the mighty fall, and how people who put all their hope in other human beings are always let down. Don’t ministries based on personal charisms, such as healing, deliverance, and prophecy, lead inevitably to the exaltation of certain people as “special” or “anointed” in a way that others are not? And won’t this perception cause Christians to seek out other human beings instead of Christ himself? This is clearly a possibility, especially when we consider cases of Christian ministers, clergy and lay, who enjoy a kind of celebrity status and a cult of personality. This can become unhealthy and harmful. That being said, as with the risk of presumption, I think this risk too is something for us to take seriously and address when necessary, not a deal breaker for charismatic prayer and ministry. The fact that something requires greater spiritual maturity and formation implies that it will be more valuable when done well.
Also, it is worth noting that the temptation of notoriety and praise is by no means unique to those in charismatic ministry. All of us in the Church—both those who minister or lead and those who seek their help—need to strive for humility and maintain accountability with other trusted Christians who can guide and correct us. Of course, at a minimum, submission to Church authorities is an absolute requirement. The Church’s pastors and hierarchy have the responsibility to discern the authenticity of charisms, and to promote and guide their proper exercise:
…those who have been entrusted with hierarchical gifts, carrying out the discernment and accompaniment of the charisms, must cordially receive that which the Spirit inspires within the ecclesial communion, being mindful thereof in pastoral activities and esteeming their contribution as an authentic resource for the good of all (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Iuvenescit Ecclesia, n. 20).
When divisions arise from excessive attention to individual ministers, clergy or lay, this must be immediately addressed, following St. Paul’s correction to the Corinthians, who suffered from this problem:
For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way? For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not being merely human? What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth (1 Cor 3:3–7).
Those in ministry should not leave participants feeling inadequate or “ordinary,” as if the ministers possessed something that they don’t. Rather, by their example and through their teaching and ministry, leaders should encourage and activate people in their own gifts, helping them to embrace their full inheritance as sons and daughters of God. This is similar to the witness of the saints. The Church does not canonize saints so that we can put them on a pedestal, thinking, “Wow, I’ll never be that holy!” It’s just the opposite: we are meant to look at the saints and think, “Wow, if God can do that in them, then He can do it in me, too!” We're supposed to imitate them, not just admire them (see CCC 828). The Body of Christ is meant to be a source of strength and constant encouragement, not competition. Spiritual gifts only exist for the sake of others; a spirit of comparison is therefore completely antithetical to God’s purpose in giving them. Our personal pursuit of holiness and spiritual gifts is not an alternative to concern for the Church, but a powerful way to build her up (see CCC 2003). Thus St. Paul writes, “since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church” (1 Cor 14:12). Due to sin, comparison and competition are ever-present temptations. But they can be overcome without forfeiting our desire for excellence. The only way to completely avoid all risk of competition in the spiritual life is to accept mediocrity, and that we simply cannot do.
“Charismatic prayer and spiritual gifts promote emotionalism and sensationalism”
I think this is one of the better objections. It is true that charismatic Christians emphasize personal experience of the Holy Spirit and encourage an openness to what are called “manifestations” of the Spirit. Examples of these manifestations include speaking in tongues, laughter, tears, bodily shaking, falling down, etc. Given that these expressions are by nature more spontaneous and unpredictable, charismatic prayer and ministry does have a stronger tendency to become disorderly and emotionally intense at times. This will especially be the impression for someone who’s never seen or experienced it before. I believe that this tendency toward emotional expression and release is in part a pendulum swing from a more stoic and emotionally suppressed approach to prayer. Many Christians—perhaps especially many Catholics—are taught from childhood that prayer is a time to be on your “best behavior” and to do everything “right.” Properly understood, these are not bad intentions. For example, in the context of the Mass we are gathered together to participate prayerfully, in a unified and orderly manner, in the sacred mysteries through the liturgical forms handed down to us. And by obeying Jesus’ solemn command, “Do this in memory of me,” we are able to be present at the Last Supper, Calvary, and Jesus’ empty tomb—a solemn occasion to say the least! For the Mass to be celebrated with due reverence and attention, we need to maintain a basic demeanor of propriety and even formality. I am not advocating for reimagining the Church’s liturgies to give them a more charismatic “style,” or to make them more entertaining by the standards of popular culture. When I speak of charismatic prayer, I’m referring primarily to prayer groups, times of worship, personal prayer, and ministry outside the context of Mass and other liturgies (e.g., healing services, street evangelization).
Speaking of the Mass, I think that in general we have a problem in the Catholic Church of trying to make the Mass fit every spiritual need. Of course, as Vatican II famously affirmed, the Eucharist is the center, the “source and summit” of the Church’s life (Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 10). However, if we don’t provide other opportunities for prayer, worship, and community, many people will become frustrated and disengage or else advocate manipulating the Mass in an attempt to better satisfy their unmet spiritual needs. When a parish has little to no community life, and Sunday Mass is the only event that most people attend, there’s a greater temptation to make Mass a social and entertaining experience. But this does violence to the Mass, which was never intended to be the “one-stop shop” where we live our entire life of prayer and community. Yes, again, the Mass is the center of the Christian life and the privileged place where we encounter God. But the graces we receive through the Mass are also meant to flow over into the rest of our life of prayer, service, and mission for the glory of God.
Now, in regard to emotions specifically, I think that in the Church there is a fairly widespread distrust of emotions, especially the open expression of emotions. It’s true that in the spiritual life one cannot reliably interpret what is happening on the basis of emotions alone. We cannot make the presence or absence of good feelings the measure of grace and the action of the Holy Spirit—to do so is indeed emotionalism. Numerous saints and spiritual masters (e.g., St. Ignatius of Loyola) have warned against this temptation. With this warning in mind, we also have to affirm that emotions and affectivity are essential aspects of human nature. In any human action, one should be governed by reason (logical thought). However, according to Christian anthropology, it is not somehow better for a person to be moved solely by reason. The primacy of reason does not mean that in our actions we should strive to be motivated purely by objective, calculating thought. Rather, an action is more excellent and more fully human when our passions (emotions) are engaged as well, since the proper engagement of our passions implies that we are more fully committed to the action. As St. Thomas Aquinas writes:
…when the higher part of the soul is intensely moved to anything, the lower part also follows that movement; and thus the passion that results in consequence, in the sensitive appetite, is a sign of the intensity of the will, and so indicates greater moral goodness (Summa Theologiae, I-II q.24 a.3 ad 1).
Once we admit the general importance of our emotions working in concert with our reason, we can ask a more specific question: Should we be surprised or concerned that experiencing God engages people’s emotions, even intensely at times? How could an encounter with the infinite and transcendent Creator fail to produce a variety of reactions in our finite humanity? For a specific example of this in Scripture, consider the disciples when the Holy Spirit came upon them at Pentecost. Many marveled at how the disciples were speaking in a variety of languages, but some mocked them, saying, “They are filled with new wine.” Then Peter responded to the commotion and reassured the critics, saying, “these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day” (Acts 2:13, 15). Think about it: the first pope had to begin his first homily reassuring the audience that he and the other disciples were not drunk in the morning! As some commentators have noted, the accusation of drunkenness implies that the disciples were not only speaking other languages, but doing so in a display of joyful and exuberant emotion (it turns out that, by itself, speaking foreign languages is not a symptom of intoxication). Frankly, the scene must have been a bit wild! Now, let’s be honest, is our own suspicion of emotional expression in prayer based on real theological reasons, or simply our concern about what others think? To be clear, this is not an argument that Christian prayer, individual or communal, should be emotional or outwardly expressive all of the time or even most of the time. It is simply a reminder that, if we receive the same Holy Spirit that the first disciples received, then we should expect to see the same powerful manifestations in people at least some of the time. Even if we are not personally inclined to or comfortable with outward expressions (laughing, crying, clapping, praying in tongues, singing, etc.), we can at least recognize their legitimacy and avoid discouraging and condemning them in others.
There certainly is no biblical basis for demanding that all our prayer and worship be quiet and calm. Especially in the Psalms, we are often summoned to praise the Lord loudly with joyful shouts, clapping, dancing, and a variety of instruments:
Shout for joy in the Lord, O you righteous!
Praise befits the upright.
Give thanks to the Lord with the lyre;
make melody to him with the harp of ten strings!
Sing to him a new song;
play skillfully on the strings, with loud shouts (Ps 33:1-3)
“Clap your hands, all peoples!
Shout to God with loud songs of joy!” (Ps 47:1)
Praise him with trumpet sound;
praise him with lute and harp!
Praise him with tambourine and dance;
praise him with strings and pipe!
Praise him with sounding cymbals;
praise him with loud clashing cymbals!
Let everything that has breath praise the Lord! (Ps 150:3-6).
Then there is the famous scene of David dancing with abandon before the Ark of the Lord:
And David and all the house of Israel were celebrating before the Lord, with songs and lyres and harps and tambourines and castanets and cymbals. […] And David danced before the Lord with all his might (2 Sam 6:5, 14).
St. Paul recommended joyful expressions of faith to both the Ephesians and the Colossians:
…do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart (Eph 5:18-19).
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God (Col 3:16).
Of course, the topic of music, liturgy, and cultural developments is a huge one. I’m not advocating a liturgical free-for-all! My point here is simply that more expressive and spontaneous forms of prayer and praise are by no means foreign to our spiritual inheritance as Christians. Feelings are not everything, but sometimes our prayer can feel dry or stagnant simply because the way we're praying isn’t coming from our heart, which is blocked from expressing itself. Personally, I’ve had many moments of personal prayer with praise music that have left me weeping! It was very powerful, and something that never happened to me in prayer before.
In my experience, we have a far greater problem in the Church today of emotional suppression than emotional expression. Compare the emotional engagement at anything Church related to that of a sports game (I know the comparison isn’t completely fair, but you get the point). The 20th century Protestant revivalist William Branham once said, “I’d rather have a little wildfire than have no fire at all!” I agree! Pastorally speaking, I would much rather guide and form people who are over zealous in some ways than try to engage people who are just going through the motions or even apathetic.
“It’s just…weird.”
This is connected to the previous objection about emotions. For many people, charismatic expressions of prayer such as speaking or singing in tongues, prophecy, deliverance prayers, and (to a lesser degree) prayers for healing simply seem unusual or even unsettling. To be fair, it’s not surprising that people would be confused and even put off initially when they see bodily manifestations of the Holy Spirit, such as laughing, crying, shaking, and falling to the ground (known as “resting” in the Spirit). This is especially true for those seeing such things for the first time. Many of us have been raised and catechized to see prayer as something that should always be very calm, orderly, and even dispassionate.
Of course, “weird” or “unusual” are relative terms based on one’s prior experience and expectations. What seems weird to one person will be normal to another. Also, not everything that people attribute to the Holy Spirit really comes from him. Discernment is always necessary. As St. Paul told the Thessalonians: “Do not quench the Spirit. […] test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thess 5:19, 21). Here is a key for discernment: If we make our own experience of how God can operate the measure of what is possible or “normal,” then we might be quenching the Spirit both in others and in ourselves. In response to the “weird” accusation, I would say that when the transcendent and infinite God interacts with His finite creatures and pours His own divine life into them, we should expect things to happen that are, naturally speaking, very unusual. Again, this is not to make some felt or visible bodily response the measure of the Spirit’s activity—but such a response certainly is not surprising when you think about it.
“It’s too Protestant!”
The fact that the renewed emphasis on the spiritual gifts in the 20th century began mostly in Protestant communities in no way invalidates the authenticity of this movement. If in the Old Testament God often used foreign rulers and nations to reprimand and form His chosen people, how much more can He use non-Catholic Christians, who are united to us through Baptism and who share with us the gift of the same Holy Spirit?
The Second Vatican Council stated a general principle regarding this in its Decree on Ecumenism, Redintegratio Unitatis:
Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brethren. […] anything wrought by the grace of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of our separated brethren can be a help to our own edification. Whatever is truly Christian is never contrary to what genuinely belongs to the faith; indeed, it can always bring a deeper realization of the mystery of Christ and the Church (RU, n. 4, emphasis added).
As a fascinating historical note, it appears that the initial outpouring of the Holy Spirit which marked the beginning of Pentecostalism came in response to the prayer of none other than the pope himself! Blessed Elena Guerra (1835-1913) was an Italian religious sister and the founder of the Oblates of the Holy Spirit. She enjoyed extensive written correspondence with Pope Leo XIII. On January 1, 1901, following her encouragement, the pope invoked the Holy Spirit upon the 20th century, singing the hymn Veni Creator Spiritus (Come, Creator Spirit) by the Holy Spirit window in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. Here’s the crazy part: that very day, at the Bethel College and Bible School in Topeka, Kansas, the Holy Spirit was powerfully poured out upon a group of Protestants who had been praying to receive the Holy Spirit as the early Church had at Pentecost. This outpouring in Topeka is regarded as the beginning of Pentecostalism. Therefore, one could say that the Charismatic Renewal, which followed in the Catholic Church in 1967 and continues to this day, was very Catholic in origin! If God were only willing to use Christians with a perfect doctrinal record as vessels of the Holy Spirit, the Church never would have made it very far!
“It’s not my spirituality. If other people are into those things, great, but it’s just not for me.”
Besides a lack of awareness, this may be the biggest obstacle to the spread of charismatic Christianity. I have met many Catholics who have this attitude. They are not opposed to charismatics “doing their thing,” but they are not interested in it themselves. It’s common for people of this mindset to see “charismatic” as its own spirituality type or temperament. People say things like, “Well, I have more of a contemplative/liturgical spirituality.” Or else, they misunderstand the spiritual gifts as elements of one spirituality which stands alongside other spiritualities within the Christian tradition, such as Franciscan, Ignatian, Carmelite, Benedictine, etc. The response to charismatic Christians is a laissez-faire “You do you” or “Different strokes for different folks.” The problem with this attitude is that it doesn’t address the central claim of charismatics, which is that they are recovering and embracing something essential to the normal Christian life. To say, “The spiritual gifts aren’t part of my spirituality” is like saying, “The Eucharist isn’t my spirituality,” or, “Loving my neighbor as myself isn’t my spirituality.” Yielding to the Holy Spirit’s action and gratefully receiving his gifts is not one spirituality among many—it is just the normal Christian life.
Of course, there is a legitimate variety in the spiritual lives of committed Christians. Even the saints show great diversity in terms of their spiritual gifts and their personal “style” of holiness. In order to be holy, everyone does not need to be like St. Teresa of Calcutta, serving among the poorest of the poor, or like St. Thérèse of Lisieux, living a hidden life of prayer in a religious community, or like any other specific saint. The common and necessary ingredient is Christ-likeness. Just as in the natural order people have different gifts, strengths, and tendencies, so too in the spiritual order their gifts will tend to be consistent with their character and suited to their vocation and mission. However, the important thing is not to associate various spiritual gifts promised by Jesus himself and experienced by the first disciples with some rare, strange spirituality that isn’t meant for most people.
On a more specific note, I often hear people compare “traditional Catholicism” and “charismatic Catholicism” as if these were two poles of spirituality that are radically different or opposed in some way. Occasionally, more direct people will even ask, “Are you more traditional or more charismatic?” In some people’s minds, I think the word “traditional” equates to conservative and “charismatic” to progressive. As often happens in discussions about Christianity and the Church, the left-right dichotomy really breaks down here. Those political categories just don’t correspond to these spiritual realities.
Contrary to those who oppose traditional and charismatic Catholicism, I personally know many Catholics, including a number of priests, who are devotees of traditional liturgy and even Latin Mass and who also attend charismatic prayer groups and conferences, which include more modern-style praise music, as well as prayer services involving healing and prophecy. Along this line, think of St. Padre Pio, who was very traditional in his piety and celebration of the Mass, yet also exercised powerful spiritual gifts such as healing and prophecy (sometimes called “reading hearts”). Also, contrary to the equating of charismatic and progressive, virtually every charismatic Catholic I know is orthodox and faithful to Church teaching, even on the more controversial issues. There is also a great concern for doctrinal fidelity among charismatic Catholic leaders, for example: Dr. Ralph Martin, Peter Herbeck, Dr. Mary Healy, and Cardinal Raniero Cantalamessa (Preacher to the Papal Household). It's true that orthodoxy was not always the norm in all Catholic charismatic circles. Without delving into the history, I think the strong commitment to Church teaching among charismatics today is in part a response to past errors that undermined the movement.
When speaking about Church teaching (especially moral teachings), many priests and other Catholics often lament the inconsistency of “cafeteria Catholics,” those who pick and choose which teachings they want to accept and which they will do without. I think there is an analogy to this when it comes to the spiritual life: why pick and choose just a few forms of prayer? Or why assume that you have no spiritual gifts on the basis of what you’ve experienced so far? Why not, as St. Paul says, “earnestly desire” the spiritual gifts? When it comes to the wide variety of spiritual gifts, forms of prayer, and spiritual “styles” accepted within the Church, my recommendation is this: don’t be a cafeteria Catholic, be a buffet Catholic! Try everything! Personally, I want to hear more Latin and more speaking in tongues! (each in its proper context) If it’s beautiful and spiritually nourishing, sign me up! It’s important to be grateful for where God has brought you up to this point in your spiritual life. But why limit yourself to staying there? Breakthrough often lies just beyond your comfort zone. When St. Thérèse of Lisieux was a young child, she was asked to pick out something from among her older sister’s toys. She responded, “I choose all!” That’s my answer when people ask me which spirituality I have, or try to force me to choose between "traditional" and "charismatic" forms of prayer: “I choose all!”
Conclusion
I hope you have found this defense of charismatic Christianity helpful. As you probably noticed from the length of this post, this rediscovered way of living the Christian life in the Holy Sprit touches on many topics! While I’m sure many readers do not share all or most of these objections, hopefully the responses have been informative. Perhaps what you need instead is simply encouragement. If so, here it is: Pray! Talk to Jesus and to others about this! Let’s make this conversation normal and discern what the Holy Spirit is doing so that we can follow his lead. St. Paul enjoined us, "Do not quench the Spirit" (1 Thess 5:19). This applies not only to others, but also to ourselves. Be open to whatever God wants to give you—the good news is: there’s always more!
† Under the Mercy,
Fr. Christopher Trummer
PS: In the next post, I’ll be explaining the foundational grace and most characteristic experience of charismatic Christianity: Baptism in the Holy Spirit.
Other articles in this series:
Part I: The Reality and Importance of the Spiritual Gifts
Part III: Baptism in the Holy Spirit
Part IV: The Gift of Healing
Part V: The Gift of Prophecy
Part VI: Other Spiritual Gifts
