Magisterial documents about the Catholic Charismatic Renewal.

Are there any magisterial documents that address the Catholic Charismatic renewal?


The Church has approved the statutes of the ICRSS (the International Catholic Charismatic Renewal Service). The Holy See appointed a Vatican adviser to the organization, but it is a lay organization (not an official Vatican Office) and has no official Catholic standing beyond its founding statutes.

These approved statutes are very narrow in scope. They do not, for example, mention any specific charism (as one might expect from an organization with such a name). The statutes make only one reference to “charisms” (in general and in plural).

The Catholic Charismatic movement itself often teaches and practices things which are not part of the ICRSS statutes and have thus never received any sort of official recognition or sanction by the Catholic Church. Some practitioners of this movement will claim official Church sanction or approval for teachings and activities which go beyond the approved ICRSS statutes, but these teachings and activities do not legitimately merit such a claim.

As DavidFilmer said, sorta.

Search the Vatican website for items containing the word “charismatic”.

I did, and I found some extremely interesting passages that I think most Catholic Charismatics didn’t even know existed.

I did the same search. I’m pretty sure that most Catholic Charismatics would not be very pleased by the results - especially whenever these documents specifically delve into teachings and practices within the Charismatic Catholic movement which are not approved by the Catholic Church (ie, many of the same teachings and practices that I made reference to above).

This document is particularly instructive, especially the part near the end discussing Restorationism. These Charismatic teachings and practices are clearly of (dubious) protestant origin, and have no basis in authentic and/or traditional Catholic belief or worship, and have never been taught or practiced by any Saint or Pope of the Church, and are utterly devoid of any Church approval or sanction whatsoever, and yet they are an inseparable part of each and every Charismatic Catholic community, without exception.

Perhaps you can elaborate a little for me? Are you under the misapprehension that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal teaches anything related to Restorationism?

I agree that it is of Protestant origin, and has no basis in authentic/tradition Catholic belief and worship. I can’t understand what you are seeing in Catholic Charismatic communities that relates to that?

The Catholic Charismatic Renewal is based on the teachings of St. Paul. I believe he pre-dates Protestantism.

[FONT=Arial]The following book is a thorough study of “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” and the charisms in the early Church. It includes; Tertullian in his Catholic years, Hilary of Poitiers, Basil, Gregory Nazianzus, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, Philoxenus, John of Apamea, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Severus of Antioch, and Joseph Hzaazya. They represent Latin, Greek, and Syrian cultures, almost the whole of the Mediterranean seaboard.

[FONT=Arial]Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial]Evidence from the First Eight Centuries
ISBN 0-8146-5009-0
by Kilian McDonnell, O.S.B. and George Montague, S.M.


This is an excellent scholarly work, you are right Granny! :thumbsup:

I’m not under any misapprehension at all. The Catholic Charismatic Renewal withholds what actually happens at Charismatic worship services. I have searched in vain for a SINGLE reference on ANY Catholic Charismatic website for ANY mention of the practice of speaking in “unknown tongues” as described in 1Cor. Yet, it is a part of EACH AND EVERY Catholic Charismatic worship service WITHOUT EXCEPTION (prove me wrong!) 100% of the time, WITHOUT EXCEPTION (prove me wrong!)

What the Catholic Charismatic Renewal SAYS and what it DOES are two different things. It has a “hidden” agenda (poorly hidden, as it is blatantly obvious to the world, but it does not plainly reveal this agenda).

I agree that it is of Protestant origin, and has no basis in authentic/tradition Catholic belief and worship. I can’t understand what you are seeing in Catholic Charismatic communities that relates to that?

I’m seeing the practice of speaking in “unknown tongues,” which is a part of EACH AND EVERY Catholic Charismatic worship service (prove me wrong!).

This particular practice is WHAT DEFINES a protestant movement as “Charismatic” (ie, Pentecostal - same thing). It is WHAT DEFINES a Catholic “charismatic” movement as well. The “movement” will NEVER admit this, but it is the truth.

Prove me wrong.

The Duquesne Incident does not pre-date Protestantism.

Someone once said, “I have a vacuum cleaner older than that”.

This is not to prove you wrong.

I have read a bit about the “Protestant” connection and the fact that someone other than a Catholic read St. Paul does not bother me. However, I would appreciate your thinking about a clarification in vocabulary. And please do not hesitate to ask me questions.

Your post says: “I’m seeing the practice of speaking in “unknown tongues,” which is a part of EACH AND EVERY Catholic Charismatic worship service.” What really needs to be put in capital letters is “unknown tongues”. The people of Corinth certainly knew what tongues were. In fact, not only did they understand the use of tongues, they abused the proper use of tongues. When reading the two chapters 12 & 14 in 1Corinthiasns, it is certainly obvious that St. Paul was not referring to something unknown.

So, I am curious about the source for the term “unknown tongues”. What does “unknown tongues” refer to? I am not looking for the obvious doubt-filled reactions of someone who listens to a person praying in tongues. Why search for “unknown tongues” on Google when the two separate gifts of tongues are already known? I do not mean to be rude, but could “unknown tongues” be a slang expression? I do have to admit that I have not kept up with the slang of the younguns.

Lots of “incidents” have occurred after Protestantism. That is life.

I mentioned St. Paul in particular. If one wants to know about the common gift of praying in tongues or if one wants to know about the nine classical gifts of the Holy Spirit, one needs to first understand what St. Paul was preaching to the Corinthians.

Now it does not bother me that there are Catholics who object to the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. Some objections are valid and should be addressed. St. Paul certainly addressed the problems which occurred in Corinth. Some of those problems are still around. That is life.

What bothers me is the confusion when it comes to the actual “charismatic” Gifts of the Holy Spirit.
Note: I am not referring to the Isaiah Gifts.

I am very eager to learn more about this withholding. I have attended perhaps thousands of Catholic Charismatic events since 1976 and apparently I am missing a great secret!

I am having trouble making sense of what you are writing here. You say that the practice mentioned in Cor. is not promulgated by the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, and yet, it happens in meetings? So, which one is it? Does it exist, or not?

Fascintating. Sounds like an intriguing conspiriacy theory. Tell me more!

In case you did not know, it is impossible to prove a negative. Since you have never attended “each and every” Charismatic service, then you cannot possibly have “seen” all of them, right? However, I will certainly stipulate that Catholic Charismatics follow the Scripture and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

I hardly see how that is relevant. All Protestant groups are defined by which heresies they espouse, and to what extent.

I am sorry to hear that you have had such a warped and inappropriate experience of the CCR. :shrug:

Perhaps you will consider forgiving the misguided people who led you astray on this point?

Well, I have learned that “the movement” is rather analgous to the “spirit of vatican 2” and sometimes bears little resemblance to anything that has been approved or encouraged by the Holy See.

I would not presume to do so. Clearly you have developed some bigoted prejudices as a result of your own experiences. These are you perceptions, and it would not be appropriate to dispute them. Each human person apprehends information in the light of their own experience and education (or lack of it). If you wish to believe fallacies, it is your perogative. I will pray that you are able to let go of your resentments and forgive the misinformed persons who misled you.

LOL yes I think it is rooted in the Pope’s prayer before Vat… 2

Or, if you like, rooted in the LCWR’s inspiration to move beyond the Church.

Just look at the fruits, right?

Begging your pardon, but isn’t the LCWR for women? St. Paul is one of the founders of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal for *both *women and men, so I don’t really think there is a comparison.

That’s right, I forgot … the CCR permits women to teach, preach, and have authority over men, isn’t that right?

I have no clue.:o

I think that the real issue is about the validity of the Holy Spirit being present within the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. Renewing the period of the early Church is appropriate work of the Holy Spirit. Whether or not everyone accepts that is not the point. The real point is that the Holy Spirit is pouring out His gifts in order to once again “build up the Church.”

For the benefit of those who have not followed this particular topic on CAF, I will let you in on Rainaldo’s little inside-joke - he is quoting me from post #6 of this thread.

And it’s true - I inherited a shop-vac from my grandparents. I still have the owner’s manual and receipt - dated Feb 19, 1964. This was one of the first wet/dry vacuum cleaners, and it was manufactured about three years before the Duquesne weekend (when the seeds of the Catholic Charismatic movement were first planted). The vacuum cleaner is a few months older than me. And it is in perfect working order (I wish I could say the same).

Both my vacuum cleaner and I are older than the Catholic Charismatic movement.

Don’t you dare let anyone try to convince you that this movement has any historical merit. My vacuum cleaner is older than this movement.

I will answer your question if you clarify this point - what are these “two separate” gifts? Some will say known/unknown tongues, and some will say speaking/interpreting tongues. Which “two gifts” do you refer to?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit