THE SAME OLD

The year is now 2006, everything has changed, yet nothing's changed. We still need to expose the charismatic renewal; today more than ever. We cannot surrender and lapse into lassitude for the sake of peace any longer. There are still debates going on about certain aspects of the renewal, but these tend to focus on local problems. The charismatic heresy has never really been dealt with. It has been catholicized and it managed to adept in order to remain within the Church, but like any parasite that feeds on its host, it cannot be fully integrated with it, as that would be the end of it. So the charismatic renewal remains a somewhat separate entity within and continues with its mission to reinvent the Catholic Church.

This has been going on for forty years and charismatics are becoming more and more intolerant of criticism about the renewal. Every debate with charismatics deteriorates into an argument about personalities and experiences, in other words, secondary issues. People who raise concerns are labeled divisive and enemies of the Holy Spirit. The debate has been silenced; because we have been intimidated into thinking it is uncharitable to criticize the renewal. We have been convinced that it is wrong to question. Most people have given up dealing with the issue for fear of committing an unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit.

Particularly when people "in the know" make ignorant and irresponsible statements to this effect; like John Mallon, Contributing Editor in the January, 2006 issue of “Inside the Vatican”, titled "The Obedience Test"? To quote Mallon: “While the charismatic experience may not be to some people’s taste, (as though taste were an issue), it would be wise to be very circumspect about anything vaguely close to mocking—blaspheming—the Holy Spirit.” Just what can Mallon mean with “anything vaguely close to mocking – blaspheming – the Holy Spirit”? With the same logic one can be “vaguely close to being pregnant” or being in Paris or in New Jersey. So which is it?

Well let’s see: Conditions for Unpardonable Sin against the Holy Spirit are:

1. Refusal to repent one's sins,
2. Deliberate refusal of God’s mercy,
3. Refusal of Salvation (1864 CCC).

“…There are no limits to the mercy of God, but anyone who deliberately refuses to accept his mercy by repenting, rejects the forgiveness of his sins and the salvation offered by the Holy Spirit.137 Such hardness of heart can lead to final impenitence and eternal loss.” It is there in the Catechism (#1864) and it is there in the Bible. (Mt 12:31; Mk 3:29; Lk 12:10.) – There you have it: as clear as day. God cannot force his mercy on anybody; We have free will to either accept or to reject it. The reason these sins are unpardonable is because God cannot pardon anyone without consent; that would violate free will. It’s the old leading the horse to water but you cannot make it to drink. It has to drink to get water.

Of course Mallon should be well aware what blasphemy against the Holy Spirit really is. Yet he implies that criticizing the Charismatic Renewal is the same as blaspheming against the Holy Spirit. I cannot credit Mallon with this novelty though, this line of reasoning has been used by false prophets and followers of false prophets. Remember too that these sort of claims are in explicit contradiction to Catholic teaching, because Catholics are not bound to accept any prophet or prophecy. So drawing attention to an anomaly which claims to be coming from the Holy Spirit does not resemble, not even “vaguely”, the final refusal of God’s saving grace. Now how is that for manipulation from the "inside"?

I realize my position is not very popular these days -- I believe that the Charismatic movement is an aberration, and the charismatic “gifts” of today have nothing to do with the extraordinary gifts of healings, tongues, and prophesy in the early Apostolic Age. Writhing on the floor like serpents and waving arms crazily are not the gifts of God. God’s gifts are based on what transforms us into his own image, and not on inferior emotionalism.

If the gifts described in Acts were intended for everybody and for the entire Church Age then the gifts would not have ceased until the last century. In truth, there were very few cases of miraculous events even during Acts and these were never normative components of Christianity.