Kevin J. Symonds

While in Fátima last month, I referred to Rick Salbato in my first blog post. Rick recently went to his eternal reward and I would like to take a moment to focus upon the life, work and person of Rick.

Salbato is the author two published books: The Miracle of Damascus (also a video) and The Tongues of Satan, both written under the pen name “The Publican.” The Miracle of Damascus focuses on Myrna Nazzour and her claims to be receiving private revelations and various mystical phenomena. The Tongues of Satan is, essentially, an autobiography of Salbato’s life prior to and just after his conversion. The book also features commentary on the Charismatic Movement. In addition to these books, Salbato founded the web site Unity Publishing.

In reading his writings (books or web site), one very quickly comes to see that Salbato was no stranger to controversy. Because of his topics, combined with a strong and oftentimes combative writing style, Salbato became a controversial figure, dare I say, persona non grata. He wrote often on the subject of private revelation and his writing style indicated a direct and gruff personality, one that was off-putting to some people.

While Salbato’s writings are many, few appear to have known much about the man and his person. It is no secret that Salbato and I knew each other for several years. He went to his eternal reward on February 24, 2016 surrounded by family in California. When he was alive I dared not write about him to respect his wishes. In death, I am no longer so bound.

Richard “Rick” Salbato

My acquaintance with Salbato began in January, 2002. I was doing some research on the Internet when I came across Unity Publishing. Being extremely well read in Catholic thought and affairs, Salbato presented information in the light of Catholic teaching in such a way that I had not previously much considered (or, at least, valued). I wrote him an E-mail, an act which led to a more than a decade long correspondence and friendship.

Over the years as I continued my research into private revelation, Salbato continued to offer help and guidance here and there. In the summer of 2005, I was preparing for a trip to Europe and Salbato invited me to stay with him in Portugal as he was then living in Fátima. This invitation was significant because the visit afforded me a more in-depth opportunity to learn about the man, his character and personality. He was not just an “Internet friend” or a faceless avatar.[i] The time in Fátima was a blessing and a couple of events help to describe Salbato and his personality.

I wrote above that Salbato’s writings made him a controversial figure, especially for those on private revelation. His strong stances on specific cases made him unpopular, and, dare I say, a bane.[ii] What most people did not know about him, however, was that Salbato was rather well-connected, up to and including contacts in the C.I.A.[iii] The fact of his connections came out especially during and after my visit with him in Fátima.

Rick’s Apartment in Fatima.

Not a few people disbelieved Salbato when he claimed to have met Sr. Lúcia eleven different times. He spoke the truth and I can personally verify that he was on good terms with Sr. Lúcia’s convent. When I went to Portugal, Salbato was to pick me up at the airport in Lisbon. My baggage had not gone on the same flight with me—causing a delay—and I could not get word to Salbato. He left the airport to return to Fátima and he was gone by the time I was able to get out to the pickup area. When I finally got to Fátima, I went over to the information booth and sought help. Being a local, I figured someone had to know Salbato and how to contact him.

It turned out that the receptionist at the booth knew Salbato—except how to contact him. I mentioned that he knew Sr. [X] at the convent in Coimbra. This wonderful receptionist graciously called the convent and received Salbato’s number from one of the Sisters (Sr. [X], I believe). The receptionist wrote on the paper “Ricky” followed by the number. I went to a pay phone and, long story short, was able to connect with Salbato. If he was making up his claim about knowing the Carmelites in Coimbra, how did Sr. [X] know him well enough to use the diminutive for his name and provide his phone number?

The above question came in handy when, some days later, I met some good people who, regretfully, were among those who were quite skeptical of Salbato. They discussed with me his claim of having met Sr. Lúcia saying, “Kevin, Bishops come here [on pilgrimage] wanting to talk to Sr. Lúcia and not even they were able to do so. Why would Rick be able to meet her and not them?” Salbato had an advantage that these Bishops did not: he lived in Fátima and was friends with relatives of Sr. Lúcia. They visited her on a regular basis and he drove them to the convent.

I inquired of the above fact to him one day in private conversation. It is, after all, one thing to drive relatives to their visits with the famous surviving seer of Fátima; it is another thing to engage the seer in conversation. Salbato, respective of the family’s privacy (not knowing Portuguese helped tremendously), explained to me that he stood in the back and did not involve himself. Sr. Lúcia, however, motioned for him to come over and engaged him in conversation through a translator, thus began their visits.[iv] While I asked him to tell me the story, I never questioned Salbato and his claim. My time in Fátima showed me that he was telling the truth.

I recall four other things that Salbato discussed with me about Sr. Lúcia and/or her convent, three of which I shall mention here. The first was his explanation of how the Sisters choose a new postulant.[v] Second, that he had just helped the convent to purchase a computer so they could edit video footage of Sr. Lúcia around the convent.[vi] Third, and this might have been after my pilgrimage, he helped to coordinate the Sisters to watch a screening of The Passion of the Christ with Mel Gibson. On this last fact, Salbato himself wrote about it.

As I mentioned earlier, Salbato had a rather gruff personality—one that was very off-putting to anyone with a superficial understanding of him. If one were to read his autobiography present in The Tongues of Satan, they would see from whence came this gruff exterior. He was a sinner who had lived a hard life prior to his conversion, the details of which I leave for the leisure of the reader. There is one thing, however, that we discussed and which I believe will help people better appreciate the man and his work.

Prior to his conversion, Salbato would find it difficult to go to bed at night without the company of a woman. As he began his conversion, one of the things that he had realized was the miracle that takes place in the womb of a woman (and her concurrent dignity). He told me that once he realized this miracle, he immediately stopped treating women like objects. His book The Tongues of Satan indicates how well he lived this at first as he struggled to reform his life and grew in the grace of God.

Rick & Family

Salbato was a devoted Catholic who spent much time reading, studying, and praying. Towards the end of his life especially, he worked for the betterment of his family.[vii] When talking to people about the Faith, he would take a no-holds barred approach and tell the truth to people whether they liked it or not. He was a defender of justice for the “little guy” and we talked about this in Fátima through a story he gave from his younger years. In short, he hated injustice. If he saw a smaller guy being beat up, Salbato would immediately intervene.

This “defender” theme carried over into Salbato’s work on private revelation, He would not brook any error against Holy Mother Church. If a claim to a private revelation contradicted the teaching of the Church, Salbato would examine and weigh the facts. He then marshaled these facts to formulate reasons and proceed to tell it as he saw it. In the fourteen years of our friendship, few who disagreed with Salbato were ever able to refute him.[viii] To my knowledge, when he received criticism from people who respected his work, these remarks were largely based upon his tone and tenor in communicating the information.[ix] This observation, admittedly, is one to which I also subscribe and any disagreements were handled with dignity and respect.

Salbato was reluctant to allow people to defend him in the public forum. In this, he lived the spiritual work of mercy to bear wrongs patiently. I state before the bar of history that although he had a gruff exterior, if people looked past said exterior, they would have found a man who was a very serious and faithful Catholic. Salbato understood what it meant to practice the Faith. I do not say he practiced it perfectly, but I aver that the man tried not only to live the Faith as he understood it but to defend it as well. He was devoted to God and to the Blessed Virgin Mary in such a way that nowadays is rare to witness.

There are many stories that could be said of Richard Salbato by those who knew and loved him. I am but one writer who is graced with some ability to capture, albeit poorly, something of the man. His life and work with upholding orthodoxy and orthopraxy with private revelation now prepares to be passed to the pages of history.

For now, I bid a fond farewell to a man from whom I have learned much and can truly say was a mentor to me. He was my friend, and I pray that if he has entered into the eternal beatitude of God that he remember us who yet languish in this vale of tears. If he be found guilty of sin and in need of purgation, then join me in prayer for the repose of his soul.

Requiem aeternam, dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis!

---

[i] The pilgrimage to Fátima was also significant that year because Sr. Lúcia had died three months prior. The place was abuzz with the news and after-effect of her death. Salbato even gave me two holy cards that were printed for her funeral and which he had obtained during the ceremonies that February.

[ii] I remember being on a retreat shortly after returning from Europe in 2005. The priest leading the retreat talked to everyone about a very famous case of alleged private revelation. He believed the claim and was telling about people who, he believed, taught lies about it. To this effect, he specified Rick Salbato and Unity Publishing. He was unaware of my friendship with Rick and just having spent ten days with him. I waited to speak with this priest about his mischaracterization until a more opportune and private moment.

[iii] In my book Refractions of Light, I discussed in endnote 97 Salbato’s claim to me that he had indeed verified a famous quote attributed to Pope Urban VIII. I constructed my discussion in that endnote and the Q&A (#127) very carefully because I would not go against him unless I possessed absolute certitude, hence why I qualified my words.

[iv] I recognize that this act might contradict the idea that Sr. Lúcia was forbidden to speak to anyone outside of those approved by the Holy See. I call attention to a simple and terribly overlooked fact in the history of Fátima. The public, to the best of my knowledge, has never seen a copy of a specific written and official document that gives the exact terms of who was and was not allowed to see Sister and under what terms. There are bits and pieces of information scattered throughout a number of sources, but never is an entire document provided. Moreover, a new biography on Sr. Lúcia indicates that it was not a “gag order” placed on Sister by Rome, but rather her own wish to be hidden from the prying eyes of the world and curiosity seekers. It is in the light of these considerations (and perhaps others) that one must weigh Sister’s beckoning to Salbato.

[v] This selection is a story about which I do not believe prudent to reveal without the permission of the Sisters, which I do not have.

[vi] I am not sure what became of this project, though if memory serves it became a DVD that was published.

[vii] Rick moved back home to California in order to be with his family. I pray the family does not mind if I reveal that he told me that his motives were, at least in part, because, “my grandson needs me.” It betrayed a great love that Rick had for his family.

[viii] Attempts were made in various places to discredit Rick but in fourteen years I never saw a whole-scale rebuttal. I believe these remarks to be largely from people with little to no grasp on the person of Richard Salbato, and, in some cases, no firm understanding of Church doctrine and practice.

[ix] I should be clear to state that it was not impossible to argue a point with Salbato. I myself had done so, but, as stated above, only when there was absolute cause to do so.

The following is part 5 of a 5-part series exposing some of the disorders of the so-called “charismatic movement.” All the parts of this series add up to one homily entitled The Charismatic Gifts delivered by an anonymous priest some years ago. The whole homily can be read and shared on our parish’s web site.

When it comes to the charismatic gifts, the best attitude to have is one of indifference; when it comes to charismatic revivals, the best thing to do is stay away.

In the end, we should follow the example of the prayer of the publican in the Gospel today: humble, honest, and sincere, not seeking any sign from God, but only His mercy. It is a prayer that is a testament to the Holy Ghost’s continuous work in our souls that attunes us to those quiet whispers of His that we may be missing or ignoring.

Actually, it is in those quiet whispers that we often find the strength to persevere provided we do not waste time in seeking solace in useless signs or wonders; it is also in those quiet whispers of the Holy Ghost that we discover for ourselves His greatest charism, the one which prompted Christ to carry His Cross and hang on it, which truly revives all of us and sets our souls on fire. [The end.]

Fr. Ward’s conclusion to the series: And so concludes our five-part series, preceded by an introductory article by Your Pastor; it was an excellent homily by a brother priest exposing some of the salient problems of the so-called “Charismatic Movement.” It isn’t a comprehensive, doctorate-level academic analysis of it, but a good, solid summary of some very key points.

I might add to Father’s conclusion the following: sometimes, God even chooses not to whisper. It may occasionally please the Lord, as is best discerned by his Divine Judgment, to abandon a soul in darkness. In fact, such darkness and aridity is a very normal, even common phenomenon of the spiritual life. St. John of the Cross wrote with extreme intelligence and eloquence about it, and how these difficult moments are some of the most fruitful for the soul, if born well.

So Catholicism isn’t a sort of narcotic to reduce someone to a frenzy of irrational feelings, nor is it a teddy-bear to make one feel fuzzy feelings, nor is it a sort of spiritual ATM where we go to obtain every temporal whim we should like. It is a way of life; it makes one holy; and it saves one’s soul.

And for this reason, as a final reminder, we should be very dedicated to help others live this kind of life – and not so they can have their financial problems solved, their relationships in this world healed, their emotions cuddled, their self-esteem boosted, or their body healed. We wish all to live this kind of life, because the Catholic life is the one and only road God gave us to get to heaven. Can a non-Catholic get to heaven? It seems so, but if it’s hard for Catholics, it would only be that much more difficult for the non-Catholic who has not so many means for salvation at his disposal as a Catholic has.

But that’s a bit off point; the point is that we practice Catholicism for holiness and salvation, and the so-called Charismatic Movement is not that road, just a poor imitation of it. Let each one of us, as best we can, faithfully trod this road behind our savior, and help others to do the same. ■

Before getting into our article today, I warmly encourage all of our parishioners to dispose their souls for the beautiful, if challenging, penitential season of Lent. Ash Wednesday falls this week; let us remember that the ashes will do us no good if in our hearts we are not resolved to fight against sin, reform our lives, live our Catholicism better and love God and neighbor more.

The following is part 4 of a 5-part series exposing some of the disorders of the so-called “charismatic movement.” All the parts of this series add up to one homily entitled The Charismatic Gifts delivered by an anonymous priest some years ago. The whole homily can be read and shared on our parish’s web site.

[Note: Last week, the priest explained that the Church cautions souls against being greedy for extraordinary, truly charismatic gifts, because they can be sought for reasons such as vanity or curiosity, or because their manifestations could be false, or because their origins could be other than God.]

One such example of this, which is quite characteristic of revivals, is the apparent speaking in tongues. While remembering that charismatic gifts are always for the spiritual benefit of another soul, and in recalling how this gift of tongues was manifested in the Apostles on Pentecost, we get a clear sense of what this gift entails. When the Apostles, filled with the Holy Ghost and confirmed in grace, emerged from the upper room and stood before the crowd of various nationalities, they began preaching the Faith and each person heard them in his or her own language.

In other words, for the benefit of a person listening, the Apostles, although speaking one intelligible language, were understood by another person in his own intelligible language so that he could understand the truths of the Faith which are necessary for salvation. The gift was not for any other purpose but that; the Apostles were not announcing their favorite colors nor their top picks for the local father-son tag-team chariot semi-final races later that week.

Although not in this instance, the gift of tongues can also be manifested by way of a person speaking a language they have no knowledge of, but once again, for the instruction of another in that language in matters pertaining to the Faith.

Therefore, speaking in tongues, if it is authentic, is never under the form of unintelligible gibberish claimed as adoration or praise of God, which is what usually happens at charismatic revivals. The gift of tongues deals with intelligible languages, meaning the language possesses an order by which it can be known and understood.

Aside, then, from the fact that gibberish draws attention upon the person who is speaking, first of all, by giving us an intellect and will, God desires from His rational creation intelligent and volitional worship; unintelligible gibberish completely fails in this regard. Secondly, there is no purpose to it, no instruction is being given to another; nor is there any place for the gift of interpretation of the tongue because that gift is to make sure what is being taught is understood in the correct way (in other words, the gift of interpretation is a protection from the Spirit of Truth against heresy). And furthermore, we must beware that the demonic can influence a person to speak a language he or she does not know, and this can easily happen to people who desire to possess these gifts.

Hence why this gift must always be connected with the expounding and instruction of the Faith, and if conditions are otherwise, the gift is not from God nor is it authentic. It should be obvious, then, why the Church’s scrutiny and judgment in these matters is of great importance and why a silence by Church authority amounts to a tacit approval which can lead many souls astray.

(Part V, the last part, will be published in next week’s parish bulletin.)

The following is part 3 of a 5-part series exposing some of the disorders of the so-called “charismatic movement.” All the parts of this series add up to one homily entitled The Charismatic Gifts delivered by an anonymous priest some years ago. The whole homily can be read and shared on our parish’s web site.

The correct understanding of the proper place and function of the charismatic gifts establishes the grounds to legitimately call into question the purpose of so-called charismatic revivals and, most importantly, why we even see them in the Catholic Church.

Now the good will of the people involved in such things is not being criticized here.

With that said, and as stated earlier, these practices have a tremendous focus upon the emotions. It is not that our emotions are bad, but they require our reason in order to be governed or else they take on a mind of their own.

The essence of the spiritual life consists in the union of our wills with God’s, and since the path to such union is often difficult and trying (it is essentially the way of the Cross), God will from time to time give the soul some sensible consolations, a certain sweetness of His presence, in order to help the soul along and encourage it, sort of like an oasis in the desert. Our emotions tend to like this.

These consolations are more frequent when a soul begins taking the spiritual life seriously, but as progress is made, God will scale back on the frequency of the consolations in order to enable to the soul to begin taking more delight in Him rather than in the gifts He gives; it tests the soul’s resolve and also gives it more occasions to make acts of charity which are far more pleasing to God.

Unfortunately, many souls do not get this far and become alarmed when their initial fervor is lost and the consolations disappear. Instead of continuing on the straight path, and thinking God has abandoned them, they may inadvertently turn to things that feed the emotions in order to regain some sense of the consolations they once had.

In fact, a certain expectation (and it can be very subtle) begins to set in that this is the purpose and function of divine worship: how often nowadays is Mass attended with the intent to leave feeling personally affirmed and good about oneself.

Since the manifestations of the charismatic gifts are sensible to a large degree, it is easy to try seeking consolations in them. This really is not any different than when the crowd asked our Lord to show them a sign and our Lord retorted saying Perverse generation that seeks a sign.

The first thought of our spiritual life should always be God’s glory, not our own consolation and progress, and in so doing we actually serve our interests better because God will not lead us astray.

For good reason, then, has the Church always commanded great caution when it comes to the presence and operation of the charismatic gifts because, in general, they are often sought for the wrong reasons, out of curiosity, or because their manifestations can actually be false, either as a product of an emotional or psychological frenzy or arising from the demonic.

(Part IV will be published in next week’s parish bulletin.)

The following is part 2 of a 5-part series exposing some of the disorders of the so-called “charismatic movement.” All the parts of this series add up to one homily entitled The Charismatic Gifts delivered by an anonymous priest some years ago. The whole homily can be read and shared on our parish’s web site.

It is interesting to first note that the present-day charismatic movement has its origins in Protestantism, which means it originates in a forum that fundamentally rejects rightful spiritual authority, so the result is a misunderstanding and an actual blindness as to the presence, place, and function of the charismatic gifts, which is the duty of the Church’s authority to determine.

We must remember how easily we can be deceived by the powers of hell who can present themselves as angels of light. Unfortunately, this misunderstanding seems to have infected the Catholic circles and, together with the modern collapse of the true sense of the sacred, has led to a great deal of confusion nowadays about these gifts and their purpose. This confusion can lead to spiritual downfall or the retarding of true spiritual progress if one is not on guard.

In many Protestant circles, for instance, it is considered a sign of holiness or approval from God to possess one of the charismatic gifts and it could be a safe bet that such a mentality has also crept in among Catholics, although perhaps not as widespread. This could not be further from the truth.

The Church’s teaching on the charismatic gifts, supported by St. Thomas Aquinas and the writings of the great saints, theologians, and mystics, is that these gifts belong to what is classified as “extraordinary graces,” that is, graces that are freely given by God to a person but for the specific purpose of the sanctification of another soul, not the sanctification of the person who has the gift.

These gifts are distinct from sanctifying grace. As we know, sanctifying grace (or charity) renders our souls pleasing to God, it is a reflection of God’s very life in the soul and remains there as long as there is no mortal sin to drive it out; in other words, sanctifying grace is ordinary and extended to all souls for the purpose of their own personal sanctification and salvation. We need it in order to go to heaven and it can increase in us with the performance of penance and good works.

This is the key distinction and of extreme importance in understanding the matter: sanctifying grace is for our own holiness; the charismatic gifts are for the sanctification of another. Therefore, an individual’s personal holiness is not a condition for the possession of a charismatic gift, which means an individual can be in a state of mortal sin and still have a charismatic gift.

So, for instance, a priest in a state of sin while hearing confessions could very well be given a gift from God to read the soul of a person making a confession in order to bring to light sins the person has forgotten or is too embarrassed to tell. In such a case, the gift has no bearing on the soul of the priest but rather prevents the penitent from making an incomplete confession or committing a sacrilege.

This shows overall that the charismatic gifts are completely gratuitous and are completely dependent upon the good pleasure of God. In granting these gifts for a person to use, God may do so only once, or occasionally, or even habitually, but these gifts are never to be desired or prayed for, keeping in mind that when God does grant a person the habitual presence of a gift (like He did for Padre Pio), God always attaches a great deal of suffering with it in order to keep the person humble and to manifest that it is completely His work; in fact, this would be one sign that the gift is authentic. We can conclude from this then that it would be highly suspect for someone with a charismatic grace to openly advertise having it because it would lead others to place their hope in the gift or the person and not in God, which is completely contrary to the purpose of the gift.

(Part III will be published in next week’s parish bulletin.)

The following is part 1 of a 5-part series exposing some of the disorders of the so-called “charismatic movement.” All the parts of this series add up to one homily entitled The Charismatic Gifts delivered by an anonymous priest some years ago. The whole homily can be read and shared on our parish’s web site.

In the past fifty or sixty years, we have been witnessing the surge (or onslaught depending on how one wishes to look at it) of what could be called religious revival meetings, which usually occur within Protestant circles but have also and regrettably found a growing niche within Catholic circles.

Regardless of where, there are common qualities: usually there is some dynamic speaker or panel that works up the crowd, there is so-called “praise and worship” that has music and gestures that are characteristic of high-school pep rallies, and there seems to be the presence of various manifestations of the Holy Ghost, usually in the form of what could be called speaking in tongues, interpretations, healings, and the like.

Catholic circles tend to take this all one step further by sometimes having these things within the framework of Mass or Eucharistic adoration. Doing things like this is quite foreign to the Church’s sacred spiritual and liturgical tradition as taught authoritatively by the great saints and doctors – masters of the spiritual life – and ratified by the Church’s Magisterium for centuries.

Forms of worship such as these put a great deal of weight upon the emotions, and although God can and does always draw good from anything, this does not preclude the fact that such forms are fundamentally flawed in that these transform the spiritual life and its progress into an emotional experience; as a result, the focus of the spiritual life is taken off the will and perfection of charity and placed upon things that are not essential.

The epistle heard today[1] to the Corinthians was written because the new Christians in Corinth questioned St. Paul about the value of the charismatic gifts of the Holy Ghost, gifts which seemed to have permeated throughout the Church at Corinth. Because of this, an attitude of comparing and classifying the gifts had arisen among the people and this began leading to jealousies and feuds.

To correct the problem, St. Paul reminds them that the gifts all have a single source, the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, and so are not matters for boasting. St. Paul then enumerates nine such gifts, including, as mentioned, speaking in tongues, interpretations, and healings, along with other ones like miracles, prophecy and so on.

In the early stages of the Church, like as was seen at Corinth, the presence of these gifts was quite common, but the reason for this was to assist with the diffusion and confirmation of the teachings of the Church in new regions, which is the mission of the Holy Ghost accomplished through the Apostles. And for this reason precisely, the Apostles had these gifts in their fullness – just peruse the book of Acts – and this is one of the reasons why three thousand were baptized by St. Peter on Pentecost.

Nonetheless, these gifts were not confined to the Apostles, other people had them, but as the Church matured and Christianity spread and rooted, the presence of these gifts became less and less prevalent, although never entirely disappearing. They still are operating today, from public figures of recent memory like Padre Pio, to the majority of which are private instances, but the degree of their public presence is certainly a matter of debate.

(Part II will be published in next week’s parish bulletin.)

---

[1] This homily was delivered on the 10^th Sunday after Pentecost in the Extraordinary Form. The Epistle, roughly equivalent to the “First Reading” in the Ordinary Form of the Mass, for that Sunday is 1 Cor 12:2-11.

Sacred Heart Catholic Church Imlay City, Michigan  Tel: (810) 724-1135

Fr. Paul Ward       A Reasoned Critique of the Gnostic Charismatic Movement Charismania: Introduction      I have continually admonished the Gentle Reader and all our parishioners to trust in Catholicism, and avoid turning to the so-called “Charismatic Movement” or “Pentecostal Movement” which have, of late, been making great inroads in Catholicism. Sometimes even Bishops, who should be teachers of doctrine and guardians of Catholic tradition, have been swayed by Charismania, often thinking, it seems, that the emotional hype it generates in some would serve as a solution to the dwindling numbers of heads and dollars. (Some also seem to think that more dollars will solve the head count problem.) But this is not new, for many times in history we have seen large numbers of bishops go astray – Arianism and the Orthodox schism serving as outstanding examples. Charismania is nothing but Gnosticism rehashed – the heresy promising “secret knowledge” (from which comes the name, as gnosis is Greek for “knowledge”) to some sort of initiated persons; and all the non-initiated are categorized as lesser, deviants, inferiors, and so on. It promotes the exercise of miracles as if the human person could perform them at will. It stresses, like the arch-heresy of Modernism, the addiction to emotional experiences and then interpreting them as supernatural experiences. It orients the soul to pursue the extraordinary gifts of the spiritual life, such as miracles, locutions, etc., while leaving doctrine, penance, sacraments and the works of charity aside. It encourages people to babble like animals, or like a jazzy scat, and then call it “the gift of tongues”; and repeatedly I have met Charismaniacs who claim to be able to teach these skills to others. Its origin, historically speaking, is not in the Apostles, but in a group of Pentecostal Protestants – who neither believe nor practice the Catholic faith that Jesus gave us through the Apostles – in the 1800’s. This is only a small, initial list of what’s wrong with Charismania, and how it should be avoided and ignored like every other heresy. In the next few weeks, to further edify and inform the faithful, and to provide sound reasons why the Gentle Reader should avoid so-called “charismatic” events, be they presented as Catholic or no, I will do the following. I will reprint, part by part, a long homily a fine priest delivered some years ago on this very topic. I do not know who this priest is, but a scholarly friend forwarded me the homily. Perhaps if the Gentle Reader hears the same warnings from a different priest, he or she may take the matter more to heart and be less critical or suspicious that it’s “just all Fr. Ward’s opinion.” Rather, the deep disorder of the so-called charismatic movement is not a dubious opinion, but a well-formulated judgment. The reasons for this evaluation are presented above, but also in future bulletin articles of the upcoming weeks. The whole homily will be posted on the parish web site as of this weekend.       A Reasoned Critique of the Gnostic Charismatic Movement Charismatic Movement: Introduction Charismatic Movement Part I: Gifts of the Spirit, Then and Now Charismatic Movement Part II: The Nature of Extraordinary Gifts of God Charismatic Movement Part III: Emotions and Seeking Consolations Charismatic Movement Part IV: “Tongues” Charismatic Movement Part V and Conclusion: Final Advice

-James Likoudis

It is admirable that there is greater prayer to, and devotion to, and invocation of the Holy Spirit, the Sanctifier of souls. It is the Holy Spirit with His seven-fold gifts and fruits of the Spirit who transforms the baptized into living members of the Body of Christ, and living Christ’s divine life. And we also know that all are called to salvation and that the “Holy Spirit breathes where He wills,” and we are “not to extinguish the Spirit.” However, beginning in January 1967 there were claims that at the University of Duquesne in Pittsburgh there had occurred a new ‘outpouring of the Holy Spirit” on students giving rise to a charismatic movement of Neo-pentecostalism with its manifestation of extraordinary (and miraculous) gifts such as “baptism in the Spirit” (to the detriment of the sacraments of baptism and confirmation), “speaking in tongues” [glossolalia], prophecy, and healing, all as in the very early Church. This was alleged to be part of the renewal of the Catholic Church sparked by the holding of the Second Vatican Council [1962-65]. Early on there appeared, with some admitted cautions (“By their fruits you will know them”) — statements of Popes and Bishops (in the U.S. , Canada, and France, not to mention others) expressing approval of those engaged in the “charismatic renewal.”

It was not long before serious criticism began to be leveled against certain features accompanying liturgical and sacramental practices and ecclesiological shortcomings on the part of those involved in the “charismatic renewal.” Examples of hyper-enthusiasm, eccentric and odd behavior (even grotesque: I think of Pentecostal meetings with tongue-speaking, prophecies, testimonials by Protestants who denied the doctrine of the Trinity, and tongue-speaking Catholics who abandoned the Church for some kind of interdenominational sect); ugly manifestations of elitism and cultism setting “charismatics” apart from ordinary Catholics; and a false ecumenism involving rejection of the “institutional Church” as the sole Ark of Salvation—all such raised serious questions concerning fidelity to Catholic teachings by some “charismatics.” Then there were other problems : Did not St. Paul tread warily in dealing with Acts 16 and the First Corinthians’ account of charismatic gifts? Did not the same Apostle declare childish and unbalanced those who desired to speak in tongues and whose behavior brought discredit to the Church? Such gifts were not to be sought after, and besides genuine glossalalia was meant as a sign to unbelievers, not believers! Did not glossalalia become quite rare after the first century? And if so important, why did the ancient Church allow extraordinary gifts to practically die out by the 4^th century? With regards to Vatican II stimulating the rise of the “charismatic renewal”, why did the Council Fathers specifically declare that extraordinary gifts “are not to be rashly sought after”? It was the claim to revive the miraculous charisms of the early Church which, after all, gave the “charismatic renewal” its dramatic appeal to many of its followers and sympathizers. But another question arose: were the miraculous charisms claimed by charismatic renewalists really the same as those seen in the ancient Church? Or were they actually counterfeit, and explainable by natural causes or as fabricated by one’s restless subconscous mind? Moreover, do not such phenomena similarly appear among pagan religionists? That the influence of the devil as “the ape of God” might be at work in feigning glossalalia, prophecy, healings and “slaying in the Spirit” among those especially prone to unstable emotions, could not be excluded. Does not this “enemy of God” delight in causing confusion and division among Catholics? These are only some of the considerations that lent to a far less favorable view of “charismatic renewal” than that held by various Catholic clergy.

Certainly, one of the most powerful factors underling the dynamism of the “charismatic renewal” is the seeking of direct contact with God, to have a “felt-experience” of God, to “feel God.” This is assuredly a special temptation for those with an unblanced desire for “religous experience” and who display an exaggerated attachment to sensible feelings and favors and constantly seek an emotional satisfaction that can be easily masked as an all-too-easy “joy in the Holy Spirit.” It is curious that the desire for a “felt-experience of God” has been a leading motif in the controversial Eastern Orthodox spiritual movement called Palamism which also raises serious theological questions concerning the nature of grace. In the words of a modern Palamite spiritual guide: “When man unites with God by grace, he receives also the experience of God, he feels God. For otherwise how could we unite with God without feeling His grace?” However, the entire history of Catholic mysticism witnesses to the seeking of “felt-grace,” and deliberately desiring extraordinary experiences and miraculous interventions of the Holy Spirit in one’s life, as opening the doors to dangers and illusions. The great Cathoic Doctors of the Church and masters of the spiritual life have rather stressed that the closest to Christ are those who live by faith (not feelings) and who practice the evangelical virtues; they seek not the multiplicity of miraculous touchings, and sensible joys and consolations but rather to do the ordinary tasks of life well in the spirit of faith, hope, and charity- all for God.

Interestingly, somewhere I have read that in the New Mass Lectionary, passages referring to glossolalia were deliberately omitted: “It has no pastoral value today”. [General Introduction, II. 17.2a].

Dr. Elizabeth Salas

What is the difference between an emotional encounter and a spiritual encounter? The saints explain.

Encountering a person for the first time — especially a dynamic, attractive, or compelling person — is exciting. Indeed, “encounter” suggests a spontaneous or unexpected meeting between two persons that leaves a deep emotional impression, even a message or realization unique to that moment.

Beyond just knowing about a person, encountering a person seems to be deeply intimate, even inexplicable. An encounter of the soul with Jesus may be yet more intense, since he knows us “in our inmost being.”

But to capture Christ, personally and deeply within us, requires a soul willing to mature in its encounter.

The “Felt” Encounter

Since we are embodied souls, we naturally seek an encounter with God that we can feel — an emotional encounter. God created us like this; indeed, our faith is sacramental because our senses lead us to all the knowledge we are capable of acquiring. Because we delight in our senses, we want to taste, touch, and experience God bubbling within us. We want to cry holy tears, to feel inner joy.

Often, such an encounter is had when we receive unexpected mercy, unexpected welcome, or see God’s providence at work starkly, suddenly. We “feel” God when, lonely in some hidden way, we realize we are in fact not alone.

Or, faced with a failing relationship, we realize God’s arms are always open. God, who seems far off, “comes down” to our hearts. There is nothing more pleasurable to us than this “feeling” of God, and such an experience can be the “door” to a life that is lastingly spiritual.

However, we must not confuse an emotional encounter with a personal encounter. Because of concupiscence, our senses are greedy, turned inward. We want to relish the “felt” encounter. We relish what we “get out of” spirituality — the pleasure or coziness that spirituality produces — rather than the Giver himself.

Getting Beyond Emotions

When emotions run high, we tend to think we are quite close to God, even holy. Spirituality seems easy, and so all intellectual work on our part seems superfluous. We come to the point where we can’t read a long article, or hear a homily that is too philosophical or weighty in theological categories. But then the teachings of the Church and of the great scholar-saints cannot be communicated accurately to our souls, and we are actually distanced from God.

Moreover, emphasizing emotion tends to de-emphasize criticism and discernment — anything that would dampen fervor — under the pretext of receptivity or humility. Thus extraordinary phenomena, such as tongues, are generally accepted without criticism, making us spiritually vulnerable.

St. John of the Cross writes that, in such phenomena, “the devil habitually meddles so freely, that I believe it impossible for a man not to be deceived in many of them unless he strive to reject them, such an appearance of truth and security does the devil give them” (St. John of the Cross, Ascent of Mt. Carmel, II.27.6). The saint also cautions, “In order to deceive the soul and to instill falsehoods into it, the devil first feeds it with truths and things that are probable in order to give it assurance and afterwards to deceive it” (II.27.4).

That we “get something” out of such an encounter or that it “works” for us, therefore, is not an argument for its safety.

Settle for More Than “Crumbs”

When emotions run low, we think God is absent. We then attempt to recycle previous emotional encounters. The song, the chapel, the book that stirred us, the prayer meeting, listening to so-and-so’s talks: these we return to, hoping to squeeze from them another benefit. But since emotions are passive — they just “happen” to us — it is it is impossible to “stir them up.”

St. John of the Cross refers to this discontent as “spiritual gluttony,” and it is a roller coaster. We voraciously eat the “crumbs” under the table (created things) instead of the bread—the Creator himself.

Desire for these “crumbs” binds the soul “to the mill of concupiscence,” since crumbs never truly satisfy (Ascent, Book I, Ch. 7.2). We are mired in animalism, not exalted in mysticism. Searching for this kind of encounter, or promising it, can lead to despair, self-deception, and spiritual showmanship.

When a “felt” encounter is experienced, it is likely God’s only way of reaching us because of our “tender and weak” souls. He often meets us in the midst of situations that are undesirable, sinful, or imperfect
in themselves, not to affirm where we are at but in order not to lose us completely (Ascent II.21.2-3). He wants to lure us out, to a true personal encounter.

God is indeed our “friend,” but we need to learn that He is also God — to appreciate his transcendence.

The “Spiritual” Encounter

Truly to encounter God, we must break out of the exhausting and dangerous cycle of spiritual thrill-seeking; when we feel desolation, we must not recoil but embrace it. Like the Blessed Mother, we may “know not” how God can communicate himself to our souls in any other way, but we give our fiat anyway. We determine to
focus on the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist, because we believe God is truly present in them.

By our choice to commit ourselves to God regardless of feelings, we show him how much we love and honor him, that we are truly his friend! We cannot be fooled by his apparent absence or disfavor.

Relying on faith, the assurance of things “not seen,” we are content to let God work secretly within us, “holding still” with our thoughts and desires so that God the artist can “paint” us (Dark Night of the Soul,
10.5.2). We choose to remain in a simple state of loving attention to God. Our prayer and sacramental life is characterized by regularity, acceptance of aridity, solitude, patience, gradual growth and humility. Instead of becoming upset if there is no “result,” we pray and receive the sacraments with patience, knowing that we do not “waste time.”

When Darkness is Light

In 1959, after ten years of torturous spiritual desolation, St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta prays: “Do with me as you wish — as long as You wish, without a single glance at my feelings and pain . . . Your happiness
is all that I want . . . please do not take the trouble to return soon.—I am ready to wait for you for all eternity.”

When we approach God more closely as he is, the darker that encounter will be for us. True encounter is a desert, not a tropical resort, this side of heaven.

But in the midst of it, St. John of the Cross describes an awareness of God’s presence that is truly about God, not us. Mysteriously, as we endure aridity, our longing for God increases, and our emotions gradually take on a new character.

As St. John Paul II suggests, “A love which has matured . . . frees itself from . . . anxiety by its choice of [the] person. The emotion becomes serene and confident, because it ceases to be absorbed entirely in itself and attaches itself instead . . . to the beloved person . . . becomes simpler and soberer” (Love and Responsibility).

A true, loving encounter with the transcendent God requires commitment, not fervor. However, in his time, that commitment will also brighten our hearts.

Dr. Elizabeth Salas is assistant professor of philosophy at Sacred Heart. Her article, “How to Personally Encounter God,” was originally published in Mosaic magazine by Sacred Heart Major Seminary (April, 2017).

By Thomas M. Reid, O.C.D.S.

Copyright © 2009 Thomas M. Reid
International Standard Book Number: 078-0-9842372-0-3
Published by The Little Flower Press
Rochester Hills, MI 48309
http://www.TheLittleFlowerPress.com
Available at Carmelite Book Service
810-357-9499
Printed in the United States of America

Reproduced by permission of the author

Advertisement

What is known as Carmelite spirituality dates back to Elijah, the Prophet, and the hermits who joined him on Mt. Carmel to worhip God in solitude and prayer. This spirituality was enhanced and perfected in the sixteenth century through the writings of two Carmelite Doctors of the Church, St. Teresa of Jesus and St. John of the Cross. Since that time thousands of Carmelite friars and nuns have sought spiritual perfection by applying the spiritual doctrine of these two saints to their individual lives. This doctrine has for its foundation, solitude in prayer and purgation fromt he soul of all that is not God or of God.

The Charismatic movement in religion was begun in the second half of the nineteenth century within the Pentecostal segment of Protestant faith communities. This movement claimed a special relationship with the Holy Spirit that was denied to others who failed to follow the Charismatic tenants of faith and worship. Eventually some Catholics seeking a revival of their interest in religious practices, began to practice this form of worship and attempted to fit it into the doctrines and piety of the Church extant for centuries.

Recently statements have been made within the Charismatic community that the Charismatic way of worship is compatible with, and in fact based on the spiritual doctrines expounded by St. John of the Cross in this major works. This pamphlet explores the question whether or not these statements of Carmelite compatibility and foundations of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal are in fact true.

Carmelite Spirituality and the Catholic Charismatic Renewal

Acknowledgements

In 2003 I was attending a Secular Carmelite community meeting for the purpose of giving a talk on the spiritual doctrine of St. John of the Cross. The talk was to be a general overview of his descriptions of the various stages a soul goes through in its efforts to reach union with God in this world. As I passed through my description of the first stages, I began to comment on the entry of the soul into the more passive stages of spiritual growth in which the soul experiences much greater suffering, solitude, aridity, and anxiety over its loss of the good feelings and consolations experienced when its love for God was beginning to blossom. I remarked that the weakness and limitations of the Charismatic approach to spirituality is exposed here because those souls cannot retain the Charismatic spirituality and at the same time enter the more advanced and difficult spiritual life of the passive nights as described by St. John. Little did I know that in the room were several Charismatic practitioners, one of whom rose to do battle with what I had just said. A lively debate ensued. Not long after that I heard a well known Charismatic claim that the spiritual doctrine of St. John of the Cross was the foundation for the Charismatic Renewal. I certainly did not agree with that position, and found myself discussing this contradiction with a friend who had done voluminous research on the Charismatic Renewal. She offered to give me the results of her research, and the seed of this pamphlet was begun. This friend is Ruth Lapeyre of Royal Oak, Michigan. Without her assistance I could not have acquired enough knowledge of the Charismatic approach to the spiritual life to enable me to refute the claims being made by the Charismatics of expressing the spiritual doctrine of St. John in their approach to prayer and spiritual growth.

As usual, my Carmelite friend Patty Palmer has been an invaluable aid to me in getting this pamphlet ready for publication. She has proof-read it several times and formatted it for publication. In addition she prepared the cover for me. God bless her generous heart.

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Chapter One: Catholic Sacramental Doctrine
• Chapter Two: The Charismatic Renewal
• Chapter Three: The Charismatic Renewal and Carmelite Spirituality
• Chapter Four: The Spiritual Doctrine of St. John of the Cross
• Conclusion

Introduction

I am a Secular Discalced Carmelite and for several years have served as the Master of Formation of the Community of Secular Discalced Carmelites at Assumption Grotto Parish in Detroit, Michigan. The original purpose of this pamphlet was to discharge what I perceived to be my duty as Master of Formation of the secular Carmelite spirituality which comes to us primarily from the spiritual doctrine of our father St. John of the Cross and our mother St. Teresa of Jesus, also known as St. Teresa of Avila. However, I believe this discussion can be of benefit to other secular Carmelite communities. The topic is the similarity or dissimilarity of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal’s spiritual approach versus traditional Carmelite spirituality. It has come to my attention recently that claims are being made that the spiritual doctrines of St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila are being employed to support the aims and practices of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. In my opinion that claim is erroneous. The methods and goals of the two spiritualities are in fact not compatible or even similar. The descriptions of the Charismatic practices in this book are dependent upon the accuracy of the reports that were researched in preparation for the writing of this book.
Thomas M. Reid, O.C.D.S.

Chapter One: Catholic Doctrine

There are some basic propositions that underpin all spirituality which identifies itself as Catholic. First, there can be no doubt that the Catholic Church is the one true church founded by Jesus Christ as the means of obtaining eternal salvation; and that Christ has left His own authority in the Catholic Church. Recall the statement of Christ to Peter made on the occasion of Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God: “I give you the keys to the kingdom of Heaven. What you shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven. What you shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” A clearer transmission of authority to Peter and his successors and to the apostles and their successors cannot be imagined. Therefore, any spirituality or charism within the Catholic Church that tends to lessen or dilute this transmission of authority must be rejected. Also, any denial that the Catholic Church is the means established by Christ to reach eaternal salvation through adherence to its teachings must be rejected as that denial contradicts the basic principle of specific transmittal of authority just stated.

The Church has taught throughout its history that outside of the Catholic Church there is no salvation, meaning that salvation comes through the Catholic Church and from no other source. The principle was clearly enunciated by Pope Pius IX in his Syllabus of Errors. This principle has been most recently reiterated in the coduments of the Second Vatical Council and the letter of Pope John Paul II, Dominus Jesus, and earlier in the writings of Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII. In addition, the Church teaches that the primary channels of grace are the sacraments instituted by Christ and given as a gift to the Catholic Church. The Church has always taught that in the Sacrament of Baptism, in addition to other graces and the remission of Original Sin, the recipient receives the Holy Spirit in a special way. In the Sacrament of Confirmation the indwelling of the Holy Trinity through the mediation of the Holy Spirit is augmented in the soul receiving that sacrament. Both of these sacraments imprint an indelible mark on the soul and may only be received once. Any claim that an additional form of Baptism must be received by the faithful in order to be in a position to receive salvation is in fact an error. Similarly, any teaching that some souls are favored over others by a special, personal coming of the Holy Spirit into a soul in a way different from that available to all souls who seek the gifts of the Holy Spirit through the sacraments of the Church is likewise erroneous.

Chapter Two: The Charismatic Renewal

It cannot be denied that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal has received some approval from the Church. That approval, however, must be understood to be limited in its scope to matters within the authentic magisterial teachings of the Church and is not a blanket approval for Charismatics to teach matters which in fact contradict those magisterial teachings. Also, it is apparent that certain gifts claimed to be received by those in the Charismatic movement are in fact extraordinary gifts given by God to an individual of His choosing for His specific purposes, and particularly for the benefit of others, such as the gift of healing or the gift of prophecy. There are many well-documented cases of miraculous healings being brought about by calling upon God in the person of the Holy Spirit to accomplish a healing which defied all natural explanation. Also, it is equally well-documented and approved by the Church that other gifts such as stigmata, both visible and invisible, have been granted by God to particular souls. What must be said about this, however, is that the giving of these gifts is rare indeed and are given by God not for the benefit of the recipient of the gift only but for the benefit of others. Whether a recipient of such a gift from God is a Charismatic, defined as one who follows some or all of the practices and beliefs of the Charismatic Renewal described throughout this pamphlet, or is not a Charismatic is irrelevant.

Something also must be said about the claim of those who identify themselves as Charismatics that the so-called gifts of tongues or the gift of praying in tongues is common among the members of the Charismatic Movement, both Catholic and non-Catholic. The gift of tongues that is claimed manifests itself as a speaking in a language that is unknown and that forms no part of any dialect or language spoken by identifiable inhabitants of any particular part of the world. In this regard we are reminded by members of the Charismatic Renewal that the figt is found in Scripture, particularly in the gift of tongues granted to the Apostles after the first Pentecost. We should, however, recall that the description in the Acts of the Apostles of this gift was that the Apostles spoke in their own language, the Aramaic dialect of Hebrew, but were understood by the hearers in their own language. This is not the same thing that is claimed by those in the charismatic Renewal.

There is an account of an individual who set about to test the praying in tongues phenomena at two Charismatic conferences. At the first conference he claimed to be praying in tongues and an interpreter provided the listeners with a translation of what the speaker was saying. This particular man memorized the phraseology of the prayer in tongues that he made in the first conference and the same prayer was repeated at the second. conference. The interpreter at the second conference gave a completely different translation of the same utterances. In addition, this individual, who was fluent in the Hebrew language, recited in Hebrew the 22nd [or 23rd] Psalm with which we are all familiar and which begins with the worlds, “The Lord is my Shepherd I shall not want.” The interpreter at that conference advised the listeners that the translation of the prayer was something totally unrelated to the 22nd Psalm. We must, therefore, immediately be put on our guard regarding this particular claim of the Charismatic, that he possesses the “gift of tongues.”

It is the practice of the Charismatic to claim to transmit the Holy Spirit from one lay person to another by the laying on of hands. This practice seems to be at odds with the practice of the Catholic Church of communicating the Holy Spirit and the graces of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit through the intermediation of the sacraments given to the Church by Christ. In rare instances throughout the history of the Catholic Church God has granted to certain chosen individuals the role of intermediary to bring about conversion and physical healing. We must always bear in mind that this is not a universal gift that can be chosen and is granted rarely by God and only for His own particular purposes, which remain unknown to us.

The Charismatic Movement was begun by Protestant Pentecostal denominations toward the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century. Much of the doctrine advanced by these non-Catholic denominations contradicts the constant teaching of the Catholic Church. Those Catholics who call themselves Charismatic have to an alarming extend adopted some of the positions of the Protestant Charismatic which contradict the teaching of the Catholic Church. Immediately we are put on our guard to weigh carefully and evaluate, with the assistance of a knowledgeable spiritual director, any participation we will have in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, and to what extent. Some Protestant Charismatics wish to form a single church and seek the involvement of Catholic Charismatics in that pursuit by combining their conferences with Catholic enthusiasts who adopt similar approaches to spirituality. No Catholic may participate in what amounts to indifferentism, the belief that any church that professes a belief in Christ is as good as any other church that professes the same belief. The Catholic Church has not condemned the general concepts of the Charismatic movement, but it does condemn indifferentism. It is in the spirituality pursued where the errors of the Charismatic are revealed. By focusing on the raptures, ecstasy, and prophecy as the measure of spiritual growth the Charismatic leaves himself vulnerable to abandonment of his faith altogether. The problem is what do they do when all of this ceases, as it must do, to continue their growth in the spiritual life. They must necessarily leave all of the enthusiasm behind or stagnate there; or worse, give up the spiritual life altogether.

Chapter Three: The Charismatic Renewal and Carmelite Spirituality

Now let us examine whether or not the spirituality and practices of the Charismatic are similar to and compatible with the traditional Carmelite spirituality of St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila. The Charismatic has adopted some of the terminology that has long been used by the Carmelite Order in the spiritual formation of its members. The language originated with the writings of St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa. For instance, the concept of union with God is frequently employed to characterize the experiences of the Charismatic while at prayer.

Some questions immediately come to mind concerning this adopted language: Does the Charismatic attach the same meaning to union with God as found in the writings of St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila? Do these Carmelite saints advocate the same attitudes and dispositions of mind and heart in order to advance spiritual growth as advocated by the Charismatic? Does the Charismatic see the dynamics of the spiritual life in the same way as the Carmelite saints do? Do they see the experiences of affliction and consolation of the soul progressing toward union with God in the same way as the Carmelites? The answer to all these questions is decidedly, no.

The spiritual path of the charismatic and that of the Carmelite are parallel lines that never meet. Where do we see described in the writings of St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa that souls publicly undergo the experience of being “slain in the spirit,” trembling, shaking, jerking, groaning, weeping, laughing, or even the occasional animal sound, such as barking? The Charismatic movement is now advocating the use of some of the doctrines of St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila to support their particular approach to the spiritual life. This claim of similarity of spiritual doctrines to those of the Carmelite saints is erroneous. In fact, the Carmelite saints caution against seeking the experiences so revered by the Charismatic because of the ease of demonic or self-deception. The writings of these two saints exhibit a profoundly different view of how the soul advances toward God, and of the extent of the spiritual journey required for reaching union with God. The soul empties itself of all that is not God rather than filling itself with more and more new experiences essentially on the natural rather than the supernatural level, according to the two Carmelite Doctors of the Church.

Chapter Four: The Spiritual Doctrine of St. John of the Cross

St. John of the Cross postulates his entire spiritual doctrine on the simple fact that one ought to seek one’s self in God and not seek God in one’s self. If there is a primary principal underlying the entire spiritual doctrine of St. John, it is that the road to union with God consists in mortification, self-denial, both interior and exterior, and the complete emptying of the senses and the spirit of the self. The suffering of the purgations necessary to remove the obstacles to union with God are the essential means to this end, rather than enjoying a road of rapture, ease, and spiritual consolations. He teaches that no spiritual progress is made that is not accompanied by some suffering. For instance, he says in Book II of the Ascent of Mount Carmel, chapter 7, paragraph 5, that:

Some are content with a certain degree of virtue, perseverance in prayer, and mortification but never achieve the nakedness, poverty, selflessness, or spiritual purity that the Lord counsels us here, for they still feed and clothe their natural selves with spiritual feelings and consolations instead of divesting and denying themselves of these for God’s sake.

The Charismatic thinks that a denial of self in worldly matters is sufficient without an annihilation and purification of spiritual possessions. One who sets out to acquire for himself spiritual experiences, whether they be ecstasies or some lesser consolation such as being “slain in the spirit,” as the objective of his spiritual life, is in fact acting contrary to the spiritual doctrine of St. John of the Cross. St. John states unequivocally that such a path will never lead to union with God. St. John attributes these early desires to the very beginnings of the spiritual journey, a very immature state in the spiritual life, which eventually must be left behind. In general, St. John of the Cross breaks down the spiritual journey into two specific dark nights: the night of sense and the night of spirit, and each of these is further sub-divided into an active and passive night. As the soul advances through each night, the darkness deepens and is accompanied by greater affliction and suffering. We must recall here the significance of the term “night” in the spiritual doctrine of St. John of the Cross. It is not a depressing gloom that settles over the soul like pathological depression. In the doctrine of St. John of the Cross the concepts of “night” and “dark night” mean the inability of the soul to perceive the path that God has placed it on, and from this darkness comes the aridity and suffering encountered along that path.

The first dark night in the doctrine of St. John of the Cross is the night of the senses. The objects of the senses, both the exterior senses and the interior senses of the intellect, will, imagination, and phantasm, are darkened of their natural objects. Here an emptying of the soul of natural objects occurs and the sensory part of man is being prepared to be accommodated to the spirit in the later “night of the spirit.” The active phase of this “night of sense” involves the efforts which we ourselves are able to make to accomplish certain limited spiritual objectives. The soul here begins the basic spiritual ground work, such as the removal of habitual sin from its life and the development of habits of spiritual practices and avoidance of the occasions of sin. The passive “night of sense” which follows the active “night of sense,” however, is primarily managed by God through His grace and takes place largely unseen by the soul because the work being done in the soul is not being done by the individual, but by God Himself.

This passive “night of sense,” which lasts a very long time for most people, is followed by a period in which the senses, having been purged and purified, leave the soul at peace and restful. It is most often accompanied by a much greater degree of aridity in prayer and in spiritual consolations than the night that preceded it. This is a period of spiritual growth which St. John tells us must be clearly understood. The soul must not conclude because of the aridity that it has lost the grace of God and now should abandon its efforts at spiritual development since they have proven futile. Rather, he counsels, the soul should enjoy the peace, trust in God that He has not let the soul fall from His hands, and that work is being done in the soul by Him that is completely unseen. This is not a period of great spiritual joy and exaltation, but rather a period of dryness and aridity that could last a very long time, years in most cases. He urgently counsels souls and spiritual directors not to conclude that what is required now is additional effort on the part of the soul at what it has done before, and at seeking spiritual favors from God. This effort by the soul, he claims, will defeat the work of God in the soul, which is to deepen its purification and bring it closer to the ultimate goal of union with Him. It is a necessary stage that must be experienced by all souls for their purification if they are to advance.

Another major principle found in the doctrine of St. John of the Cross, is the avoidance of what he describes as supernatural apprehensions. In Book II of the Ascent of Mount Carmel, chapter 11, paragraph 7, St. John describes six kinds of harm that result from accepting enthusiastically supernatural apprehensions, even though they have a divine origin. They are as follows:

• First, faith will gradually diminish.
• Second, if not rejected they are an impediment to the spirit because they detain it and prevent it from soaring to the invisible.
• Third, the soul begins to develop a possessive attitude toward these communications.
• Fourth, a man gradually loses the effect of these communications and the interior spirituality which they produce.
• Fifth, a man gradually loses God’s favors because he receives them as if they belonged to himself.
• Sixth, through the desire of accepting them one opens the door to the devil.

God touches the soul in different ways in order to propel the soul forward and in the direction that God wishes it to go. St. John’s universal counsel to all souls with regard to supernatural apprehensions of any kind is that they must be dismissed. The reason for this is the vulnerability of the soul to be deceived by experiences that are well within the power of the devil to produce in order to misdirect the soul away from God. This is where the Charismatic parts company with St. John of the Cross. The Charismatic actually pursues these experiences as signs that he has been favored by God and is among the elite chosen ones. St. John states unequivocally that in these experiences God can accomplish His purpose in the first instant and that fleeing from them will not frustrate God’s objectives. So if St. John of the Cross counsels rejection and avoidance of supernatural apprehensions of all kinds, how much more does he oppose seeking to have such consolations and experiences. This is what he describes as seeking God in the self. Those practices of the Charismatic which promote and seek spiritual experiences and special effects outside of the Sacraments instituted by Christ to transmit those graces are directly contrary to the spiritual cautions of St. John of the Cross in their most fundamental form. In Book I of The Dark Night, St. John describes such seeking of consolation in spiritual and religious matters as “afflictions of the beginners,” which must eventually be overcome and set aside. The opposite is true of the Charismatic. It seems that the principle effort of the Charismatic is to produce as often as intensely as possible a spiritual experience on the emotional and natural level, which signifies to him the presence of God through the Holy Spirit in his soul. You can readily see from these examples the contradiction between the spiritual doctrine of the Charismatic and that of St. John of the Cross.

Certain quotations from the writings of St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila have been used by those in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal to illustrate that the experiences they strive to achieve are in fact approved by St. John of the Cross as signs of God’s favor to soul. The quotes that claim to support the Charismatic spirituality are taken from the The Spiritual Canticle and the Living Flame of Love. These two works by St. John of the Cross are descriptions of a very advanced soul who has traversed all of the earlier levels of spiritual growth, with all the sufferings and purifications of those periods. These extracted consolations usually represent momentary gifts from God to encourage the soul to continue forward in its movement towards Him. These touches are call by St. John “infused contemplation,” which he states cannot be produced by the soul regardless of how much effort is applied by it to do so. They cannot come to a soul except by the granting of these gifts by God. However, this advanced stage of spiritual development has been preceded by a long and painful period of purgation, not by endless ecstasies and raptures as Charismatic events.

What could be further from the interests and expressed goals of the Charismatic than the doctrines of St. John of the Cross. Such goals of the Charismatic as being “slain in the spirit,” transmitting this spirit from one person to another by the laying on of hands, the extremes of the so-called Toronto Blessing, which causes those who are affected to believe they are preferred over others by the Holy Spirit, are a few examples. The so-called Toronto Blessing is sometimes characterized by the antics of imitating the sounds of animals. They claim the Holy Spirit causes them to laugh for hours or to perform physically embarrassing actions in front of large crowds. When one is “slain in the spirit” they claim to be frozen to the floor and unable to move for long periods of time. The basic principal with regard to these matters is that they are beneath the dignity of the human being, the dignity that was given to human nature by God through the Incarnation. The second thing that is obvious here is that the effects described above are in the realm of the physical world, and not spiritual at all. They certainly are not compatible with anything proposed by St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila.

It has also been claimed by the Charismatic that most saints have been granted extraordinary supernatural experiences by God, when the opposite is true. Very few saints report extraordinary supernatural phenomena occurring in their lives and many report immense spiritual suffering on the road to union with God. We know that St. Therese of Lisieux, The Little Flower, for the last year and a half of her life suffered terrible temptations against the virtue of hope, but never lost her faith and never let go of the pursuit of her Divine Spouse. We are discovering now through her letters, that Mother Teresa of Calcutta spent 45 years of her life in spiritual darkness, almost completely without consolation. It is this emptying of the spirit, of everything that is not God, which results in this high degree of sanctity that we see in great saints.

Looking further into the spiritual doctrine of St. John of the Cross, he tells us that following the passive night of sense, a soul enters into the passive night of the spirit, if God chooses to move it forward to that level of spirituality. The sufferings encountered in the night of the spirit are immensely more difficult than those encountered in the night of sense. The further the soul progresses toward spiritual perfection the greater is the suffering and greater the degree of emptiness and aridity experienced by the soul.

Charismatics are encouraged to experience being “slain in the spirit,” a phenomenon resulting to some degree in loss of consciousness and falling to the ground. This is sometimes followed by an explosion of expressions of praise and prayer, whether expressed in singing or shouting or reciting mantras with others who claim to be experiencing the same thing. On the other hand, we see St. John of the Cross describing characteristics of the spiritual life as involving silence, solitude, emptiness, renunciation, and mortification. Stanza 35 of The Spiritual Canticle, speaks entirely of interior solitude and a longing for solitude from all exterior things. St. John uses the wonderful expression “sounding silence” to describe the interior state of the soul that has advanced to the spiritual betrothal. This certainly does not sound like the description of the Charismatic form of prayer described above.

St. John of the Cross laments the deficiency of spiritual directors who make the mistake of attaching too much importance to supernatural experiences reported to them by their directees. The opposite approach or response is what we see in the Charismatic who seeks and celebrates extraordinary and emotional experiences through his prayer practices. In Book II of the Ascent of Mount Carmel, chapter 19, paragraph 11, St. John says this:

The spiritual director should try to see to it that his disciple is not detained by the desire of giving heed to supernatural apprehensions which are no more than small particles of spirituality and the only thing he will be left with. And, he should turn him away from all visions and locutions and teach him to remain in freedom and the darkness of faith in which spiritual liberty and plentitude is obtained and consequently, the proper wisdom and understanding of God’s pronouncements.

St. John also says in chapter 18 of Book II of the Ascent of Mount Carmel, paragraph 3:

Numerous imperfections consequently arise for the person loses humility, he thinks his visions are significant, that he possesses something profitable and that he is prominent in God’s eyes. He is pleased and somewhat satisfied with himself which is against humility. Although this person is unaware of it the devil then secretly augments this feeling and begins to suggest thoughts about others. Whether they receive these visions or not or whether their visions are authentic or not; such thoughts are contrary to holy simplicity and spiritual solitude.

This spiritual teaching of St. John is diametrically opposed to the recommendations of those in the Charismatic Movement who are encouraged to pass the Spirit to one another so others can have the same up-lifting spiritual feeling as the one who imparts the Holy Spirit has had.

A Charismatic will state that it is undeniable that special experiences are given to individuals and that they are most likely from God. That is true, but what does St. John of the Cross say about this? In chapter 21 or Book II of the Ascent in paragraph 2 he says the following:

You will say if it is true that God is displeased why does He sometimes answer? I reply, sometimes the devil answers but when God responds He does so because of the weakness of the individual who desires to advance in that way: this person could become sad and turn back or imagine that God is unhappy with him and become overly affected or there may be other motives known to God prompted by that person’s weakness and because of which God sees the appropriateness of condescending with such an answer.

In chapter 22 at paragraph 5, he says the following:

Any person questioning God, or desiring some vision, or revelation, would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending Him by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.

In paragraph 7 of the same chapter, St. John says:

One should disbelieve anything coming in a supernatural way and believe only the teaching of Christ the Man, as I say, and of his ministers who are men. So true is this that St. Paul insists, “If an angel from heaven should preach to you any gospel other than that which we men have preached let him be accursed and excommunicated” (from the letter to the Galatians, Chapter 1 verse 8).

At the end of chapter 22 of Book II of the Ascent of Mount Carmel, St. John presents the following caution to spiritual directors regarding directees who present descriptions of visions, locutions, or other special experiences claimed to be of a supernatural nature:

Spiritual directors should guide them in the way of faith by giving them good instruction on how to turn their eyes from all these things and on their obligation to denude their appetite and spirit of these communications. They should explain how one act done in charity is more precious in God’s sight than all the visions and communications possible since they imply neither merit nor demerit. And how many who have not received these experiences are incomparably more advanced than others who have had many.

There is an interval between the active and passive nights that is characterized by aridity and lack of consolation which St. John of the Cross describes in chapter 8 of Book I of The Dark Night of the Soul. The end of paragraph 3 says the following:

God now leaves them in such darkness that they do not know which way to turn in their discursive imaginings. They cannot advance a step in meditation as they used to. Now that the interior sensory faculties are engulfed in this night He leaves them in such dryness that they not only fail to receive satisfaction and pleasure from their spiritual exercises and works as they formerly did, but also find these exercises distasteful and bitter.

The encouragement of the Charismatic to seek experiences, exhilarations, and enthusiasms in the spiritual life, as can bee seen from what has already been said, are trul opposed to the spiritual doctrine of St. John of the Cross on which all Carmelite spirituality is based. The two are not compatible in any way. In fact, if a Charismatic wishes to adopt Carmelite spirituality he must abandon most of the prayer practices of Charismatics in order to enter the spiritual solitude and emptiness which St. John says is indispensable for the spiritual life. A very vivid description of the afflictions of the “dark nights,” especially the “night of the spirit” is given in chapter 6 and 7 of Book II of The Dark Night. In chapter 6 of Book II of the Dark Night, at the end of paragraph 4, a very terse summary of the experience of the struggling soul is given by St. John; he says:

For the sensory part is purified by aridity, the faculties by the void of their apprehensions, and the spirit by thick darkness.

The conclusion that must be reached is that Carmelite spirituality and the Catholic Charismatic Renewal spirituality are not the same, with the possible exception of the very immature beginnings of the spiritual life, when enthusiasms are common. With regard to the claim by the Charismatic that the divine touches experienced by the soul are common and should be sought by all, the opposite is true. Direct your attention to the statement in Book II of The Ascent of Mount Carmel, chapter 32, paragraph 2:

For God grants them to whom He wills and for the reason He wills. It can happen that someone will have done many works and yet God will not bestow these touches and another will have accomplished far fewer works and nevertheless receive and abundance of the most sublime touches. Accordingly, although it may be a better preparation it is unnecessary for a person to be actually employed and occupied in spiritual matters in order that God grant the touches from which he experiences these feelings. Most of the time this favor is given when it is farthest from the mind.

And lastly, in Book II of the Ascent of Mount Carmel, chapter 23, paragraph 4, St. John says in part:

We must disencumber the intellect of these spiritual apprehensions by guiding and directing it past them into the spiritual night of faith to the Divine and substantial union with God lest the solitude and denudation concerning all things, which is a requisite for this union, be impeded by the hindrance and weakness these apprehensions occasion.

Something should be said regarding the supernatural phenomena that afflicted St. Teresa of Avila. It was a matter of great regret to St. Teresa that God granted her extraordinary supernatural and divine touches at times when they were least expected, and at times they caused her embarrassment. She knew that she was privileged by God in His granting of these touches and that they were granted to bring about some great good in her and in those around her. However, she tells us in the Seventh Mansion of The Interior Castle that as one reaches union with God, these experiences cease. The ultimate advancement in spiritual development according to St. Teresa is perfect conformity of one’s will to God’s will. The two wills become one: God’s.

Conclusions

The practices and experiences of the Charismatic as described herein are characteristic of the immature, beginning stages of the spiritual life. They are self-centered and emotional in nature. They manifest the problems that St. John describes as the problems of beginners. Spiritual gluttony and avarice are very much a part of the life of the Charismatic. This is probably true for every neophyte in the spiritual life, but the problem with the Charismatic is that they don’t seem to have an avenue out of these weaknesses and defects leading to sound spirituality. Rather, they advocate continuing more or less permanently in these experiences typical of the beginner: to seek emotional consolation and extraordinary events in prayer, to pursue visions and healers to the point of arguing with the authority of the Church over the question of the validity and soundness of their pursuits. What is recommended by St. John of the Cross is rather than to foster these kinds of apprehensions and enthusiasms, the soul should flee from them and have no regard for them. In clinging to the desire for unusual spiritual experiences, the Charismatic leaves himself open to the deceptions of the devil. Because of the effort and wish to have unusual experiences such as being “slain in the spirit” and receiving the Toronto Blessing, the soul is defenseless against the wiles and tricks of the devil. The Charismatic believes that he is the favored recipient of some special gift from the Holy Spirit that is denied to others who do not follow the same path as he in the spiritual life. He sees himself as superior to others for this reason. Spiritual pride is practically defined by this attitude.

On the other hand, St. John of the Cross outlines a much different course for the serious seeker of union with God. Rather than look for more and more consolations and extraordinary experiences in prayer, St. John advocates the abandonment of these pursuits, the emptying of the self, the rejection of spiritual apprehensions, the seeking of silence and solitude so that God may find a place in the soul, alone. Unity with God is brought about by afflications that purify, and purgations that empty the soul, not more and more emotionalism and falling down and yelling yout.

Pax Christi, sit semper vobiscum.