Rama P. Coomaraswamy, M.D.



The rapid spread of the "Charismatic Movement" within the Catholic milieu has taken even its protagonists by surprise. There is hardly a parish or convent left that has not in sonic way been influenced by this religious "phenomena," indeed, some leave become totally Charismatic. It has received the approbation, if not the blessing, of some of the highest members of the hierarchy. All this being so, it becomes incumbent upon us to examine this "religion for our times," this "authentic renewal"[1] in the light of what its leading exponents have stated.


Few Pentecostals would deny that this "Evangelical" movement is other than a manifestation of the "New" and "Post-conciliar" Church. As Ralph Martin, one of the movement's founders, states: "the renewal began, not apart from the Church, but amongst a group of men and women with a deep commitment to the Church and to the renewal that was advocated Vatican II."' As for the actual founders, they are well described by James Manney: "Although their backgrounds are varied, they shared at least two common interests before experiencing the baptism of the Spirit: a fervent concern for a fundamental and communitarian line, and a high degree of theoretical agreement about the right shape and strategy for the renewal. All were deeply influenced by the Cursillo Movement;[2] and shared an intense experience living and working together in a unique Christian community they formed at Notre Dame in 1964-1967."[3]

To backtrack somewhat, the Pentecostal sect was founded in 1901 by a young Methodist pastor, Charles Parham. At the Bethel Bible School in Topeka, Kansas, he claimed to have received "the baptism of the Holy Spirit," an experience that was immediately. associated with the "gift of tongues."'[4]After hearing Charles Parham speak of this event, William Seymour, a Holiness preacher, took the Pentecostal doctrine to Los Angeles and there led the Azusa Street revival. From Azusa Street the movement spread rapidly throughout the United States and abroad. While there are now a great many "classical" Pentecostal denominations, it is estimated that there are some 13 to 15 million individuals who consider themselves to be Pentecostals.[5]


The movement was initially rejected by the "mainline" Protestant Churches. However. with time, members of various Christian denominations began to introduce "Pentecostal" ideas within their respective organizations  and. By 1960, there were Episcopalian and Lutheran clergy involved actively in what now came to called "neo-Pentecostalism.”


In 1960, a group of lay professors at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, Pa. (Founded by the Holy Ghost Fathers). Returned from a Cursillo Congress where they met with Ralph Martin. Mr. Martin, influenced by David Wilkerson’s (a Pentecostal minister) book “The Cross and the Switchblade,”[6] sought out contact with the Pentecostals.[7] This was arranged through the mediation of an Episcopalian pastor, W. Lewis. In January of 1967, four members of the Duquesne University group joined the Pentecostals in a prayer meeting. Impressed by the “participation in prayer,” and the “living theology” that they saw , two of them, Ralph Martin and Patrick Bourgeois (a theology professor) returned the following week and sought the “laying on of hands” that they might receive “the baptism of the Spirit.” They were prayed over, and the results as described in Martin's own words were:


"They asked only that I make an act of faith that the Holy Spirit's power would enter into me. I began to pray rapidly in tongues. There was nothing particularly exalting or spectacular in all this. I felt a certain sense of peace, a need to pray. I wis curious to know where all this would lead.”[8]



The following week, Ralph imposed his hands on two other colleagues at Duquesne and they experienced the same result, accompanied with glossolalia. In February of the same year, a group of some thirty students and professors were similarly "initiated."' As Martin had been a graduate student in philosophy at Notre Dame (specializing in Nietzsche), it was only a matter of time before the movement spread to his Alma Mater.


According to the Canadian magazine Vers Domain, the first seat of the movement was in the house of the chaplain of Opus Dei at Notre Dame. Indeed, the spread was not limited to the laity. Thus, for instance, Father Connelley describes how both Trappist and Benedictine monks, not willing to await the arrival of Ralph Martin, rushed out and found their own local Pentecostals to "initiate" them, and how, in turn, they spread the Spirit among Catholics in their area."[9]

From the start the movement was greatly assisted by the Protestant Pentecostals. To quote Kevin Ranaghan directly:


"One could not accurately relate the story of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit among Roman Catholics in the lastfour years without repeatedly pointing out the outstanding contribution of Protestant Pentecostals...  Not only has there been a shared unity and fellowship in the work, but time and time again the Lord has used the service of' brothers and sisters in Christ from denominations other than Roman Catholic to initiate, to nourish, and to mature the outpouring of the Holy Spirit among Roman Catholics."[10]


          This assistance was not limited to the spiritual sphere, for according to the same source, funds were provided for the founders to travel and preach the "new word" by the "Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship."


Our concern, however, is not to diagram in detail the phenomenal growth of this movement, but to come to terms with its basic nature. One suspects that the movement is but another "Enthusiasm,"[11] as far as the majority of its members are concerned. Whether or not the movement as such lasts, it has been the medium for spreading among the Catholic faithful a whole host of dubious concepts under apparent ecclesiastical approval. These concepts are unfortunately going to be with us for a long time. Let us consider first the issue of "Faith." From a Catholic viewpoint, Faith must be considered both objectively and subjectively. As the Catholic Encyclopedia (1908) states: "Objectively it stands for the sum of Truths revealed by God in Scripture and Tradition and which the Church presents to us in a brief form in her creeds; subjectively, faith stands for the habit or virtue by which we assent to these truths." Faith, says St. Thomas, is "the act of the intellect assenting to a Divine Truth owing to the movement of the will, which is itself moved by the grace of God." (Summa Tlieol. 11-11 iv, a, 2). Such definitions cannot be taken lightly, for as St. Thomas says elsewhere, "the principles of the doctrine of salvation are the articles of faith" (Coininentary on I Cor. 12:10), and as St. Paul himself said, "without the faith it is impossible to please God" (Heb. xi. 6). Thus it follows that, as the Catholic Encyclopedia defines it, Orthodoxy is “right belief or purity of faith."


Opposed to this “hard-line” or “essentialist" (the term is Andrew Grecley's) approach to faith is that of the modernists. For them, to again quote Andrew Greeley, "faith is primarily an encounter with God and Jesus Christ rather than an assent to a coherent set of defined truths." This outlook is variously described as "Existentialist," as "Encounter theology," as "Personalism," and reduces faith to the realm of experience and feeling. Such a "faith" may include an orthodox Catholic view (in so far as such is not specifically excluded) but, in fact, rarely does, and is often reduced to what Maritain calls "a simple sublimating, aspiration" (Tiie Peasiiiit of Gerrotte). It is a faith that allows us to believe whatever we want. And so it follows that:


"The people involved in the charismatic renewal are basically men and women of a new and richer faith. Faith of course, is a gift of God, a grace, an unearned favor. It comes to love serve and adore Jesus with all our hearts, the Jesus of faith and of an interior, visceral Christianity" (Jacques Maritain). This is the faith of' the Pentecostal. As Dorothy Ranaghan says:


“Believing the Word of God, by witnessing the life of the Word lived out in the lives of Christians, by seeing the results of faith in the beauty of those around us...”[12]

Faith then, for the Pentecostal, is "experiential" and this characteristic h as been noted by many of their writers. Thus, Clark states: "men of all kinds are eager for the experience of i the supernatural... If Christ is someone who can be experienced... If there is to be a renewal in the mission of the Church to the world, there must be a renewal in the personal experience of Christ. The whole charismatic renewal is a renewal of faith."[13] James Byrne speaks of "an experience of Christ, or a conversion experience" and Father Gelpi, S.J. says that "the most basic question posed by the charismatic renewal is one of conversion to God. To understand the complexity of the conversion process, one must come to some clarity about the meaning of experience and of religious experience. " Taking Alfred North Whitehead as one of his authorities, Father Gelpi goes on to reiterate the phraseology of Maritain. "His (The Spirit's) gentle touch is closer to a visceral perception than to the perceptions of the five senses."[14] Ralph Martin, in describing the Pentecostal "birth," says the entire affair is an "experience" that people must "come into,"and Kevin Ranaghan acknowledges that in the language of the sect, people ask, "Have they received yet ... ?" or, "Have they come into the experience yet?"or, “Have they come into the experience yet?” [15]


May one not ask, if our-Catholic faith is to be reduced to what Schillebeeckx calls "The Sacrament of the Encounter with God," what need do we have for the institutional Church? And, in reverse, may we ask, if we have the institutional Church with Her Sacraments "without which" as St. Augustine says, "a person cannot enter into that life which is true life," (Tract 120 on John), what possible need could we have for the Holy Spirit to be given to us by heretics? Let us examine in more detail the principle "experience" that Pentecostals undergo, the so called "birth of the Spirit."


It is very difficult to find a clear-cut definition of "baptism of the Holy Spirit," for as Father O'Conner says, it is "quite difficult to determine what exactly is essential to it."[16] Father Vin- cent Walsh describes it as "an internal religious experience (or prayer experience) whereby the individual experiences the risen Christ in a personal way. This experience results from a certain 'release' of the power of the Holy Spirit, usually already present within the individual by Baptism or Confirmation."[17] John Healey quotes theologian Kilian McDonnell, O.S.B. as saying, "baptism in the Holy Spirit manifests itself in an adult when by either a crisis act or a growth process he says 'yes' to what objectively took place during the rite of initiation (Batism and Confirmation)." Now, all this phraseology attempts to disguise who has received Confirmation. As Father Gelpi, S.J. puts it, "a classical Protestant Pentecostal theory of conversion from the reception of the Holy Spirit. It designates the latter as a 'second blessing' over and above the con- version. And it regards tongues as the only decisive sign of the reception of the Spirit." He adds quite correctly that "there is no way to reconcile such a theory with Catholic doctrine."[18] Thus charismatics, in their attempt to delineate this alien rite from Catholic sacraments, must attempt a variety of subterfuges. Among these are the denigrating of the sacraments to the level of "public affirmations of the faith before the community," and the concept that the new rite "releases" the Holy Spirit's "power," previously only potentially present because of the sacraments. All this makes very little logical sense. Indeed, how can one reduce to logic what is a phenomena and an experience? As Father Gelpi says, "Spirit Baptism .is a self- validating experience" which "brings self-integration, freedom, the enhancement of creativity and greater selflessness to one's actions." (Shades of Dale Carnegie!) Certainly, we can hardly ask for more clarity, for as the

same source says, "the Catholic charismatic renewal is ... suffering from a vacuum, in its pastoral catechesis." This simply means that the movement has no well-defined doctrine. In theory, then, the sacramental nature of the rite is denied, but in practice, it is insisted on.


Accompanying this "release" of the "power" of the "Spirit," are a variety of charismatic "gifts." Among the most characteristic of these is '.speaking in tongues." As Father O'Conner states, "that which marks the difference between the Pentecostal prayer meeting and prayer meetings of other types is chiefly the exercise of charisms." Indeed, the "gift of tongues" is to be sought after, for as James E. Byrne states, "Tongues, then is a valuable gift of prayer, it is an important gift and should be sought and valued."[19] He continues, "once received tongues should be used regularly. The most appropriate use is in the daily prayer." What exactly is this gift? Byrne describes it as "a charismatic gift in which an individual speaks aloud in an unlearned vocabulary.”[20] Father Gelpi calls it a "vague emotive response to the impulse of the Spirit,"[21]  Father Walsh is more specific and more confusing. He states, "praying in tongues is a gift whereby the person prays to God in a language which he does not know, by simply 'yielding' to the action of the Spirit ... the person does not use his rational powers of memory or intellect." Yet, this form of prayer "begins and continues as long as the person wills...(and) is totally under the person's control. The person decides when he wishes to pray in tongues and when he wishes to stop. The person however has no control over what words will be spoken..."[22]


The Scriptural phrase of speaking in tongues occurs first in Acts: 2:1-15 where, following the Feast of Pentecost, the one hundred and twenty disciples were heard speaking “with diverse tongues, according to the Holy Ghost gave them to speak.” There were in Jerusalem a diversity of races and peoples such as to represent "every nation under heaven." All were "confounded in mind" because every man heard the disciples speaking the ”wonderful things of God" in his own tongue. The glossolalia (the Greek word for this charism) thus described was, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia (1908), "historic, articulate and intelligible" and the listener understood the speaker. The same source tells us how “subsequent manifestations occurred at Caesarea, Palaestina, Ephesus and Corinth, all polyglottal regions.” Indeed, this same gift has been manifest, in more recent times, in such cases as St. Francis Xavier, St. Anthony of Padua and St. Vincent Ferrer


It would seem however that even in Apostolic times, abuses crept in, for St. Paul instructs the Corinthians (xiv 37) to employ none but articulate and “plain speech" in their use of the gift (9), and to refrain from such use it church unless even the unlearned could grasp what was said (16). No tongue could be genuine "without voice" and to use such a tongue would be the act of a barbarian (10, 11). Tongues, even then, had apparently deteriorated into a mixture of meaningless inarticulate gabble (9, 10), with an element of uncertain sounds (7, 8), which might sometimes be construed as little short of blasphemous (12:3). The Divine Praises were recognized now and then, but the general effect was one of confusion and disedification for the very unbelievers for whom the normal gift was intended (14:22, 23, 26). Thus used, tongues became for the church  source of schism and scandal (23). If there is any connection between what goes on today among the Pentecostals and what happened in Corinth in Biblical times, then the warnings of St Paul also hold, for he asked that the faithful do all things "decently and according to order" (40)


It is usually held by both orthodox theologians and Pentecostals that this charism was given to the early Church and then disappeared for an idterminate period of time. While they interpret the nature of this charism and the reasons for its disappearance differently (classical Pentecostals say the church was “unfaithful” to the “gifts”), the use of “unintelligible” language seems to have re-surfaced in the time of the Renaissance. Father Kinox in his excellent book on “Enthusiasm,” discusses its re-appearance among the “French prophets” of the 17th century where it cropped up among the Huguenots of the Cevennes and among the appelant Jansenists. It next appeared in 1830 in the neighborhood of Port Glasgow in England and spread among the Irvingites and other “revivalist” groups. It is a phenomena that has appeared among the Mormons, the Shakers and a long list of similar sects - always of course, in association with the “Spirit.”[23]


According toDom Peter Flood, O.S.B., a recognized authority in moral and medical matters, glossolalia is “mere gibberish, not having the philological structure of any language,” and is produced by the uncontrolled power of vocalization, as in the phenomena “of hysteria and in tantrums of young children not yet capable of sustained speech."[24] His studies, based on tape recordings, led him to believe that all the emotions felt in the prayer sessions were those of sensory excitement, because certain of the lower brain centers were being stimulated while not being controlled by higher mechanism. Such a view is certainly consistent with some of the opinions expressed by the charismatics themselves.


The Church has always held that the gift of tongues is a gratiae gratis datae, that is, a gift given for the sake of others. Further, the saints repeatedly warned against an individual desiring or seeking such gifts lest they be deluded by satanic powers. Again, it has always considered this particular gift as an inferior one, and St. Paul ranks it next to last in a list of eight charismaa. It is a mere “sign” given for the sake of unbelievers, not believers (I Cor. Xiv: 22). But , if the gift of tongues is unintelligible, it loses its main evidential value. Moreover, if the person using this “gift” does not use his rational power, memory or intellect, with what is he praying and of what value is his prayer? No language has ever been identified with this type of Pentecostal gibberish, either in its earlier manifestations, or at the present time - indeed, tape recordings have never been consistently interpreted by those who claim this parallel gift or function. One simply cannot accept, on the basis of either revivalist behavior or charismatic claims that this has anything in common with the “tongues of angels.” Finally, no canonized Catholic saint has ever manifested this “charism” in the way that the Pentecostals understand it, and Father Thurston doesn’t even mention it in his study of mystical phenomena.[25] Ifall this is not sufficient warning,let us consider the opinion of Father Knox:


“To speak with tongues you had never learned was, and is, a recognized symptom in cases of diabolical possession.”[26]


Now, please understand, I am not saying that all the Pentecostals are possessed by the Evil Spirit. What I am saying, however, is that for Catholics to "seek and value", this "charism," for them to use it frequently in public and private prayer, for them to consider it a sign that the Spirit has descended upon the individual is, to say the least, hardly prudent. Prudence is, after all, both a cardinal virtue and a gift of the Holy Spirit. I am also saying that to leave oneself open to “vague emotive responses" is to leave oneself open to influences the nature of which one can never know with certainty. This is clearly demonstrated in another quote of the Ranaghans which is most frightening:


I felt myself tremble and recognized clearly and distinctly an odor of boiling sulpher, an odor which the chemical laboratory permitted me to know well.” (Emphasis mine)”


It would be impossible to examine all the opinions that the charismatic movement entails. In order to sample their attitudes on a variety of topics the following quotation is given:



“All of this must be taken and given in the context that God does not have a plan for His people, a strategy for the salvation of the world... We subjects of this King (Christ, I presume) are Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists, Mennonites, Pentecostals, and others. As a rule, our families have not always loved or trusted each other very well. But Jesus is determined to be Lord of all His people and He is outpouring His life-giving Spirit upon us all. No matter what church background we come from, no matter what serious theological difficulties may still lie between us-Jesus is teaching us that we are basically and fundamentally called to be one people. One Holy Nation, one royal priesthood, a new humanity led by the New Adam... Another good fruit of the charismatic renewal that can permeate the whole Church is the discovery with the Lord of the role of community in normal Christian life. We have discovered, and the whole church needs to experience that we are not meant to be saved as isolated individuals, but as brothers and sisters who belong to each other...”[27]


With regard to the Catholic Church, he states:


"It is not the Lord's will to create from the Catholic charismatic renewal another new denomination of church; but it is the Lord's will that we make every effort in the Spirit to be one with the Catholic Church....   Let us pray incessantly for our bishops, for upon them rests the heavy responsibility which they must exercise now of recognizing the voice of the Lord among us.... We must be in harmony with the bishop and pastor, wherever possible cooperating with them in their pastoral, supporting them with our prayer, but also sharing with them our discernment and vision of the Lord’s plan for the renewal of the Church.”[28]


We see, then, a summary of Charismatic views presented to us by one of its foremost exponents, or rather, should we say, a compendium of errors that has been consistently anathematized by Papal Encyclicals and Ecumenical Canons of the Traditional Church. Even a "penny catechism Catholic" knows that he cannot worship in common with heretics, that "renewal" involves get- ting rid of the "old man," and not creating a "new humanity," that salvation is an individual affair, and not a community experience, and that Catholicism was perfectly viable before the Charismatics brought to the Church their modernist "discernment and vision."


Yet despite all this, the Pentecostal vision can be said to be consistent with Vatican 11. Consider the following quotations taken from the "Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World":



“It has pleased God to men holy and save them not merely as individuals without any mutual bonds, but by making them into a single people, a people which acknowledges Him in truth and serves Him in holiness. So from the beginning of salvation history He has chosen men not just as individuals, but as members of a certain community."


Thus we are witnesses of the birth of a new humanism, one in which man is defined first of all by his responsibility towards his brothers and towards history..."


And again from the “Decree on Ecumenism:”


“The brethren divided from us also carry out many of the sacred actions of the Christian religion. Undoubtedly in ways that vary according to the condition of each church or community, these actions can truly engender a life of grace and can be rightly described as capable of providing access to the community of salvation.”


The Charismatic religion can thus claim, with justice, to be the full flowering of the religion of the "New" and "Post-Conciliar" Church. It is no wonder, then, that it has received the approbation and blessing of the hierarchy and even of the Pontiff. The Pope himself had warmly greeted the Pentecostals and addressed them directly. While voicing certain vague cautions, he stated:


“You have gathered here in Rome under the sign of the Holy Year; you are striving in union with the whole Church for renewal-spiritual renewal, authentic renewal, renewal in the Holy Spirit. We are pleased to see signs of this renewal; a taste for prayer, contemplation, praising God, attentiveness to the Holy Spirit, and more assiduous reading of the Holy Scriptures. We know likewise that you wish to open your hearts to reconciliation with God and your fellow men." Paul VI, May 19, 1975


And to the leaders of the movement he directly stated:


“We are very interested in what your are dong. We have heard so much about what is happening among you. And we rejoice.”  Observatore Romano, Oct. 11, 1975


If any doubt about the Pope’s attitude remains, one has but to recall that Cardinal Suenens had stated that, “should Paul VI request it, he would, in obedience, immediately dissociate himself from the movement." Such a request had never been made.


The Catholic hierarchy has been, with few exceptions, highly supportive of the movement. Cardinal Willebrands has stated that "the mission of the charismatic renewal is.to remind all the people of God that we all belong with Jesus Christ, baptized in Him - that we have received the gift of the Spirit." Cardinal Suenens, whose attitude has been noted above, is considered to be a "leader," and his book "A New Pentecost" is in every way an open endorsement of the movement and its ideas. The National Conference of Catholic Bishops (in America-the Committee on Doctrine) endorsed the movement and, while noting "certain cautions," stated that it "should at this point not be inhibited, but allowed to develop." Six of the seven American Cardinals have responded to the movement in a "positive pastoral way." Cardinal Dearden of Detroit and Car- dinal Kroll of Philadelphia (as indeed the Pope himself) have celebrated special Pentecostal charismatic liturgies in their cathedrals. Many of the Bishops are openly involved with the movement, and perhaps half the active clergy on the parish level consider themselves to be Pentecostals. What is perhaps even more serious is that many of the Pentecostals have declared themselves to be qualified spiritual directors. Since the bishops allow almost anyone who is interested in spiritual direction to become involved in this aspect of the "ministry," this has allowed the seeds of the movement to be disseminated wthin the heart of the few contemplative houses that are left in the New Church.[29]


Voices raised in protest have been few. Archbishop Robert J. Dwyer has stated that he  "considers Pentecostalism to be one of the most dangerous trends in the Church of our time, closely allied in spirit with other disruptive and divisive movements, threatening great harm to her unity and damage to countless souls;" but, everyone knows what happened to his now famous letter to the Pope. Warnings from those who have departed from the movement are likewise ignored. Dr. Josephine Ford, a former leader, left because she found in the movement an excess of "spiritual arrogance," and the "spirit of Protestant sectarianism."[30] Dr. William Story, who was responsible for bringing the “spirit" to Notre Dame from the initial group of thirty at Duquesne University, has also left and warned that the movement contained "most grave dangers," "theological errors," and standards "incompatible with authentic Catholic tradition." Despite all this, the movement continues to spread and even where formal affilitation does not occur, its ideas diffuse in rampant fashion.


We see, then, that the barriers are down and the fortress has been breached. As St. John Fisher said to his apostate colleagues, "The fort is betrayed even of them that should have defended it." The battle standards of the enemy have been carried to the walls; and what is written on these standards? One finds such catch phrases as “renewal,” “the authentic Church,” “Dynamic religion,” “Experiencing the Spirit,” “Charisms for the common man,” “A New or Second Pentecost," (what is wrong with the first one?) "Openness" and "Community."


Believe me, dear reader, the Holy Spirit bloweth where it will, but it does not leave a smell of flatus and boiling sulphur behind it. It bloweth when it will and has throughout all time, but it is always the same spirit that bloweth. It is not new, nor is it likely to adapt itself to the aberrant ways of modern man. Whatever all this new “evangelical" religion is, one thing is clear-IT IS NOT CATHOLIC. No Catholic can hold that the Holy Spirit either derives, or is activated, from sources outside the Church. No Catholic can submit himself to rites and rituals that are not of ecclesiastical and ultimately of apostolic origin. No Catholic can allow himself to be involved in the gibberish of glossolalia..


No Catholic can accept a faith which is purely “experiential” and without doctrinal foundation. No Catholic can hold that salvation is not an individual affair. No Catholic can actively participate with non-Catholics in acts of worship (did not Christ and the Apostles tell us how we should worship?), and finally, no Pentecostal can deny that every one of the above criteria are demanded of the followers of this new sect. If our hierarchy sees no problem in all this, then plain and simple, they are not Catholic! Those who are “born again” Christians are born again, but not within the womb of Holy Mother Church, for those within Her received their second birth at Baptism. We, as Catholics, would do well to recall the words of St Augustine:


“Only the Church [of all times] is the Body of Christ of which He is the Head and Savior. Outside of this Body the Holy Ghost does not vivify anyone. Those who are outside of the Church [of all times] do not have the Holy Ghost: let he who wishes to have the Holy Ghost be vigilant so that he does not land outside the Church [of all times].”

                                                  Letter 185 and Treatise on St. John.

ã R Coomaraswamy, 2001

[1] The phrase “authentic renewal” as applied to this movement is Paul VI’s  - the complete quote is given later in the paper. Ralph Martin, The Spirit of the Church, Paulist Press: New York, 1976.

[2] The natuee of the Cursillo movement would require separate documentation, a difficult task both because it poses as a conservative spiritual movement, and because of it is “secretive” in character. It has been condemned in an Encyclical letter by Bishop Meyer (in Brazilo) who has demonstrated its modernist and Teilhardian outlook. Dr. DeTar (TAN Books) has also been able to show its connections with the Communist movement. It has branches in other Christian denominations under a variety of names. One suspects that the “inner circle” of the Charismatics are deeply involved with this suspicious organization, and that the Cursillos recruit new members from among Charismatics.

[3] Ralph Martin, op cit.

[4] “Glossolalia,” or speaking with tongues which is discussed below.

[5] In a certain sense the movement dates back to Wesley, the founder of Methodism, who wrote about the “interior witness of the Spirit.” The concept of “extra-ecclesial” inspiration with the Holy Spirit of course dates back to the Pelagians and the Montanists. To disagree with the Pentecostals is to refuse to accept (their) Holy Spirit,

[6] The Cross and the Switchblade, Pyramid Books, New York, 1964, 1973

[7] Quoted in Pentecostalism chez les catholiques, Rene Laurentin, Beauchesne, Paris, 1974

[8] These early Catholic Pentecostals felt something was lacking in the Cursillo movement and sought that “something extra” from the Pentecostals. It is also quite possible that they saw the Pentecostal movement as a means of spreading their Cursillo ideology. Certainly the remarkable success of Pastor David Wilkerson among the New York drug addicts is worthy of respect. His achievement is however, not more remarkable than that of the Black Muslims,” and other similar groups. The history of the Church is replete with similar achievements - to mention only Mother Theresa of Calcutta - and this without the imposition of some “extra-ecclesial” rite of questionable validity. For a Catholic to seek a “rite” outside of normal channels is truly extraordinary, and not without certain clear spiritual dangers.

[9] James Connelley, O.S.C. “The Charismatic Movement” in As the Spirit Leads Us, Paulist Press, New York, 1971

[10] Keven Ranaghan, “Catholics and Pentecostals Meet,” ibid

[11] Msg. Knox, Enthusiasm, Oxford Univ. Press: London, 1960

[12] “As the Spirit Leads us,” op. cit.

[13] “As the Spirit Leads us,” op. cit.

[14] Father Donald Gelpi, S.J., Charism and Sacrament, Paulist Press, N.Y., 1976

[15] Ralph Martin, Sent by the Spirit, Paulist Press, N.Y., 1976

[16] Father Edward D. O’Conner, C.S.C., The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church, Paulist Press, N.Y., 1974

[17] Rev. Vincent M. Walsh, A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church, Abbey Press: St. Meinrad, Ind.m 1976

[18] Father Gelpi, Charism and Sacrament, op cit. And Can you Institutionalize the Spirit? In Pentecostal Catholics, Ed. Robert Meyer.

[19] Op. cit.

[20] James E. Bryne, Living in the Spirit, Paulist Press: N.Y., 1976

[21] Op. cit.

[22] Rev. Vincent Walsh, A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church, Abbey Press, St. Meinrad, Ind., 1974

[23] Rev. Msgr. R. A. Knox, "Enthusiasm" Oxford Univ. Press: London, 1950 and 1976.

[24] Dom Peter Flood, O.S.B., "Pentecostalism: Montanism, the Forerunner" in Christian Order. Vol. 16, No. 5, May, 1975 "Vierbert Thurston, S.J.. "The Mystical Phenomena of Mysticism" Regnery: Chicago, 1952.

[25] Herbert Thurston, S.J., The Mystical Phenomena of Mysticism, Regnery, Chicago, 1952.

[26] Enthusiasm, op. cit

[27] One notes in passing the similarity of Ranaghan’s phraseology with the following: “God’s plan is dedicated to the unification of all races, religions and creeds. This plan, dedicated to the new order of things, is to make all things new - a new nation, a new race, a new civilization and a new religion, a non-sectarian religion” (C. W.  Smith expressing the views of the Supreme Council 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemasonry) and the words of the ex-Abbe Roca, also a Freemason, who said “There will be a New Religion, a New Dogma, a New Ritual and a New Priesthood...”

[28] Both passages are taken from Kevin Ranaghan, “The Lord, the Spirit and the Church” in The Spirit of the Church by Ralph Martin, op. cit.

[29] Statements in this paragraph are from Ralph Martin’s The Spirit and the Church, op. cit.

[30] Quoted by George O’Toole, op. cit.