Is there something inherent in the charismatic movement that breeds liturgical abuse? More and more, I have been having doubts about the authenticity of the movement, in part because of questionable practices, especially in the liturgy - and I don't mean the style of music (although I'm no fan).

Tonight in particular, there was a guest priest visiting, who personally identified himself as a charismatic during the homily. At the same time, this Mass was a greater departure from the norms than I've seen in a long time (personal additions and explanations). And that raises the question - if you're being inspired by the Holy Spirit, how does that lead to liturgical abuse? I can't envision the Holy Spirit ever causing infidelity to the Church's liturgy, but this seems to be a problem at almost every charismatic Mass I've experienced. The recent news concerning the Neochatechumenate and their liturgical problems only increase my feeling that something's wrong.

I don't think it's a minor problem either, since charismatics tend to be way more into apparitions and visionaries than usual...and when almost every Mass is done with an emphasis on the Holy Spirit personally speaking (whether by tongues or otherwise), it's not such a stretch that people will have an easier time believing in these things (lex orandi, lex credendi in action). The emphasis of some people I know on all manner of visionaries, apparitions, and the Holy Spirit, to the detriment of the Church's teachings, the Bible, and the other two persons of the Trinity, is troubling. It's not that the latter are denied, but so much energy and focus seems to be put in the unproven periphery and not in the revealed center of the faith.

As if to make the point, not long after this post was originally written, someone asked for help trying to track down a reference to an angel only mentioned in the Book of Enoch, on what can only be described as an ongoing grace-hunting quest, as though specific ones can only be obtained via these obscure sources.

Maybe my experience is an aberration, but more and more, I get the distinct impression that something is fundamentally wrong here. Anyone have thoughts?

NB: Updated Jan 30, 2006

- Posted by in Catholic at 8:31 PM