In the anonymous subforum, Jaynek made the following outrageous assertions:
I do not believe that Charismatics are heretics.
The Charismatic Renewal movement within the Catholic Church has been recognized by the post-conciliar popes as an authentic work of the Holy Spirit. That is my position.
The second quote is especially dumbfounding, as it uses the phrase "post-Conciliar popes," a phrase that usually connotates a recognition that the popes since V2 have been, if not false claimants to the papacy, certainly men of questionable personal orthodoxy and manifestly untrustworthy due to complicity to one degree or another with the Modernist novelties and errors de facto promulgated by the "pastoral" Council (not the least of which being the abominable Novus Ordo).
But here is Jaynek using the phrase "post-Conciliar popes" as a sure and safe sign not only of the mere acceptability of the "Charismatic Renewal" movement, but that it is, in fact, "an authentic work of the Holy Spirit."
This Novus Ordite ultramontanism of the worst sort. It is just this kind of rationality-suppressing elevation of papal infallibility to the level of oracular divinity that would lead "Catholic" ignoramuses to accept any pap and nonsense conceivable as long as the "post-Conciliar popes" smile beneficenty upon it.
Well, Jayne, what about what the pre-Conciliar popes have to say? What about what pre-Conciliar saints and doctors and Councils have to say about things like this? What about forming one's conscience and intellect according to these traditional sources and applying that developed Sensus Catholicus to these novelties? That's what being a Traditional Catholic is all about isn't it? A well-Catechized child of 9 or 10 could easily see that the "Charismatic" movement, whatever else it may be, is not Catholic. Such a child doesn't need a parent, priest, or pope to tell him that any more than he needs a parent, priest, or pope to tell him that grass is green and the sky is blue. But here you are, a grandmother, ready to believe that the sky is green and grass is blue because "the post Conciliar popes say so."
I mean, do you recognize any problem at all with the post-Conciliar popes, Jayne? Or is Paul VI more or less as good in your eyes as Pius V? Do you even have any problem at all with the Council? Is the abominable Novus Ordo just fine in your eyes? According to the "post-Conciliar popes," Vatican II was "an authentic work of the Holy Spirit;" according to them, the Novus Ordo was a boon from Heaven itself, with wonderful spiritual fruits being reaped everywhere and all the time; according to them, we're in the "New Springtime" of the Catholic Church. So do you accept all of those assertions with the same irrational, fideistic zeal, despite the fact that they are manifestly, grossly, unquestionably,objectively untrue?
The "Catholic Charismatic" movement was founded in the very heart of the immediate years of post-Conciliar chaos. It is distinguished by two things: a "style" of prayer and liturgy that is unquestionably Protestant in nature; and a novel doctrine, totally alien to Catholic theology, about "Baptism of the Spirit," an objectively heretical warping of Catholic Sacramental theology, particularly with respect to the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation. At their prayer meetings and even their "Masses" (such as they are), the Charismatics engage in such totally non-Catholic behavior as speaking in tongues, collapsing on the floor and convulsing, leaping about spasmodically, blasphemously attributing such pointless, carnal, sensual actions to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity.
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, right Jayne? Well what "Law of Belief" are Catholics going to follow when they follow a "Law of Prayer" indistinguishable from that of Pentecostal Protestant heretics?
The Charismatic "Movement" found its Curial champion in Cardinal Leo Suenens, one of the rankest, vilest Modernist of the Conciliar Revolution, as well as a man credibly asserted to be a Freemason (codename "Lesu") and participant in perverted diabolical rites. We're talking about a man who once uttered this damnable, diabolical blasphemy:
Men and Christians .... have made an idol of God, a caricature of God. Before condemning Atheism, it serves to know what is the God that it wants to destroy.
Let us take a moment to examine some of the current images of God, which were very common a short time ago ....
That God which is found in the beginning as an architect and engineer in repose, like one who explains and covers the ignorance and incapacity of man is also the one that presently guarantees the established order, the status quo, who shields authority with divine right and protects the strong against revolutions, who requires patience from the poor, who impedes social reforms: He is the opium of the people.
We can analyze diverse caricatures of God. To mention just one: let us think of the caricature of the God as Providence who “providentially” allowed us to avoid some misfortune, but who permitted the same misfortune to happen to someone else. It is a type of second-rate providence ....
It is really understandable that this God should die so that the world lives, and also so that God lives.
(Leo-Josef Suenens, "Cristinaismo sem Deus," in Cristianismo sem Cristo?, Caxias: Edições Paulinas, 1970, pp. 63-66).
http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_039_SuenensGod.htm
This is the hierarchical guarantor of your "authentic work of the Holy Spirit," Jayne.
Have you eyes with which to see and ears with which to hear? Then see and hear what you call "an authentic work of the Holy Spirit":
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/pk8VH5pHWXA[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/SFG-8YDTcIc[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/-k7Vz4UGieg[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/LwQZoLEGXyE[/youtube]
The currently-reigning post Conciliar pope has helpfully gone on record so as to illustrate just to what end he believes this "authentic work of the Holy Spirit" is working:
"You shall bear witness to a spiritual ecuмenism with all those brothers and sisters of other churches and ecclesial communities who believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior."
"Remember: The Charismatic Renewal is ecuмenical in nature ... The Catholic renewal movement would be about what the Holy Spirit works in the other churches' (1 Mechelen 5.3)."
"This is great. I would also like to thank, because they are already organizing the great jubilee of 2017."
"And I expect you to celebrate all their charismatics in the world together with the Pope your big anniversary at Pentecost 2017 on St. Peter's Square! Thank you! "
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/08/pope-francis-recommends-charismatics.html
Do you concur, Jayne?
Another of the post-Conciliar popes pointed out the other thrust of the movement, the use of it as a mobilization of the laity, when he described it as:
"a greater attention to the voice of the Spirit through the acceptance of charisms and the promotion of the laity." (Tertio Millennio Adveniente, 46)
Let's see what the last of the great sainted PRE-Conciliar popes had to say about this notion:
Hence, studying more closely the ideas of the Modernists, evolution is described as resulting from the conflict of two forces, one of them tending towards progress, the other towards conservation. The conserving force in the Church is tradition, and tradition is represented by religious authority, and this both by right and in fact; for by right it is in the very nature of authority to protect tradition, and, in fact, for authority, raised as it is above the contingencies of life, feels hardly, or not at all, the spurs of progress. The progressive force, on the contrary, which responds to the inner needs lies in the individual consciences and ferments there - especially in such of them as are in most intimate contact with life. Note here, Venerable Brethren, the appearance already of that most pernicious doctrine which would make of the laity a factor of progress in the Church.
- Pascendi Dominici Gregis, 27.
You say that Charismatics are not heretics, Jayne (full stop, no distinction between formal and material having been suggested or proffered by you). This ridiculous, scandalous assertion requires - nay, demands - an explanation. Before you give it, ruminate on your public scandals and errors before - the most egregious of which being your public assent on FE to the outrageously diabolical notion that elective surgical mutilation of a man's generative organs to approximate those of a woman's is possible and even licit due to "sub-Secretum Vatican Docuмents." Ruminate also on your subsequent promises to this forum that you would speak less in the future and listen and learn more, a promise which you have failed to adhere to by your publicly standing by your absurd and scandalous assertions given above. Ruminate finally on the words of St. Paul in Sacred Scripture:
Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted them to speak, but to be subject, as also the law saith. But if they would learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a shame for a woman to speak in the church.
First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians xiv:xxxiv-xxxv