A summary of Catholic attitudes & teaching about Pentecostal churches; which is a topic that has arisen in other threads and ought to be presented.

Always in His Presence · May 16, 2026

Xeno.of.athens said:
He did have a profound Spiritual awakening. But did he do, “holy laughter,” shaking, falling to the floor, weeping, speaking in tongues, spontaneous vocal outbursts, extended periods of emotional release, and reports of physical or inner healing ?

With links

Physical Manifestations in John Wesley's Ministry

Under Wesley's preaching at Bristol broke out strange cries and shouts, accompanied by singular physical manifestations such as marked the Great Awakening in New England. Cries of the sharpest anguish were heard. Hardened sinners were stricken down as in the throes of death. Wesley Center Online

Bold blasphemers cried aloud for mercy; passing travelers, pausing to hear, were smitten to the earth in deep conviction for sin. An irritated mother, vexed by the weeping of her daughter, became herself convulsed with sorrow and went home in joy. Wesley Center Online

The Physician's Eyewitness Account (from Wesley's journal, April 30, 1739):

A physician who was much afraid there might be fraud or imposture in the case watched one woman he had known for years — she broke out into strong cries and tears, great drops of sweat ran down her face, and all her bones shook. He then knew not what to think, being clearly convinced it was not fraud nor any natural disorder. But when both her soul and body were healed in a moment, he acknowledged the finger of God. Wordpress

"Thunderstruck" at Newgate:

While Wesley was preaching at Newgate, several people "dropped on every side as thunderstruck." These encounters were attended by all sorts of peculiar manifestations, such as howling, groaning, roaring, convulsing, speaking in strange voices, and other eerie expressions. However, the result in most cases was repentance, deliverance, and peace with God. Goodnewsmag

Wesley's Own Interpretation:

Wesley believed these manifestations were "chiefly supernatural, springing from the gracious influences of the Spirit of God which accompanied his word." Seedbed

To Wesley, outward manifestations were simply indicators of inward workings of the Holy Spirit. The point was never simply the phenomenon of people falling, but rather that God was working mightily in their hearts to bring them into conviction, repentance, faith, and right relationship with himself. Destiny Image

Glad you asked - Links and quotes provided by Claude ai

Then there is out Lords words:

Mark 16:17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues;18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them;they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

The Liturgist · May 17, 2026

Xeno.of.athens said:
He did have a profound Spiritual awakening. But did he do, “holy laughter,” shaking, falling to the floor, weeping, speaking in tongues, spontaneous vocal outbursts, extended periods of emotional release, and reports of physical or inner healing ?

Not in church in the context of worship or in a manner akin to Charismatic practices contrary to the claims of some Charismatics and Pentecostals - except with regards to healing, but to be clear our two denominations report miraculous healings through holy water, the annointing of the sick with oil and the intercession of the saints. But Wesley supported evidenced based medicine as he was aware that relying on miraculous healing is inadvisable, while it does happen, to leave it to such a hope is to tempt God and is the chief error of the ”Christian Science“ heresy (neither Christian nor Science) and the occult New Thought movement more broadly.

Wesley was interested in the scientific use of electricity for healing and did early experiments with electrotherapy to treat muscle pain et cetera, and of course now we know that electromagnetism has medical applications Wesley could not have dreamt of, in diagnostics (the EKG, EEG, CT scanners and magnetic resonance imaging, for example), and treatment (defibrilation, electrocardioversion and so on).

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

The Liturgist said:
Not in church in the context of worship or in a manner akin to Charismatic practices contrary to the claims of some Charismatics and Pentecostals - except with regards to healing, but to be clear our two denominations report miraculous healings through holy water, the annointing of the sick with oil and the intercession of the saints. But Wesley supported evidenced based medicine as he was aware that relying on miraculous healing is inadvisable, while it does happen, to leave it to such a hope is to tempt God and is the chief error of the ”Christian Science“ heresy (neither Christian nor Science) and the occult New Thought movement more broadly.

Wesley was interested in the scientific use of electricity for healing and did early experiments with electrotherapy to treat muscle pain et cetera, and of course now we know that electromagnetism has medical applications Wesley could not have dreamt of, in diagnostics (the EKG, EEG, CT scanners and magnetic resonance imaging, for example), and treatment (defibrilation, electrocardioversion and so on).

Good post my friend.

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
With links

Physical Manifestations in John Wesley's Ministry

Under Wesley's preaching at Bristol broke out strange cries and shouts, accompanied by singular physical manifestations such as marked the Great Awakening in New England. Cries of the sharpest anguish were heard. Hardened sinners were stricken down as in the throes of death. Wesley Center Online

Bold blasphemers cried aloud for mercy; passing travelers, pausing to hear, were smitten to the earth in deep conviction for sin. An irritated mother, vexed by the weeping of her daughter, became herself convulsed with sorrow and went home in joy. Wesley Center Online

The Physician's Eyewitness Account (from Wesley's journal, April 30, 1739):

A physician who was much afraid there might be fraud or imposture in the case watched one woman he had known for years — she broke out into strong cries and tears, great drops of sweat ran down her face, and all her bones shook. He then knew not what to think, being clearly convinced it was not fraud nor any natural disorder. But when both her soul and body were healed in a moment, he acknowledged the finger of God. Wordpress

"Thunderstruck" at Newgate:

While Wesley was preaching at Newgate, several people "dropped on every side as thunderstruck." These encounters were attended by all sorts of peculiar manifestations, such as howling, groaning, roaring, convulsing, speaking in strange voices, and other eerie expressions. However, the result in most cases was repentance, deliverance, and peace with God. Goodnewsmag

Wesley's Own Interpretation:

Wesley believed these manifestations were "chiefly supernatural, springing from the gracious influences of the Spirit of God which accompanied his word." Seedbed

To Wesley, outward manifestations were simply indicators of inward workings of the Holy Spirit. The point was never simply the phenomenon of people falling, but rather that God was working mightily in their hearts to bring them into conviction, repentance, faith, and right relationship with himself. Destiny Image

Glad you asked - Links and quotes provided by Claude ai

Then there is out Lords words:

Mark 16:17 And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues;18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them;they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

While John Wesley’s reports of dramatic physical manifestations are historically interesting, Catholic dogma is cautious about identifying such phenomena as signs of the Holy Spirit. The Church teaches that extraordinary signs can occur (cf. 1 Cor 12:7–11), but they are never reliable proof of sanctity or divine favour. St John of the Cross repeatedly warns that physical ecstasies, convulsions, or unusual sensations may arise from natural causes, psychological suggestion, or even preternatural influence, and therefore “are not to be desired nor encouraged” (Ascent of Mount Carmel II.11–13). The Church’s doctrinal norm is that authentic grace is known by conversion of life, growth in charity, and obedience to the Church, not by bodily manifestations (Council of Trent, Decree on Justification, ch. 7; CCC 2003–2005).

Catholic teaching therefore neither denies nor affirms Wesley’s interpretation of these events as supernatural; rather, it insists on discernment. St Paul’s criterion—“test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thess 5:21)—is formalised in the Church’s rules for discerning spirits, which require examining (1) doctrinal conformity, (2) moral fruits, and (3) ecclesial obedience (St Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, Rules for Discernment). Even when repentance follows a dramatic episode, the Church does not automatically attribute the physical phenomenon to the Holy Spirit. St Thomas Aquinas notes that God’s grace works primarily in the intellect and will, and bodily effects are “accidental and not essential to the action of grace” (ST I–II q. 111 a. 2). Thus, Catholic theology would affirm the conversions Wesley describes while remaining agnostic—and prudently reserved—about the manifestations themselves.

Regarding Mark 16:17–18, Catholic dogma holds that these signs accompanied the apostolic age as divine confirmation of the Gospel’s initial proclamation (St Augustine, Homilies on Mark 17; St Thomas, ST III q. 43 a. 1). The Church does not teach that such signs must accompany all believers in every era. Vatican II states that charisms “are not to be asked for lightly” and must be judged by the Church, whose pastors have the duty “not to extinguish the Spirit but to test all things” (Lumen Gentium 12). Thus, while the Church acknowledges that God may act in extraordinary ways, she insists that the ordinary and sure path of the Spirit is the sacraments, sound doctrine, and growth in charity, not dramatic physical manifestations.

Magisterial and Catechetical Sources

Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2003–2005) Vatican website: Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText (vatican.va in Bing)
Council of Trent, Decree on Justification (Chapter 7) Canonical text: Lumen gentium, Dogmatic Constitution On the Church | EWTN (ewtn.com in Bing)
Vatican II, Lumen Gentium §12 Vatican website: Lumen gentium (vatican.va in Bing)

Patristic and Scholastic Sources

St Augustine, Homilies on the Gospel of Mark (Homily 17) Public-domain English translation: CHURCH FATHERS: Home
St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III q.43 a.1 (on signs and miracles) SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: Scandal (Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. 43)
St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I–II q.111 a.2 (on grace and its effects) SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The division of grace (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 111)

Mystical and Discernment Sources

St John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book II, chs. 11–13 Public-domain translation: Work info: Ascent of Mount Carmel - Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org in Bing)
St Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, Rules for Discernment of Spirits Public-domain text: The Spiritual Exercises - IgnatianSpirituality.com (spex.ignatianspirituality.com in Bing)

Scriptural References

1 Corinthians 12:7–11 Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 - New International Version (biblegateway.com in Bing)
1 Thessalonians 5:21 Bible Gateway passage: 1 Thessalonians 5:21 - New International Version (biblegateway.com in Bing)
Mark 16:17–18 Bible Gateway passage: Mark 16:17-18 - New International Version (biblegateway.com in Bing)

[Copilot did the research, wrote a draft and I edited it to reflect my own views and thinking. The links to cited sources were provided by Copilot at my request after submitting my reply to it for links.]

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
The perhaps - if I can be so bold - you should post in a forum where Roman Catholic dogma is a protected subject - there is one on CF.

Why should I post there instead of on General Theology?

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
I counter your post because of the forum you placed it in and the target you put on the back of Pentacostals.

That is your perception; not my intention.

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
What it seems you are unaware of is the the Pentecostal experiences have been happening through the Centuries.

This too is your perception and not an accurate description of my state of knowledge.

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
As for Divine Healing:

Clement wrote that men received Gifts of Healing

Iraneous wrote, “Men heal the sick by laying their hands on them for many demoniacs through the whole world and your city. Many of our Christian men exorcising them in the Name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified by Pontius Pilate, have healed and do heal.”

Origin said, “Men have marvelous powers of healing by invoking the divine Name. They expel evil spirits and perform many cures.”

St. Ambrose of Milan said, “A man of Cyrene, a butcher by trade, who became blind was healed of the Lord.”

St. Marcus of Alexandria wrote, “A man withered in all his limbs, especially his feet, was anointed in the name of the Lord and, when commanded ‘In the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, arise and stand on thy feet and return to thy house,’ immediately rising up, leaping, he blessed God.”

St. Augustine wrote, “But the miracles that persons ascribed to their idols are in no way comparable to the wonders wrought by our martyrs.”

a man named Beth Wagin, paralyzed on one side, prayed, and in the midst of his prayer, he fell, as it were, into a stupor, felt a large hand touch his head and he was restored to health.

It's there in history.

Your citations from the Fathers actually confirm the Catholic position, not the Pentecostal one. The Church has always taught that God grants miracles, healings, and exorcisms (cf. 1 Cor 12:7–11), and the Fathers you quote—Clement, Irenaeus, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine—describe sacramental and ecclesial contexts, not the uncontrolled physical manifestations characteristic of modern Pentecostalism. Catholic dogma insists that miracles are real but must be discerned within the Church Christ founded (cf. Lumen Gentium 12; CCC 2003–2005). None of your patristic examples involve “holy laughter,” animal noises, convulsions, or chaotic vocal outbursts; the Fathers explicitly warn against disorder in worship, echoing St Paul: “God is not a God of confusion but of peace” (1 Cor 14:33). The same chapter requires tongues to be interpreted and subordinated to ecclesial order—something Pentecostal practice routinely violates.

Your claim that “Pentecostal experiences have been happening through the centuries” is historically and theologically inaccurate. The Fathers describe miracles, not Pentecostalism. Catholic dogma distinguishes sharply between authentic charisms and phenomena arising from emotion, suggestion, or preternatural influence. St John of the Cross warns that dramatic bodily manifestations are not signs of the Holy Spirit and must be distrusted ( Ascent II.11–13). St Thomas Aquinas teaches that grace acts primarily in the intellect and will, and bodily effects are “accidental” and not indicators of sanctity ( ST I–II q.111 a.2). The Magisterium formalises this: charisms must be judged by the Church, not by private interpretation ( Lumen Gentium 12; Council of Trent, Decree on Justification ch. 7). Thus, Catholic doctrine rejects the idea that dramatic physical phenomena are normative signs of the Spirit.

Finally, Mark 16:17–18 does not teach that every believer in every age will display miraculous signs. St Augustine explains that such signs accompanied the apostolic preaching to establish the Gospel ( Homilies on Mark 17), and St Thomas affirms the same ( ST III q.43 a.1). The Church teaches that God may still grant extraordinary signs, but the ordinary and reliable means of grace are the sacraments, apostolic teaching, and growth in charity—not emotional manifestations or spontaneous displays of power. Catholic dogma therefore affirms the reality of miracles while rejecting the Pentecostal assumption that such phenomena define authentic Christian experience.

Always in His Presence · May 17, 2026

Speaking in tongues:

Justin Martyr — Dialogue with Trypho (c. 150–160 AD) mentions prophetic gifts still present in the church, including those of speaking, though without detailed description of tongues specifically.

Irenaeus of Lyon — Against Heresies (c. 180 AD) is the clearest 2nd-century witness. He writes that "many brethren in the church" have prophetic gifts and "speak through the Spirit in all kinds of tongues." He uses this as evidence against Gnostic claims.

Tertullian — Against Marcion and A Treatise on the Soul (c. 200–210 AD) describe a woman in his congregation who received visions and revelations during worship, including ecstatic speech. As a Montanist, Tertullian was especially interested in ongoing charismatic phenomena.

Origen — Against Celsus (c. 248 AD) acknowledges tongues as a past and present phenomenon but is cautious and somewhat rationalistic about ecstatic gifts.

Novatian — On the Trinity (c. 250 AD) lists tongues among the Spirit's gifts as ongoing realities.

Hilary of Poitiers — On the Trinity (c. 356 AD) references tongues in his pneumatology, though more theologically than as a live contemporary experience.

Rose_bud · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
Speaking in tongues:

Justin Martyr — Dialogue with Trypho (c. 150–160 AD) mentions prophetic gifts still present in the church, including those of speaking, though without detailed description of tongues specifically.

Irenaeus of Lyon — Against Heresies (c. 180 AD) is the clearest 2nd-century witness. He writes that "many brethren in the church" have prophetic gifts and "speak through the Spirit in all kinds of tongues." He uses this as evidence against Gnostic claims.

Tertullian — Against Marcion and A Treatise on the Soul (c. 200–210 AD) describe a woman in his congregation who received visions and revelations during worship, including ecstatic speech. As a Montanist, Tertullian was especially interested in ongoing charismatic phenomena.

Origen — Against Celsus (c. 248 AD) acknowledges tongues as a past and present phenomenon but is cautious and somewhat rationalistic about ecstatic gifts.

Novatian — On the Trinity (c. 250 AD) lists tongues among the Spirit's gifts as ongoing realities.

Hilary of Poitiers — On the Trinity (c. 356 AD) references tongues in his pneumatology, though more theologically than as a live contemporary experience.

View attachment 379503

This is informative...

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
Speaking in tongues:

Justin Martyr — Dialogue with Trypho (c. 150–160 AD) mentions prophetic gifts still present in the church, including those of speaking, though without detailed description of tongues specifically.

Irenaeus of Lyon — Against Heresies (c. 180 AD) is the clearest 2nd-century witness. He writes that "many brethren in the church" have prophetic gifts and "speak through the Spirit in all kinds of tongues." He uses this as evidence against Gnostic claims.

Tertullian — Against Marcion and A Treatise on the Soul (c. 200–210 AD) describe a woman in his congregation who received visions and revelations during worship, including ecstatic speech. As a Montanist, Tertullian was especially interested in ongoing charismatic phenomena.

Origen — Against Celsus (c. 248 AD) acknowledges tongues as a past and present phenomenon but is cautious and somewhat rationalistic about ecstatic gifts.

Novatian — On the Trinity (c. 250 AD) lists tongues among the Spirit's gifts as ongoing realities.

Hilary of Poitiers — On the Trinity (c. 356 AD) references tongues in his pneumatology, though more theologically than as a live contemporary experience.

Justin Martyr
Justin’s reference to prophetic gifts is entirely compatible with Catholic dogma, which affirms that charisms continue to exist but are subordinate to the Church’s discernment and ordered to the common good (CCC 799–801). His lack of specificity about tongues means he cannot be used to support any strong claim about the nature of glossolalia, and a Catholic reading treats his comments as evidence of early charismatic diversity rather than a mandate for later Pentecostal-style practice.

Irenaeus of Lyon
Irenaeus is the strongest early witness, but his purpose is doctrinal: to refute Gnosticism by appealing to the Church’s visible, Spirit‑guided unity. His reference to “all kinds of tongues” must be read within this anti‑heretical framework, not as a detailed description of ecstatic speech. Catholic theology therefore receives his testimony as evidence that charisms existed, but not as proof that tongues were normative, universal, or identical to modern Pentecostal phenomena.

Tertullian
Tertullian’s Montanist phase requires careful doctrinal caution. Catholic dogma rejects Montanism’s claim to new public revelation and its tendency to elevate private ecstatic experiences above ecclesial authority. His account of a visionary woman may reflect genuine private charisms, but the Church would insist on strict discernment, doctrinal sobriety, and submission to episcopal judgement—criteria Montanism notoriously failed to meet.

Origen
Origen’s cautious attitude aligns well with Catholic teaching, which values charisms but warns against emotionalism, disorder, or claims that undermine reason or ecclesial authority. His rational approach anticipates the Church’s later insistence that extraordinary gifts are neither necessary for holiness nor indicators of superior spirituality, and that they must always be evaluated within the rule of faith.

Novatian
Novatian’s theology of the Spirit is often sound, but his later schism places his witness in a complicated position. His mention of tongues as ongoing gifts is not problematic in itself, yet Catholic dogma would stress that authentic charisms cannot be severed from communion with the Church. A schismatic context weakens—not strengthens—the evidential value of his claims.

Hilary of Poitiers
Hilary’s references are theological rather than experiential, and this is significant: by the mid‑4th century, tongues were no longer a prominent living practice in the mainstream Church. His treatment reflects the Catholic understanding that charisms belong to the apostolic deposit but may appear or fade according to the Spirit’s purposes. His silence on contemporary manifestations suggests that tongues were not considered essential to Christian life or worship.

Rose_bud · May 17, 2026

Xeno.of.athens said:
Justin Martyr
Justin’s reference to prophetic gifts is entirely compatible with Catholic dogma, which affirms that charisms continue to exist but are subordinate to the Church’s discernment and ordered to the common good (CCC 799–801). His lack of specificity about tongues means he cannot be used to support any strong claim about the nature of glossolalia, and a Catholic reading treats his comments as evidence of early charismatic diversity rather than a mandate for later Pentecostal-style practice.

Irenaeus of Lyon
Irenaeus is the strongest early witness, but his purpose is doctrinal: to refute Gnosticism by appealing to the Church’s visible, Spirit‑guided unity. His reference to “all kinds of tongues” must be read within this anti‑heretical framework, not as a detailed description of ecstatic speech. Catholic theology therefore receives his testimony as evidence that charisms existed, but not as proof that tongues were normative, universal, or identical to modern Pentecostal phenomena.

Tertullian
Tertullian’s Montanist phase requires careful doctrinal caution. Catholic dogma rejects Montanism’s claim to new public revelation and its tendency to elevate private ecstatic experiences above ecclesial authority. His account of a visionary woman may reflect genuine private charisms, but the Church would insist on strict discernment, doctrinal sobriety, and submission to episcopal judgement—criteria Montanism notoriously failed to meet.

Origen
Origen’s cautious attitude aligns well with Catholic teaching, which values charisms but warns against emotionalism, disorder, or claims that undermine reason or ecclesial authority. His rational approach anticipates the Church’s later insistence that extraordinary gifts are neither necessary for holiness nor indicators of superior spirituality, and that they must always be evaluated within the rule of faith.

Novatian
Novatian’s theology of the Spirit is often sound, but his later schism places his witness in a complicated position. His mention of tongues as ongoing gifts is not problematic in itself, yet Catholic dogma would stress that authentic charisms cannot be severed from communion with the Church. A schismatic context weakens—not strengthens—the evidential value of his claims.

Hilary of Poitiers
Hilary’s references are theological rather than experiential, and this is significant: by the mid‑4th century, tongues were no longer a prominent living practice in the mainstream Church. His treatment reflects the Catholic understanding that charisms belong to the apostolic deposit but may appear or fade according to the Spirit’s purposes. His silence on contemporary manifestations suggests that tongues were not considered essential to Christian life or worship.

Xeno, I appreciate your response to the post about this (although it appears your AI may be biased). I suggest researching Pentecostal liturgy; you would be quite surprised by what you think is disorderly is actually not so. I do know various "Pentecostal/Charismatic" churches have fanatical practices; however, not all, therefore all things should be discerned and tested, which should be a norm for every church, regardless of denomination and affiliation.

Xeno.of.athens · May 17, 2026

Rose_bud said:
Xeno, I appreciate your response to the post about this (although it appears your AI may be biased). I suggest researching Pentecostal liturgy; you would be quite surprised by what you think is disorderly is actually not so. I do know various "Pentecostal/Charismatic" churches have fanatical practices; however, not all, therefore all things should be discerned and tested, which should be a norm for every church, regardless of denomination and affiliation.

Of course it is biased, it answers my prompts which generally ask it to give a Catholic Dogmatic perspective because it is my desire to impart information from a Catholic perspective. I make no pretence that I am offering unbiased objectivity in religion because how can one offer such a thing if one believes? It must be presented as facts within the confines of the religious perspective of the person posting. But I must say, I am thankful for AI research and ability to form coherent English sentences. Not many people can do that.

PS: I used to go to an Assembly of God church in the 1980s. A long time ago. And I still have a friend from those days who remained Pentecostal; or rather become more Pentecostal since then - he was a little dominated by his very Pentecostal wife who was a dear friend, but who was also very strongly opinionated on that matter. I do not think of Pentecostal churches as hotbeds of crazy people falling on the floor or anything of that sort. Nevertheless, I do recall a time in the later 1990s when a chorus was sung with lyrics "bop bop duop" and I do recall the Toronto Blessing period when it was at its peak with people falling on the floor at the front of the church and laughing loudly and sounding quite unhinged. So much so that an English acquaintance walked out and after I followed him outside, he said, "I am not going back in there, they are crazy people".

PPS: not a single word of the above is from Copilot

Valletta · May 17, 2026

Xeno.of.athens said:
The Catholic Church has maintained an official International Dialogue with classical Pentecostal denominations (e.g., Assemblies of God, Church of God) through the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity since 1972, with the most recent session in July 2025 (Pentecostal World Fellowship, 2025 report). The dialogue does not aim for structural unity but for mutual understanding and respect, while the Directory for Ecumenism (Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, 1993) categorises Pentecostal communities as “ecclesial communities” rather than “Churches” due to the absence of apostolic succession and valid Eucharist. Key areas of divergence identified in the 1997 dialogue report include ecclesiology, salvific elements in non-Christian religions (cf. Lumen Gentium 16), and the theology of “baptism in the Spirit” (Acts 1:8; 2:4).

Areas of agreement include the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20) and the necessity of responding to God’s saving work in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:19; Acts 4:12). The Church has also encouraged the internal Catholic Charismatic Renewal, which practises charismatic gifts within hierarchical structures, serving as an ecumenical bridge. In 2024, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops established a formal dialogue with the Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches of North America (PCCNA, representing ~40 million believers) on the theme “Waters that Divide: Waters that Unite” (USCCB, 2024).

Written by: ChatGPT (OpenAI). For verification of doctrinal claims, consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum, or the relevant dialogue reports published by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. RSVCE

Rose_bud · May 18, 2026

Xeno.of.athens said:
Of course it is biased, it answers my prompts which generally ask it to give a Catholic Dogmatic perspective because it is my desire to impart information from a Catholic perspective. I make no pretence that I am offering unbiased objectivity in religion because how can one offer such a thing if one believes? It must be presented as facts within the confines of the religious perspective of the person posting. But I must say, I am thankful for AI research and ability to form coherent English sentences. Not many people can do that.

Hi Xeno, of course, we all speak from within a tradition, it’s the lens through which everyone of us engages the world.
However, when that lens becomes both the starting point and the ending point, it can subtly become the entire landscape of what counts as Christianity. It's no longer a lens but a box. And "we all do not know what we do not know."

When the box itself is never allowed to be questioned, it limits what we’re even able to see or consider. From a Pentecostal perspective, that’s precisely why Scripture stands above every tradition, including my own. In the last thread, we talked about Scripture and which voice resounds the loudest when we "hear" Scripture; you argued that voice is mediated through the Church; I argued it is both personal and communal. Regardless, that voice has to correct the box.

I just think it’s worth acknowledging that comfort and truth don’t always sit in the same place, and sometimes it’s worth asking which one is shaping us.

Xeno.of.athens said:
PS: I used to go to an Assembly of God church in the 1980s. A long time ago. And I still have a friend from those days who remained Pentecostal; or rather become more Pentecostal since then - he was a little dominated by his very Pentecostal wife who was a dear friend, but who was also very strongly opinionated on that matter. I do not think of Pentecostal churches as hotbeds of crazy people falling on the floor or anything of that sort. Nevertheless, I do recall a time in the late 1990s when a chorus was sung with lyrics "bop bop duop" and I do recall the Toronto Blessing period when it was at its peak, with people falling on the floor at the front of the church and laughing loudly and sounding quite unhinged. So much so that an English acquaintance walked out, and after I followed him outside, he said, "I am not going back in there, they are crazy people".

PPS: not a single word of the above is from Copilot

Yes, you'll definitely hear lots of testimony from both camps. I've heard some argue that it's too "dead" in the Catholic Church, too ritualistic and not alive and dynamic. So there are not "crazy" people but "dead" people. I can enjoy a Catholic mass and appreciate certain aspects of what some regard as "rituals", especially understanding what they point to, or rather, who they point to. But again, I know myself well enough to say I probably wouldn’t make it my home. More like a visit to distant cousins on my mother's side

My point is simply that every tradition has its stereotypes, its excesses, and its strengths, whether Pentecostal or Catholic. And that’s why I come back to the fact that, no matter our background, we all have to let our assumptions be tested.

This is some interesting information that speaks about being slain in the Spirit. There are also some good books on Pentecostal liturgy.

Is Being Slain in the Spirit Biblical? | David Hernandez Ministries

So we see, from scripture, that spiritual things can be transferred and given through the laying on of hands. The Spirit and His power can be transferred through human touch. And what happens when the Holy Spirit and His power are present?

www.davidhernandezministries.com

Xeno.of.athens · May 18, 2026

Rose_bud said:
Hi Xeno, of course, we all speak from within a tradition, it’s the lens through which everyone of us engages the world.
However, when that lens becomes both the starting point and the ending point, it can subtly become the entire landscape of what counts as Christianity. It's no longer a lens but a box. And "we all do not know what we do not know."

When the box itself is never allowed to be questioned, it limits what we’re even able to see or consider. From a Pentecostal perspective, that’s precisely why Scripture stands above every tradition, including my own. In the last thread, we talked about Scripture and which voice resounds the loudest when we "hear" Scripture; you argued that voice is mediated through the Church; I argued it is both personal and communal. Regardless, that voice has to correct the box.

I just think it’s worth acknowledging that comfort and truth don’t always sit in the same place, and sometimes it’s worth asking which one is shaping us.

Yes, you'll definitely hear lots of testimony from both camps. I've heard some argue that it's too "dead" in the Catholic Church, too ritualistic and not alive and dynamic. So there are not "crazy" people but "dead" people. I can enjoy a Catholic mass and appreciate certain aspects of what some regard as "rituals", especially understanding what they point to, or rather, who they point to. But again, I know myself well enough to say I probably wouldn’t make it my home. More like a visit to distant cousins on my mother's side

My point is simply that every tradition has its stereotypes, its excesses, and its strengths, whether Pentecostal or Catholic. And that’s why I come back to the fact that, no matter our background, we all have to let our assumptions be tested.

This is some interesting information that speaks about being slain in the Spirit. There are also some good books on Pentecostal liturgy.

Is Being Slain in the Spirit Biblical? | David Hernandez Ministries

So we see, from scripture, that spiritual things can be transferred and given through the laying on of hands. The Spirit and His power can be transferred through human touch. And what happens when the Holy Spirit and His power are present?

www.davidhernandezministries.com

I am sorely tempted to return to Copilot if you're going to attempt to evangelise me with Pentecostal material.

Hawkins · May 18, 2026

To me, it makes not much difference from how the Jews mock Catholicism and Christianity by applying their Judaism.

Dave... · May 18, 2026

Always in His Presence said:
Speaking in tongues:

Justin Martyr — Dialogue with Trypho (c. 150–160 AD) mentions prophetic gifts still present in the church, including those of speaking, though without detailed description of tongues specifically.

Irenaeus of Lyon — Against Heresies (c. 180 AD) is the clearest 2nd-century witness. He writes that "many brethren in the church" have prophetic gifts and "speak through the Spirit in all kinds of tongues." He uses this as evidence against Gnostic claims.

Tertullian — Against Marcion and A Treatise on the Soul (c. 200–210 AD) describe a woman in his congregation who received visions and revelations during worship, including ecstatic speech. As a Montanist, Tertullian was especially interested in ongoing charismatic phenomena.

Origen — Against Celsus (c. 248 AD) acknowledges tongues as a past and present phenomenon but is cautious and somewhat rationalistic about ecstatic gifts.

Novatian — On the Trinity (c. 250 AD) lists tongues among the Spirit's gifts as ongoing realities.

Hilary of Poitiers — On the Trinity (c. 356 AD) references tongues in his pneumatology, though more theologically than as a live contemporary experience.

View attachment 379503

But when was the English word "tongues" invented? Those quotes are all speaking of the gift of languages. Why do you still speaketh in old English? You're reading things into those quotes that they are not saying.

Justin Martyr wrote about prophetic gifts being present, but never mentioned "tongues" or "languages being one of them. The exact Greek phrasing used by Justin Martyr in Chapter 82 of the Dialogue with Trypho mentions prophetic gifts (prophetika charismata) but (as you said) does not refer to the gift of languages.

Irenaeus of Lyon No original quote available. The English translations of Against Heresies (Book 5, Chapter 6, Section 1), Irenaeus is typically rendered as writing that brethren "speak all kinds of languages".

Tertullian "In Tertullian’s original Latin, this phenomenon was not termed "ecstatic speech"." In A Treatise on the Soul (De Anima) and Against Marcion (Adversus Marcionem), Tertullian describes the revelations of the woman in his congregation but refers to her phenomena as gifts of "revelation," "visions," and "languages"..."

Origen "In Against Celsus (Contra Celsum, c. 248 AD), Origen specifically uses the term languages (and references to foreign tongues in the Septuagint) rather than ecstatic, unintelligible tongues. [1]" ***Foreign tongues?*** a clue to the meaning, me thinks.

Novatian "In Chapter 29 of his treatise De Trinitate (On the Trinity), Novatian explicitly calls them languages. [1, 2]

Hilary of Poitiers Hilary relies on the standard Latin linguae. When referencing the events of Pentecost or the distribution of miraculous gifts, he treats the terms synonymously as spoken human languages (linguae), rather than as ecstatic or unintelligible vocalizations. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Tongues just means languages. Consider the historical context. The true gift would allow one to understand or speak in anothers language. Actual languages. No need to Speaketh in old English when describing this phenomena.

BTW, Catholicism absorbs everything that they can. This is a big part of ecumenism. It's not about truth, it's about drawing numbers into the fold.

Dave

Valletta · May 18, 2026

Dave... said:
BTW, Catholicism absorbs everything that they can. This is a big part of ecumenism. It's not about truth, it's about drawing numbers into the fold.

Dave

I would say the opposite is true. Catholic teaching is very specific, the meaning of our sacraments is provided in detail in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. As in John 6, many walked away when Jesus spoke of eating His true flesh and drinking his true blood.

1324 The Eucharist is "the source and summit of the Christian life."134

Part Two Section Two The Seven Sacrements Of The Church Chapter One The Sacraments Of Christian Initiation Article 3 The Sacrament Of The Eucharist I. The Eucharist - Source And Summit Of Ecclesial Life

www.vatican.va

Most Christians have rejected the sacraments, but the Church stands firm.

Ecumenism recognizes the truth, and the truth is that other Christians, who are initially saved through Baptism, can be in a close relationship with Jesus and lead a holy life. It is folly to become a Catholic because of anything but belief, such a person will almost certainly eventually fall away. How to approach something like speaking in tongues, a subject which does not come up much to the vast majority of Catholics, can be a matter of debate. Here's a good article:

Catholic-Pentecostal Relations | EWTN

EWTN is a global, Catholic Television, Catholic Radio, and Catholic News Network that provides catholic programming and news coverage from around the world.

www.ewtn.com

Dave... · May 18, 2026

Post #13 second half.

THE PURPOSE OF TONGUES IN THE ASSEMBLY

It's important to understand the history of it in the Old Testament to know what is actually happening in Corinth when Paul speaks about it, both encouraging, and rebuking. https://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/tongues/tongues9.htm Tongues is just a sixteenth century word for languages. I...

www.christianforums.com

What is called "tongues" in todays Pentecostal and Charismatic churches has actually come full circle in returning to the Catholic church. It's what Paul was combatting at Corinth. It began at Babylon, and was very common in Rome and other pagan churches in that time. That's what infiltrated the Corinthian church. Nothing new under the sun, right?

Catholic Charismatic Renewal - Wikipedia

Vatican Council and Papal Statements on Islam

Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium 16, November 21, 1964“But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place a...

www.usccb.org

Dave

A summary of Catholic attitudes & teaching about Pentecostal churches; which is a topic that has arisen in other threads and ought to be presented.

Jesus is the only Way

Traditional Liturgical Christian

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Magisterial and Catechetical Sources​

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Jesus is the only Way

Great is thy faithfulness, O God my Father...

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Great is thy faithfulness, O God my Father...

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Well-Known Member

​

Great is thy faithfulness, O God my Father...

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Magisterial and Catechetical Sources