What does St Paul mean in chapter 14 when referring to “speaking in tongues’?
I’ve looked up Haydocks commentary but I’m still a little confused…/QUOTE
“Speaking in tongues” is a charismatic gift of the Holy Spirit, which Paul addresses in two ways. It first appears in Acts 2 during Pentecost, when the apostles spoke in tongues and all heard them in their own language; however, the gift of tongues is adressed by Paul as either something that can have an interpretation or a gift that is not followed by an interpretation. Theologians usually seperate these into “speaking in tongues” and “praying in tongues” so we can understand the difference. Praying in tongues is when the gift is not followed by an interpretation but is an angelic prayer language where the person allows the Holy Spirit to provide words of prayer. As an example, I am looking at my wall, and to describe it I would use the words white, hard, tall etc. but if I think about God, what words will I use to describe Him? When coming into contact with His glory we all desire to transcend the use of words, silence is an important way to do this, and praying in tongues aso allows the Spirit to speak a prayer of praise to God in a tongue unknown to man. Speaking in tongues is similar to a prophecy in the fact that a message is given to the community through a tongue and someone else interprets is meaning - this is a seperate gift that Paul speaks of called “interpretation of tongues.” If the gifts are used correctly they show beautiful fruit. Look at early Christians and their addressing the gift - Origen, Hilary of Poiters, St. John Chrysostom and others also show charismatic gifts to be synonymous wiht baptism in the early Church and now these gifts still appear. I would recommend reading Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa (the Papal preacher) for more in depth reading.
Augustine3;9141255:
St. John Chrysostom concluded that tongues neither altogether useless nor are they very profitable. To be honest tongues do not edify most Christians and they fail to convert unbelievers. Instead it repels them and leads them to conclude that Christians are out of their mind.What does St Paul mean in chapter 14 when referring to “speaking in tongues’?
I’ve looked up Haydocks commentary but I’m still a little confused…
StephenEstes;9141388:
I disagree, tongues, if it is unauthentic (i.e. used out of emotion or pride etc.) will of course not provide any fruit and will simply serve to confuse/repel, but if it is authentic then it will absolutely bring fruits. It is an authentic gift of the Holy Spirit, so why would we reject it because you haven’t seen good fruits? If it is an authentic gift of the Spirit, it must have use. I have seen prayer tongues serve to edify people’s prayer lives and bring a power for evangelization and greater docility to the Spirit as it is used. Paul did says “I thank God I speak in tongues more than any of you” however remember that he, and many other early Christians taught that it was the least of the gifts, it should be used to promote further docility to the Spirit and His other gifts He wishes to provide - it should never be an end in itself! If it is used correctly this way it brings great fruits and I have surely seen this. Now if you have seen the gift used in an unauthentic way, I apologize, that happens for sure, just like how the gift of preaching can be used to repel if people choose this. This gift does require strong catechesis and being involved in a charismatic prayer group is certainly not for everyone.St. John Chrysostom concluded that tongues neither altogether useless nor are they very profitable. To be honest tongues do not edify most Christians and they fail to convert unbelievers. Instead it repels them and leads them to conclude that Christians are out of their mind.
JPeter;9143825:
I’m not disagreeing with what your saying here. However, I was a Lutheran before I became an Anglican. My Lutheran Pastor (before he got married) was dating a Pentecostal girl. He went with her to her church and when the tongue speaking began my pastor said a few lines in Latin for the heck of it. When the translator came around to tell him what he said, none of the words matched. I think it can be assumed that some of this is deception. Maybe I’m too quick too judge but many of these groups that speak in tongues are the same people that see a demon behind every tree and they seem to think that every dream they have has some significant meaning. One girl told me she was a “prophet”. I had a Muslim friend that I had been talking to in the hopes of converting and after he got done talking to some of these people he just came to the conclusion that Christians are a little off.I disagree, tongues, if it is unauthentic (i.e. used out of emotion or pride etc.) will of course not provide any fruit and will simply serve to confuse/repel, but if it is authentic then it will absolutely bring fruits. It is an authentic gift of the Holy Spirit, so why would we reject it because you haven’t seen good fruits? If it is an authentic gift of the Spirit, it must have use. I have seen prayer tongues serve to edify people’s prayer lives and bring a power for evangelization and greater docility to the Spirit as it is used. Paul did says “I thank God I speak in tongues more than any of you” however remember that he, and many other early Christians taught that it was the least of the gifts, it should be used to promote further docility to the Spirit and His other gifts He wishes to provide - it should never be an end in itself! If it is used correctly this way it brings great fruits and I have surely seen this. Now if you have seen the gift used in an unauthentic way, I apologize, that happens for sure, just like how the gift of preaching can be used to repel if people choose this. This gift does require strong catechesis and being involved in a charismatic prayer group is certainly not for everyone.
In order to properly answer your question, one has to understand 1 Corinthians, Chapter 12 as well as Chapter 14.What does St Paul mean in chapter 14 when referring to “speaking in tongues’?
I’ve looked up Haydocks commentary but I’m still a little confused…
StephenEstes;9143923:
Ya fair enough, I have some experience in non-denominational Protestant Pentecostalism before I came fully back to the Catholic Church. My experiences in Catholic Charismatic Renewal (certain prayer groups and I attend a Catholic university where charismatic spirituality is very popular) have been very powerful but also seem to be well put together, well theologically catechized, and authentic because there is a good amount of solid teaching from the Church and pastoral care. I have only been in places a couple times where it seemed like something was not authentic or someone was being emotional and it was quickly taken care of by a mature member of the community. I do certainly realize though that there are situations and groups where things get crazy and unauthentic and this can certainly do damage if it is not handled correctly.I’m not disagreeing with what your saying here. However, I was a Lutheran before I became an Anglican. My Lutheran Pastor (before he got married) was dating a Pentecostal girl. He went with her to her church and when the tongue speaking began my pastor said a few lines in Latin for the heck of it. When the translator came around to tell him what he said, none of the words matched. I think it can be assumed that some of this is deception. Maybe I’m too quick too judge but many of these groups that speak in tongues are the same people that see a demon behind every tree and they seem to think that every dream they have has some significant meaning. One girl told me she was a “prophet”. I had a Muslim friend that I had been talking to in the hopes of converting and after he got done talking to some of these people he just came to the conclusion that Christians are a little off.
JPeter;9143825:
I agree with the other poster that speaking in tongues is essentially useless and Saint Paul said it does nothing to build up the Church.I disagree, tongues, if it is unauthentic (i.e. used out of emotion or pride etc.) will of course not provide any fruit and will simply serve to confuse/repel, but if it is authentic then it will absolutely bring fruits. It is an authentic gift of the Holy Spirit, so why would we reject it because you haven’t seen good fruits? If it is an authentic gift of the Spirit, it must have use. I have seen prayer tongues serve to edify people’s prayer lives and bring a power for evangelization and greater docility to the Spirit as it is used. Paul did says “I thank God I speak in tongues more than any of you” however remember that he, and many other early Christians taught that it was the least of the gifts, it should be used to promote further docility to the Spirit and His other gifts He wishes to provide - it should never be an end in itself! If it is used correctly this way it brings great fruits and I have surely seen this. Now if you have seen the gift used in an unauthentic way, I apologize, that happens for sure, just like how the gift of preaching can be used to repel if people choose this. This gift does require strong catechesis and being involved in a charismatic prayer group is certainly not for everyone.
I am going to attempt to keep this simple and clear. The Tradition of the Early Church was that when the apostles spoke to groups of people that the message was heard in the language of the listener. There is also a Tradition which holds that this ability to speak to all is a gift of the Spirit.What does St Paul mean in chapter 14 when referring to “speaking in tongues’?
I’ve looked up Haydocks commentary but I’m still a little confused…
StephenEstes;9143923:
One needs to be very clear about the two extremely different gifts of tongues.I agree with the other poster that speaking in tongues is essentially useless and Saint Paul said it does nothing to build up the Church.
Look at it this way. One gift of tongues is when humans speak directly to God, Himself. The other gift of tongues is when God, Himself, is directly speaking to humans.
As a suggestion, quoting St. Paul needs to be referenced within the entire chapter.
FYI – St. Paul specifically lists the nine [classical] Gifts of the Holy Spirit, including the gifts of speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues, as particularly used to build up the Church. 1Corinthians, Chapter 12.
What you are describing is known as a miracle of hearing – just as you said “the message was heard in the language of the listener.” This is one of many, many gifts of the Holy Spirit found in Scripture, e.g., the Isaiah Gifts. (Isaiah 11:1-3)I am going to attempt to keep this simple and clear. The Tradition of the Early Church was that when the apostles spoke to groups of people that the message was heard in the language of the listener. There is also a Tradition which holds that this ability to speak to all is a gift of the Spirit.
Hope that helps.
My apology – but somehow, I have the wrong person in quotes in my post 11. As far as I can tell I should have been replying to post 9 and not the poster StephenEstesOne needs to be very clear about the two extremely different gifts of tongues.
Look at it this way. One gift of tongues is when humans speak directly to God, Himself. The other gift of tongues is when God, Himself, is directly speaking to humans.
As a suggestion, quoting St. Paul needs to be referenced within the entire chapter.
FYI – St. Paul specifically lists the nine [classical] Gifts of the Holy Spirit, including the gifts of speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues, as particularly used to build up the Church. 1Corinthians, Chapter 12.
On its face your explanation has a problem, but I am not certain. However, I am certain that the gift is given to the speaker not the hearer in the case I referenced.What you are describing is known as a miracle of hearing – just as you said “the message was heard in the language of the listener.” This is one of many, many gifts of the Holy Spirit found in Scripture, e.g., the Isaiah Gifts. (Isaiah 11:1-3)
StephenEstes;9143923:
Paul is pretty clear that the gift’s do build up the Church, though he did say tongues was the least of the gifts (and that it is worth nothing if one lacks love) he also says “I thank God I speak in tongues more than you.” For anyone who has been involved in communities where this gift is used authentically, you can see that it serves to create greater docility to the Spirit and build up power for evangelization as well as sanctification. I don’t know why you have the opionion that it is useless, that is certainly not Biblical, historical, or the opinion of Pope John XIII, Pope Paul VI Pope John Paul II, or Pope Benedict XVI all who can be quotes as being very supportive of the charisms and the charismatic renewal.I agree with the other poster that speaking in tongues is essentially useless and Saint Paul said it does nothing to build up the Church.
Two things about what you said, Paul here is describing speaking in tongues not praying in tongues (it was described earlier how Paul gives teaching on actually two gifts of tongues, speaking which is followed by an interpretation, but he also teaches about tongues which don’t need an interpretation, and this is seen throughout Acts. This is a prayer gift for personal edification, not a message given to the community and it usually is used during times of communal worship etc. However, yes you are correct, saying that everyone must speak in tongues is an incorrect message and leads to abuse.“If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God.” (1Cor. 14:27-28, RSV-CE2)
When I was in college I attended a couple of Charismatic meetings (Protestant, though) in which this admonition was not followed. I have stayed away from such groups ever since. I was also put off by the insistence of some that speaking in tongues was a gift everyone would receive and that if you didn’t have it, you weren’t a Christian. I doubt that this would be taught by Catholic Charismatics. I found it difficult to accept that everyone (or nearly) in the room would speak in tongues at the same time, certainly going beyond the two or three Paul mentions, and that there was no interpretation. That it’s a gift of the Holy Spirit must be acknowledged or else I deny Scripture. But what I have seen as abuses have turned me off to it.
I am certainly open to find that there are individuals and groups who speak in tongues while not abusing the gift.