T
TheLittleLady
Guest
It is a learned behavior.
- Status
S
starlady
Guest
I do. Those who have done it think there’s no issue. I don’t have an issue with it, though I do think that it sometimes can get out of hand.
One of those people is my husband. He doesn’t do it frequently, but I have heard it once or twice with my own ears. Once, we were in the midst of praying the Rosary with his family shortly after we were married, and in the middle of the Hail Mary, he spoke a phrase in a language I did not recognize. He quietly apologized and said it was “the Holy Spirit.”
Believe what you will about “praying in tongues” or whatever, but I cannot imagine and do not believe that my husband, who is a man of great faith and spirituality, was suddenly overcome by the devil in the middle of devoutly praying the Rosary. :woman_shrugging:t2:
One of those people is my husband. He doesn’t do it frequently, but I have heard it once or twice with my own ears. Once, we were in the midst of praying the Rosary with his family shortly after we were married, and in the middle of the Hail Mary, he spoke a phrase in a language I did not recognize. He quietly apologized and said it was “the Holy Spirit.”
Believe what you will about “praying in tongues” or whatever, but I cannot imagine and do not believe that my husband, who is a man of great faith and spirituality, was suddenly overcome by the devil in the middle of devoutly praying the Rosary. :woman_shrugging:t2:
Last edited:
po18guy
Well-known member
A good thing to rememeer here is that tongues are supposed to have someone to interpret. Lacking that, the gift is limited to building up the speaker, and not those around him or her. And, it is never used for show or for boasting - that neutralizes any positive. So, if no one interprets, I certainly do not begrudge them their gift., as it is clear that they need it at that place and time. As odd as it may appear to us, it may be a Saint in the making.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Yes. And I do too.
It is just a way to pray. It is a powerful way to pray too. I am changed. Changed by the Holy Spirit.
Nobody can tell me that I do not. Nobody can tell me that I did not experience what I experienced. And it does not matter what they think of me. As far as I am concerned, it does not come into the equation. I know Jesus/God in a tangible way, what others said about it, especially if it is in a negative way and does not edify me, I just consider it just a distraction which I try to avoid.
In answering the question - if one prays in tongue, good. If one does not, it is good. Whatever is good for you that attribute to your growth, is always good. They are known by their fruits.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
What is a learned behaviour?
Z
Zaccheus
Guest
Many of them have done so, and many of them do.
T
thistle
Guest
Who? Give me some names.
M
Medawlinno
Guest
I was not looking for anything. Are you saying that you, also, are invested in debunking the Word of God?
I’m not “debunking” the Word of God; I’m debating the Pentecostal/Charismatic interpretation of it with respect to “tongues”. It’s a reading into the texts something that is just not there.
Perhaps you should contact the folks at the Charismatic Center, and explain to them that they are just chasing gobbly gook?
Or better, contact the Vatican and ask them to resect the New Testament, so that it will no longer lead people astray?
See the above reply – again, it’s not changing the existing text; it’s reading into it by certain groups things that are just not there.
Perhaps some of the writings of the Saints and Doctors of the Church, such as St. Teresa of Avila, should also be redacted, to reflect your findings!
Most wrote basing their assumptions on the Pentecostal narrative and seeing it as xenoglossy (it was not). St. Teresa of Avila – her writings concerning ‘tongues’ are virtual 16th century textbook descriptions of glossolalia. Point is, many of these descriptions are not overly detailed. We don’t really know what was actually produced, but by far, most descriptions given that do contain a little detail point towards glossolalia rather than xenoglossy. If xenoglossy, it’s not unreasonable to assume the languages spoken would have certainly been commented on.
I see your point. Heaven should definitely strive to meet the needs of the current generation of humans.
I think it’s just the opposite – tongues-speakers apparently presume there needs to be more than one heavenly/angelic language because humans have more than one.
Think about it - why would there ever be a need for more than one heavenly/angelic language?? Why do no two tongues-speakers ever produce the same “tongue”??
Perhaps one day our science will be able to measure all the divine mysteries? Science may one day be able to prove how the elements become inhabited by the Body and Blood of Christ!
There are many things in the Bible that must be taken on faith – one can neither prove nor disprove them. “Tongues” however is not one of these things. It is something very tangible that can and has been studied and analyzed and has been found to be not what its speakers claim it is.
St. Paul evidently made a mistake…
Paul writes “peri de tôn pneumatikôn…, – “concerning moreover spiritual things/matters….”. No word “gifts” here. Only mistake is how it was translated/interpreted.
I’m not “debunking” the Word of God; I’m debating the Pentecostal/Charismatic interpretation of it with respect to “tongues”. It’s a reading into the texts something that is just not there.
Perhaps you should contact the folks at the Charismatic Center, and explain to them that they are just chasing gobbly gook?
Or better, contact the Vatican and ask them to resect the New Testament, so that it will no longer lead people astray?
See the above reply – again, it’s not changing the existing text; it’s reading into it by certain groups things that are just not there.
Perhaps some of the writings of the Saints and Doctors of the Church, such as St. Teresa of Avila, should also be redacted, to reflect your findings!
Most wrote basing their assumptions on the Pentecostal narrative and seeing it as xenoglossy (it was not). St. Teresa of Avila – her writings concerning ‘tongues’ are virtual 16th century textbook descriptions of glossolalia. Point is, many of these descriptions are not overly detailed. We don’t really know what was actually produced, but by far, most descriptions given that do contain a little detail point towards glossolalia rather than xenoglossy. If xenoglossy, it’s not unreasonable to assume the languages spoken would have certainly been commented on.
I see your point. Heaven should definitely strive to meet the needs of the current generation of humans.
I think it’s just the opposite – tongues-speakers apparently presume there needs to be more than one heavenly/angelic language because humans have more than one.
Think about it - why would there ever be a need for more than one heavenly/angelic language?? Why do no two tongues-speakers ever produce the same “tongue”??
Perhaps one day our science will be able to measure all the divine mysteries? Science may one day be able to prove how the elements become inhabited by the Body and Blood of Christ!
There are many things in the Bible that must be taken on faith – one can neither prove nor disprove them. “Tongues” however is not one of these things. It is something very tangible that can and has been studied and analyzed and has been found to be not what its speakers claim it is.
St. Paul evidently made a mistake…
Paul writes “peri de tôn pneumatikôn…, – “concerning moreover spiritual things/matters….”. No word “gifts” here. Only mistake is how it was translated/interpreted.
Z
Zaccheus
Guest
No, I will not give you names.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
This is exactly my understanding of speaking in tongues as well.A friend and I went to a healing service a few years ago and unbeknownst to us it was part of a Charismatic gathering.This took place not in the actual church but an adjacent meeting space. The Blessed Sacrament was exposed and the officiating priest travelled the world on healing missions,showed videos of actual healings,etc.Then everyone stood up and with upraised hands started babbling and chanting .We weren’t expecting this and it actually kind of freaked me out.It sounded a lot like what the Muslims chant. I didn’t know what to make of it,however and I will admit maybe due to. Y own lack of knowledge re this,It didn’t feel very Catholic to me.
Last edited:
W
whyeyeman
Guest
Praying in tongues stems from the fact that protestants have no visible signs of receiving grace. We catholics have the seven sacraments, so we can be sure when we receive it. Protestants, on the other hand, do not and so, in trying to find this assurance of grace, turned to this peculiar thing called praying in tongues. It is essentially just people making strange noises to make themselves feel fuzzy inside.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
A cradle Catholic who is not exposed to Protestantism, I should say that is an interesting perspective. I suppose if by feeling fuzzy it leads them to be more Christ-like and increase their love for God albeit not having the fullness of truth, I think that’s altogether not a bad thing for them.
G
guanophore
Guest
I think the contention is, rather than the prayer welling up from inside the believer, the believer is just copying someone else’s behavior.
We know them by their fruits.
Priests and religious that have experienced this gift are automatically submitted to the Church for discernment, by virtue of their vows of obedience and community oversight.
Any priest or bishop can, at any time, call upon an investigation of the authenticity of the gift.
Basically I think you are saying that what is written in the bible is false.
Some of them were, certainly, as Luke describes in Acts 2. This not the only kind of tongues.
I know it seems reasonable to make 21st century demands of historical writings. Protestants do it here every day! I just read a post where a Reformed Christian was making this same argument about infant baptism. Stating that this was not the purpose of the wriitng (to be a complete doctrinal compendium or instruction book) avails one nothing. Demands are still made upon the authors based on the current want/need.
I think this question is based upon a couple erroneous assumptions.’
I am sure this can be concluded, especially if one rejects some of the supportive evidence.
G
guanophore
Guest
Since the Catechism translates this as charismatic gifts, it would seem essential to make the writers of this “sure norm” of the faith to correct this mistake!
Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers. 23So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and inquirers or unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24But if an unbeliever or an inquirer comes in while everyone is prophesying, they are convicted of sin and are brought under judgment by all, 25as the secrets of their hearts are laid bare. So they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, “God is really among you!” I Cor. 14
whether a certain practice “feels Catholic” has as much to do with our culture and experience as anything God is doing in our midst. I am sure that Peter did not think what the Holy Spirit did with the house of Cornelius was very Jewish, either!
This certainly seems to be putting chains on the work of the Holy Spirit.
“Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.” I Cor. 14
It seems that you believe certain parts of the NT should not apply to Catholics.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
I as much as admitted in my post my lack of understanding re this issue.Having never been exposed to it it did scare me a bit.it just isn’t for me is all.
G
guanophore
Guest
It is easy for us to assume that spiritual things that are unknown to us and surprise us are “not for me at all”. But sometimes this is not the case. I am sure Peter was surprised and baffled when he visited the house of Cornelius.
Have you considered asking the Holy Spirit what is “for you” with regard to spiritual gifts?
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
People see other people “babbling” in made up words from stringing together syllables and they imitate that. They learn this behavior.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
I talked to a priest in confession e this issue. He pretty much told me that I wasn’t required to accept this practice or engage in the Charismatic aspect of the faith if I didn’t care for it.To each his own.
Re my spiritual gifts,I have been a weekly adorer in the Adoration Chapel for nine years now.I felt called by the Holy Spirit to commit to this.
Re my spiritual gifts,I have been a weekly adorer in the Adoration Chapel for nine years now.I felt called by the Holy Spirit to commit to this.
Last edited:
J
Joe_5859
Guest
I think that’s true for some, but not all. I certainly knew plenty of kids in college who were just imitating what they saw around them because there was a pretty large charismatic contingent on campus. But I’ve known others for whom it was not mere imitation. I would be very hesitant about writing it all off as being fake or phony. Even for those who were just imitating what they saw, it wasn’t that they were being “fake” per se. They were trying to use it to improve their prayer life.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
This is always the Scripture verse that I have in mind with such praying “in the spirit” (I like that phrase, thanks 
)
)- Status