Speaking in tongues

[Mikaele]

We’re using the same words, but not understanding each other. Tongues within the ‘charismatic’ movement (Catholic and non-Catholic,) is that random gibberish you hear at their prayer groups, and at healing and ‘charismatic’ Masses.

The gift of tongues in the scriptures and in the case of certain Saints, is the ability to speak, and have people who speak other languages understand you. The gibberish we hear these days is not the tongues the apostles received at Pentecost.

I personally think it’s just praising the Lord without words. But is not a gift of the Holy Spirit. If it was, then why didn’t any of the Saints do it? In the recordings of Padre Pio’s Masses, he never broke out into tongues and ‘got slain in the Holy Spirit.’ Mother Teresa never picked up a leper and said, ‘Oh my, I have a word for you. You have to receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and be anointed.’ John Paul ll never ‘prophesied’ when he met up with the Cardinals.

Think about it, if it is the least of gifts, then why didn’t any of the Saints receive it?

 

[po18guy]

That’s not quite accurate. Paul says no one should speak in tongues in the church unless an interpreter is present.

The “Church” that Paul spoke of was not a building - it was the assembly of believers, right? Thus, I do believe that it stands. Where does Saint Paul refer to “private prayer”? 2,000 years later, we are big into private prayer, but they lived and prayed as one back in those days.

That doesn’t apply to personal prayer, which is what her friend was doing, as described here:

Aren’t you reaching outside of the bible?

*Romans 8:26 - Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
*

I see nothing about ‘private prayer’ in this at all.

 

[grannymh]

My friend, who isn’t catholic, goes to a church where they speak in tongues. She says that she has the gift to speak in tongues. I asked her what happens when she did that, and she said that when she is speaking in tongues she is communicating with the Holy Spirit in a language that only the Holy Spirit and her know. I asked what they are communicating to each other, and this is the part where she couldn’t really explain to me what was happening because it seems like the Holy Spirit doesn’t really tell her anything it’s more like a feeling. Personally, it seems like people are just blurting noises out of their mouths without thinking about what they are doing. I thought speaking in tongues was a miracle that meant people of many different languages could understand you. I don’t know what the Catholic Church thinks about this. Could someone explain it to me?

This is a good resource.

A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church** ISBN: 0-87029-033-9**

by Msgr. Vincent M. Walsh
Key of David Publications

 

[thevoiceofone]

Please refer to the following link for a good answer. The facts are that you will not get a good answer on this forum. For some reason this topic is very polarising where people are either for it and accept it and those who just unilaterally throw it out the window as either a sham or con to it is the devil and all people that speak in tongues are going to hell. But this link gives you the answer you are looking for:

bustedhalo.com/questionbox/speaking-in-tongues

I agree with you that it is a polarised topic, usually, but the people who have spoken are making valid observations. I look forward to the day when I may be able to speak in tongues, if the Holy Spirit wishes that for me, but, I have had similar experiences observing communities (Catholic and otherwise) who gather to speak in tongues. Chances are, some of them were really feeling the grace of the true Spirit, but I think most of them were full of themselves instead. I could have been misjudging the situation, of course, but there are other gifts of the Spirit besides tongues, like the ability to distiguish between spirits, and I couldn’t help but distinguish a difference in what was happening to the people around me.

Hopefully, no Catholic would deny that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Spirit, and that used properly (to edify the Church) and expressed in truth, it is something we all should do if we are able.

 

[PLeeD]

FWIW, I’m just relating what I’ve gathered from attending a pentecostal church for the better part of the last decade. I’m not claiming to be an expert, but this issue is discussed frequently, and the gifts of tongues/interpretation and prophecy are on display almost weekly at my church during Sunday morning services.

Who makes the groanings, the person praying or the Holy Spirit?

The person praying is in full control of whether they speak in tongues or not. Paul says if anyone speaks in tongues that only two or three should, and only one at a time. That indicates the individuals have control over the situation, to speak or not speak. It’s not a trance or some involuntary action.

As far as the source of the groanings, I suppose the source must be the Holy Spirit if it is truly done of the Spirit. The speaker initiates speech, but the words that flow come from the Holy Spirit.

I am not saying there is no legitimate prayer in tongues. But there is fakery. Hence Paul’s warning.

I too have seen situations where it did not seem that the tongues were coming from the Holy Spirit. I’ve also seen that happen in the case of prophesying. My pastor has been very diligent in trying to discern and correct where necessary.

The “Church” that Paul spoke of was not a building - it was the assembly of believers, right? Thus, I do believe that it stands.

I don’t disagree with what you said in terms of how the gift of tongues should be practiced in the church. I only disagree with your statement in the sense that tongues can also happen in private prayer where no one else is present to interpret. In that case it is proper to speak in tongues when no interpreter is present.

Where does Saint Paul refer to “private prayer”?

Again, I’m only giving you the basis for the practice described by the original poster. I’m not trying to prove it to you, or force you to believe it.

Paul says in 1 Cor 14:28 “If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.” If the speaker is to remain quiet in church, then where is he going to “speak to himself and God”? In private prayer.

Also, in 1 Cor 14:18, Paul says “…I speak in tongues more than all of you”. Then in the next verse, he says “But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words…”. The use of the word “But” indicates that much of his speaking in tongues occurs outside the church. In other words, in private prayer.

In this context, Romans 8:26 "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. " explains what the OP’s friend was experiencing when using tongues in private prayer.

 

[Church_Militant]

There are a bunch of threads around on this topic that might help you out. Here are some of the links.

Articles from Catholic Answers:

• [THE NATURE OF TONGUES (http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9804chap.asp) (This Rock: April 1998)
• THE ‘EXCEPTIONAL CASES’ RULE (This Rock: January 1999)
• Quick Questions (This Rock: November 1996)
• Catholic Answers: This Rock: Quick Questions: Pentecostal
• Quick Questions (This Rock: December 1993)

Forum threads on CAF

• SPLIT: Speaking in Tongues (Revisited)
• Speaking in Tongues
• Speaking in Tongues
• The Meaning of “Angelic Tongues”
• Charismatic Catholics?
• The Charismatic Movement and Glossolalia
• Speaking in tongues: genuine charism or silly gibberish??
• Catholic Charismatic or Catholic emotionalist?
• pentecostal emotionalism
• Speaking in tongues vs. demonic possession? (from Fr. Serpa here at Catholic Answers)
• Does 1 Corinthians 14 prohibit speaking in tongues?
• Which Holy Spirit gifts are correct?
• speaking in tongues

 

[Michael_Francis]

Then of course there is my own experience and opinion. Keep in mind that I was a deacon in an Assembly of God church during my time away from the Church. (My Testimony)
So long as everyone follows St. Paul’s mandates in 1st Corinthians, I’m fine with it, as I’ve said before. (* Re: The Charismatic Movement and Glossolalia*)

 

[Church_Militant]

Then of course there is my own experience and opinion. Keep in mind that I was a deacon in an Assembly of God church during my time away from the Church. (My Testimony)
So long as everyone follows St. Paul’s mandates in 1st Corinthians, I’m fine with it, as I’ve said before. (* Re: The Charismatic Movement and Glossolalia*)

 

[po18guy]

I don’t disagree with what you said in terms of how the gift of tongues should be practiced in the church. I only disagree with your statement in the sense that tongues can also happen in private prayer where no one else is present to interpret. In that case it is proper to speak in tongues when no interpreter is present.

Forgive me for coming across a little strong. Since the unutterable groanings cannot be interpreted, perhaps these are from private prayer? Still, Saint Paul was much more in favor of the gift of prophecy than tongues.

Paul says in 1 Cor 14:28 “If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.” If the speaker is to remain quiet in church, then where is he going to “speak to himself and God”? In private prayer.

Fair enough. But, here is how the verse reads in the Douay-Rheims and the Vulgate, much older (closer to the original) and I would say inarguably better translations:

1 Cor 14:28 (D-R) But if there be no interpreter, let him hold his peace in the church and speak to himself and to God. (but, where?)
(Vulgate): si autem non fuerit interpres taceat in ecclesia sibi autem loquatur et Deo

Maybe it’s just me, but I see this as still a little ambiguous.

Also, in 1 Cor 14:18, Paul says “…I speak in tongues more than all of you”. Then in the next verse, he says “But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words…”. The use of the word “But” indicates that much of his speaking in tongues occurs outside the church. In other words, in private prayer.

1 Cor 14:18 (D-R) I thank my God I speak with all your tongues.
(Vulgate) gratias ago Deo quod omnium vestrum lingua loquor

1 Cor 14:19 (D-R) But in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also: than ten thousand words in a tongue.
(Vulgate) sed in ecclesia volo quinque verba sensu meo loqui ut et alios instruam quam decem milia verborum in lingua

Nevertheless, the Gifts are to be used, in the main, for the building up of the Church. I am blessed that I was spared the gift of tongues, so divisive and controversial it has become. And, who is to interpret?

In this context, Romans 8:26 "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. " explains what the OP’s friend was experiencing when using tongues in private prayer.

Well, Romans is in a different context within itself, so its applicability here is more general in nature, right?

Romans 8:26 (D-R) Likewise, the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity. For, we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit himself asketh for us with unspeakable groanings,
(Vulgate) similiter autem et Spiritus adiuvat infirmitatem nostram nam quid oremus sicut oportet nescimus sed ipse Spiritus postulat pro nobis gemitibus inenarrabilibus

The problem remains that I have never seen anyone interpret tongues, and this brings scandal within the Church. Just my two cents.

 

[PLeeD]

Nevertheless, the Gifts are to be used, in the main, for the building up of the Church.

Douay-Rheims Bible
1 Cor 14:4 - He that speaketh in a tongue, edifieth himself: but he that prophesieth, edifieth the church.

Paul has no problem with the idea that speaking in tongues in private prayer edifies the individual. Seems like his whole point in addressing the issue in 1 Corinthians was to correct some misuses of the gift in that church.

I’ve also seen misuses of prophesy, and watched my pastor wisely correct the situation. These gifts definitely require a spirit of discernment, but I’ve frequently witnessed them occurring with great power and presence of God. It would be a shame to deny them completely.

 

[po18guy]

Douay-Rheims Bible
1 Cor 14:4 - He that speaketh in a tongue, edifieth himself: but he that prophesieth, edifieth the church.

Paul has no problem with the idea that speaking in tongues in private prayer edifies the individual. Seems like his whole point in addressing the issue in 1 Corinthians was to correct some misuses of the gift in that church.

I’ve also seen misuses of prophesy, and watched my pastor wisely correct the situation. These gifts definitely require a spirit of discernment, but I’ve frequently witnessed them occurring with great power and presence of God. It would be a shame to deny them completely.

1 Cor 14:5 “And I would have you all to speak with tongues, but rather to prophesy. For greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues: unless perhaps he interpret, that the church may receive edification.”

1 Cor 14:39 “Wherefore, brethren, be zealous to prophesy: and forbid not to speak with tongues.”

Paul is clear on the value of prophecy (which is not what many, if not most Christians think it is). As well, he was not prohibiting tongues, but likely was addressing the misuse of tongues, since he specifically mentioned having interpreters present. I have never seen interpreters present. That is the problem, and that is what causes the gift to be controversial.

All of the gifts are essential, but Catholics have the Eucharist to build us up. We need prophecy to build the Church up.

 

[grannymh]

FWIW, I’m just relating what I’ve gathered from attending a pentecostal church for the better part of the last decade. I’m not claiming to be an expert, but this issue is discussed frequently, and the gifts of tongues/interpretation and prophecy are on display almost weekly at my church during Sunday morning services.

From what I am understanding from your post, your pastor is very knowledgeable about the “Pentecostal Renewal”.

On another thread, I have been explaining the “Catholic CharismaticRenewal”.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=481947

What I am finding is that many Catholics do not understand the difference between the common gift of praying in tongues to God and the classical gift (one of nine listed by St. Paul) of speaking God’s message to the community.

Part of the problem is that the English word “speak” is used in two nearly opposite ways in the translation of Paul’s admonishment to the Corinthians. Also, there is confusion between admonishment and instruction.

With this in mind, a reader can go back to the context and there will be the reference to what people in today’s environment call private prayer. In other words, one needs to first recognize that the Corinthians were fully instructed in the Gifts of the Holy Spirit and that the practice of the gifts was normative. Paul was admonishing them because of their mispractice, misunderstanding and prideful abuse of the two different gifts of tongues.

One last comment. Personally, I believe that *Romans 8: 22-27 *is very significant but I rarely hear it quoted in regard to the common gift of praying to God in tongues. Perhaps, I am reading more into it… I see it as implying “yielding” to the Holy Spirit. I also see “yielding” indicated in your post and wonder if your pastor uses that word in teaching about the different gifts.

I would like to carry on this conversation with you; however, I am traveling without a laptop which means I have to depend on others for access to a computer. I will catch up to you in the future.

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16 & 17

 

[grannymh]

I thought speaking in tongues was a miracle that meant people of many different languages could understand you.

What you described is called a miracle of hearing. It happened to the crowd at Pentecost. This is an unique miracle and is not related to the two different gifts of the Holy Spirit which involve tongues.

 

[PLeeD]

I have never seen interpreters present. That is the problem, and that is what causes the gift to be controversial.

In my church, the pastor has been diligent to make sure the gifts are used in an orderly fashion per Pauls teaching to the Corinthians. If tongues are used, they are always accompanied by interpretation. There is almost never more than one incidence of a message being shared in tongues during a single service.

Tongues have traditionally appeared at some point during the musical praise and worship part of the service. Usually, a person who is led to share a message will begin speaking during a lull between songs. When it happens, the worship team (band) stops playing and everyone waits for the message to finish, then for the interpretation. Sometimes it’s quite powerful. Other times not so much, but that could be due to my own poor attitude on that particular day - not being open enough to His presence.

Just some background on my observations of the gift. In our church there are only a handful of people out of about 300 who ever speak in tongues during church. These people are not “holier than thou” in any sense. They are humble and hard workers for the church.

The gift has also been de-emphasized quite a bit recently, as the pastor has asked anyone who feels led to share a message in tongues or prophesy should consult with him prior to the service to make sure the message doesn’t interfere with the proceedings, again, to assure order in everything.

BTW, I’m glad this discussion has taken a more reasonable tone than it started out with. There is a real tendency for knee-jerk negative reaction to anything remotely perceived as protestant.

 

[PLeeD]

On another thread, I have been explaining the “Catholic CharismaticRenewal”.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=481947

I read that. It’s nice to find common ground!

What I am finding is that many Catholics do not understand the difference between the common gift of praying in tongues to God and the classical gift (one of nine listed by St. Paul) of speaking God’s message to the community.

I didn’t do a good job in differentiating it during this discussion either. The two are different except that both use the unknown language of the Holy Spirit. Is it your understanding that praying in tongues is the Holy Spirit speaking to God on our behalf, while speaking in tongues is the Holy Spirit delivering a message to us from God? I’m not sure that’s been expressly taught to me, but it’s my understanding. I’ve seen it represented differently by others in this discussion.

In our church you wouldn’t notice the use of tongues except for the obvious cases of tongues/interpretation. I’ve heard some people pray in tongues quietly to themselves, but never as making a spectacle of themselves. I have a feeling that is what was happening at Corinth. People were praying loudly in tongues all at once, causing much confusion and misunderstanding in other people.

I’ve never witnessed that sort of occurrence with groups of people speaking or praying in tongues all at the same time. Occasionally, I’ve seen two different people start to speak in tongues at the same time, then stop, and one will proceed. This is understandable, and doesn’t detract from the validity of the message, given that initiation of the speech is expected to be voluntary and at the discretion of the individual.

Personally, I believe that *Romans 8: 22-27 *is very significant but I rarely hear it quoted in regard to the common gift of praying to God in tongues. Perhaps, I am reading more into it… I see it as implying “yielding” to the Holy Spirit. I also see “yielding” indicated in your post and wonder if your pastor uses that word in teaching about the different gifts.

I think Romans 8 is significant too. To me the context is quite clearly referencing praying in tongues. I think verse 27 is refering to Jesus, who knows the mind of the Spririt, and intercedes for us.

Actually, I can’t recall a lot of direct teaching during church services regarding exactly how to pray or speak in tongues. It’s been a while since it’s been discussed. Given my understanding, I’m sure the word “yield” was used.

Also, I’m really unclear as to how interpretation manifests itself. I’ve never experienced that, and haven’t talked about it to anyone who has.

I would like to carry on this conversation with you; however, I am traveling without a laptop which means I have to depend on others for access to a computer. I will catch up to you in the future.

Please, at your earliest convenience

 

[thevoiceofone]

In my church, the pastor has been diligent to make sure the gifts are used in an orderly fashion per Pauls teaching to the Corinthians. If tongues are used, they are always accompanied by interpretation. There is almost never more than one incidence of a message being shared in tongues during a single service.

Tongues have traditionally appeared at some point during the musical praise and worship part of the service. Usually, a person who is led to share a message will begin speaking during a lull between songs. When it happens, the worship team (band) stops playing and everyone waits for the message to finish, then for the interpretation. Sometimes it’s quite powerful. Other times not so much, but that could be due to my own poor attitude on that particular day - not being open enough to His presence.

Just some background on my observations of the gift. In our church there are only a handful of people out of about 300 who ever speak in tongues during church. These people are not “holier than thou” in any sense. They are humble and hard workers for the church.

The gift has also been de-emphasized quite a bit recently, as the pastor has asked anyone who feels led to share a message in tongues or prophesy should consult with him prior to the service to make sure the message doesn’t interfere with the proceedings, again, to assure order in everything.

BTW, I’m glad this discussion has taken a more reasonable tone than it started out with. There is a real tendency for knee-jerk negative reaction to anything remotely perceived as protestant.

I agree to your last statement, and I am very glad to have you aboard for this discussion. My best friend is a pastor at an Assemblies of God church, and we have some great (friendly) debates. It sounds like you have a pretty good pastor, and that is crucial for the well-being of your church community (*too *crucial, I would say).

My parenthetical statement above leads me to my question for you. I have asked my friend the same question. His church split up not too long ago because they became divided into two camps based upon various disagreements. I can’t help but wonder that if the church was receiving the same spirit, how could they become so divided? This question, directly, may not be fair to ask without you knowing the nature of their disagreements, but, in general, it seems to me that a church community that was living in the presence of the true Holy Spirit, prophesying and interpreting, would be very strong and unified.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[PLeeD]

I agree to your last statement, and I am very glad to have you aboard for this discussion.

Thanks. I’m glad to be here. The “ignore list” function of the forum makes it easier to stay I’ve learned a lot since joining because I’ve had to think more deeply and research the things I believe. Plus, I didn’t know a lot about Catholicism, and now I have a working knowledge.

I can’t help but wonder that if the church was receiving the same spirit, how could they become so divided? …it seems to me that a church community that was living in the presence of the true Holy Spirit, prophesying and interpreting, would be very strong and unified.

I look to Romans 14. Paul clearly indicates that faithful people can have different beliefs regarding how to worship, and how faith should manifest itself in our lives. I have to believe that the Holy Spirit really does lead different people in different ways. It’s not one-size-fits-all.

In the early church there might have been a single local option for church attendance, and Paul stresses that differences among members should be tolerated. Over time, as the body of believers increases in a locality, and other options for church attendance appear, I would expect that like-minded people in regards to things like diet or observing the sabbath would tend to congregate together. The different congregations can adhere to the same Gospel, but put it into practice differently.

I see denominationalism as the same thing. The protestant churches I’ve attended all believe the same gospel of Jesus, but emphasize different teachings of the bible. They have different styles of music, and there are different styles of preaching.

Based on what I’ve read from Catholics here, this also occurs in your parishes. Different parishes do things differently. The leaders have different personalities. There are different activities available. Catholics switch parishes to find one that suits them. It’s not noticed so much since I gather that fellowship is not emphasized as much. Catholics aren’t necessarily missed in one parish if they switch to another.

In protestant churches, when someone leaves for another church it can be quite noticeable, especially if there were known differences in opinion. Given the less (pardon the phrase) authoritarian nature of protestant church leadership, protestant church members are probably more likely to speak up if they have a problem. So it seems like a bigger deal in protestantism than it might in catholicism.

Bottom line, the differences I’ve seen aren’t usually over issues of doctrine regarding the Gospel, or even interpretations of scripture. It’s usually just an emphasis on a particular practice or the church, or even the type of music being played. For example, some people will leave a church if a drum set is added to the worship team.

Other examples may be more serious. We’ve recently seen some long time members of our church leave, including some of my family members. I believe their problem was what I mentioned earlier; the de-emphasis on gifts of the spirit.

Was the disagreement at your friend’s church more serious than that?

 

[thevoiceofone]

Thanks. I’m glad to be here. The “ignore list” function of the forum makes it easier to stay I’ve learned a lot since joining because I’ve had to think more deeply and research the things I believe. Plus, I didn’t know a lot about Catholicism, and now I have a working knowledge.

I look to Romans 14. Paul clearly indicates that faithful people can have different beliefs regarding how to worship, and how faith should manifest itself in our lives. I have to believe that the Holy Spirit really does lead different people in different ways. It’s not one-size-fits-all.

In the early church there might have been a single local option for church attendance, and Paul stresses that differences among members should be tolerated. Over time, as the body of believers increases in a locality, and other options for church attendance appear, I would expect that like-minded people in regards to things like diet or observing the sabbath would tend to congregate together. The different congregations can adhere to the same Gospel, but put it into practice differently.

I see denominationalism as the same thing. The protestant churches I’ve attended all believe the same gospel of Jesus, but emphasize different teachings of the bible. They have different styles of music, and there are different styles of preaching.

Based on what I’ve read from Catholics here, this also occurs in your parishes. Different parishes do things differently. The leaders have different personalities. There are different activities available. Catholics switch parishes to find one that suits them. It’s not noticed so much since I gather that fellowship is not emphasized as much. Catholics aren’t necessarily missed in one parish if they switch to another.

In protestant churches, when someone leaves for another church it can be quite noticeable, especially if there were known differences in opinion. Given the less (pardon the phrase) authoritarian nature of protestant church leadership, protestant church members are probably more likely to speak up if they have a problem. So it seems like a bigger deal in protestantism than it might in catholicism.

Bottom line, the differences I’ve seen aren’t usually over issues of doctrine regarding the Gospel, or even interpretations of scripture. It’s usually just an emphasis on a particular practice or the church, or even the type of music being played. For example, some people will leave a church if a drum set is added to the worship team.

Other examples may be more serious. We’ve recently seen some long time members of our church leave, including some of my family members. I believe their problem was what I mentioned earlier; the de-emphasis on gifts of the spirit.

Was the disagreement at your friend’s church more serious than that?

Good answer. The disagreements began with how the people felt about the pastor. The pastor went out of town to a concert (the Police) in Dallas… a lot of people thought he shouldn’t have done that, others thought it shouldn’t make any difference… one thing led to another and the church was divided. That’s it, in a nutshell. There was more to it, I know, but the concert incident is the only thing I can remember (because I thought it was funny). Of course, being a Catholic, I would want my pastor (my priest) to be as Christlike as possible, so I would probably wonder about his pastoral leadership myself if he was going out to rock concerts, but I realize that Protestant pastors are not expected to live the life of a priest, also.

 

[grannymh]

I agree to your last statement, and I am very glad to have you aboard for this discussion. My best friend is a pastor at an Assemblies of God church, and we have some great (friendly) debates. It sounds like you have a pretty good pastor, and that is crucial for the well-being of your church community (*too *crucial, I would say).

My parenthetical statement above leads me to my question for you. I have asked my friend the same question. His church split up not too long ago because they became divided into two camps based upon various disagreements. I can’t help but wonder that if the church was receiving the same spirit, how could they become so divided? This question, directly, may not be fair to ask without you knowing the nature of their disagreements, but, in general, it seems to me that a church community that was living in the presence of the true Holy Spirit, prophesying and interpreting, would be very strong and unified.

What are your thoughts on this?

Briefly here’s my:twocents:

Modern church communities are no different than the ones St. Paul wrote to or the crowd who listened to John Chapter 6 by the original Speaker. Sometimes people, for one reason or another, won’t allow the Holy Spirit to unite them. We all have free choice.

 

[grannymh]

Good answer. The disagreements began with how the people felt about the pastor. The pastor went out of town to a concert (the Police) in Dallas… a lot of people thought he shouldn’t have done that, others thought it shouldn’t make any difference… one thing led to another and the church was divided. That’s it, in a nutshell. There was more to it, I know, but the concert incident is the only thing I can remember (because I thought it was funny). Of course, being a Catholic, I would want my pastor (my priest) to be as Christlike as possible, so I would probably wonder about his pastoral leadership myself if he was going out to rock concerts, but I realize that Protestant pastors are not expected to live the life of a priest, also.

This is definitely my personal opinion so please ignore it. I like to think that the reason Jesus ate with sinners is because it was a fun place to be.

Note to PleeD. I started a reply to your post 34 thinking I would have time to finish it. However, it looks like I may post it “as is” later on today.
I am trying to remember the joke about discernment being needed when the interpretation is that the congregation should immediately build an Olympic size swimming pool in the pastor’s back yard.