Understanding the biblical phenomenon of speaking in tongues can seem daunting, a topic on which much ink has been spilled. There are many proponents of tongues, especially in recent years, within the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements.
Others claim it was only a temporary charism in the early Church, a useful phenomenon to get the gospel off the ground. Still others, including the Catholic Church, assert that the gifts have always existed, and still exist today, for the building up of the body of Christ. Yet even among Catholics, there are disagreements over the meaning of tongues and their use today.
In Scripture, the word tongue has various meanings and connotations. In the Greek of the New Testament, the word glōssa (γλῶσσα) means “tongue,” “speech,” “talk,” “language,” or “supernatural gift of tongues” (languages). Here are a few examples.
First, the tongue is the muscular organ in the mouth, used mainly for taste and speech.
[The rich man] called out, “Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame” (Luke 16:24).
Second, it can refer to the flames of a fire, as in tongues of fire.
The tongue of fire devours the stubble, and as dry grass sinks down in the flame (Isa. 5:24).
And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them (Acts 2:3).
Third, tongue can refer to an ethnic group, members of a particular tribe or nation.
The time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and shall see my glory (Isa. 66:18; see also Rev. 5:9).
Fourth, it refers to various human languages.
Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God (Acts 2:11; see also 1 Cor. 13:1).
But now we confront the most controversial use of the word tongues, as in the “speaking in tongues,” which is mentioned often in the New Testament. Do tongues refer to natural human languages or spiritual languages, or both?
Before we discuss the various types of tongues and their practice, we will establish a few qualifications.
I have been involved with Christian groups of various traditions, both Protestant and Catholic. Several were proponents of spiritual gifts, with varying understandings of speaking in tongues.
There has been theological wrangling over the biblical meaning of tongues and how they should be practiced. Scripture is unambiguous: tongues are one of the charisms or gifts given to the Church and to individual members for the building up of the body of Christ. St. Paul mentions these gifts as normative, especially in 1 Corinthians 12-14.
Were these charisms and miraculous manifestations, including tongues, only to be practiced in the early Church to facilitate evangelism until the Church was established? Or were these gifts given for the edification of the Church until Christ comes back?
We find no “retirement clause” in Scripture that suggests that the charismatic gifts would cease. We are never given an indication that the gift of tongues was only temporary. The Church has never declared them to have ended. In fact, throughout history, the Doctors of the Church, the Catechism of Trent, St. Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI, along with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), and many other confirmations, have continued to assert with no ambiguity that the charismatic gifts exist today and are to be practiced for the edification of the Church.
There are special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” “benefit.” Whatever their character—sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues—charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church (CCC 2003).
That they exist for use in the Church today is one thing. How these spiritual gifts are practiced among the faithful is another discussion.
So what are the various kinds of tongues, and for what purpose does the Holy Spirit give them? Here again, there are a variety of opinions, but I think my three categories hold water.
First, we see the phenomenon appear when Jews from around the world were in Jerusalem for the Feast of Passover. The Holy Spirit rushed in with a mighty wind (Acts 2:3). The Apostles began speaking in tongues (better understood as various languages). We read that the listeners heard the message in their own languages.
So the question is, were the apostles speaking the different languages of the people gathered, or were the crowds able to understand the preaching in their own languages? The textual evidence leaves room for both interpretations.
The natural reading suggests that the miracle consisted in hearing rather than in speaking. The crowds did not ask, “How can they speak our multiple languages?” but rather, “Since these men are Galileans, how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?” (Acts 2:8). When Peter preached to the crowds, they were all able to understand him.
So the miracle on Pentecost seems to be that the Holy Spirit interpreted the apostles’ words for the individual hearers in their own languages, so that even though one language was being spoken, they all heard it in their own minds. This phenomenon has happened many times throughout history in worship and in preaching the gospel. A friend testified that this specifically happened to him.
Second, Paul speaks of tongues being used publicly to teach, to exhort, or to praise. These tongues, if unknown to the listeners, needed an interpreter.
If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God (1 Cor 14:27-28).
This kind of speaking in tongues is intended to build up Christ’s body and individuals, but it fails to do so unless people can understand the words. Thus, an interpreter is required so that all listeners can understand and be edified.
A third kind of tongues emerges in Paul’s writings: one of personal prayer, which Paul calls “praying in the spirit” and not “with the mind” (1 Cor. 14:14). This could even refer to the “tongues of angels” (13:1), which could mean an unknown spiritual language of prayer and worship. Romans 8:26 informs us of the Spirit’s involvement in our private prayer: “The Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.”
If there are three different kinds of “speaking in tongues,” then, in some cases, an interpreter is needed, but other times, the Holy Spirit interprets individually and internally, as on the day of Pentecost. With the third, no interpretation is necessary, since it is spiritual language used in private prayer and praise.
The gift of tongues is not for everyone, nor a sign of salvation, nor a threshold gift opening the door to other gifts. Nor should tongues be viewed as a shortcut to spirituality. In Paul’s thought, they are the least of the gifts, therefore the last mentioned in each of his three lists. Paul asks seven rhetorical questions, including “Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?” (1 Cor. 12:30). The expected answer is no. The gifts are given by the Holy Spirit as he wills, to whom he wills.
Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. . . . All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills (1 Cor. 12:4, 11).
God has given spiritual gifts to each individual for the building up of the body of Christ. It is our responsibility to seek the Lord as to what our gifts are and to exercise them accordingly.
For another take, check out Jimmy Akin’s recent article “What Happened on Pentecost?“, published Friday.