Thoughts on Tongues

I grew up in the Protestant Evangelical world, but as my one, perhaps both, of my readers will know I've since converted to Eastern Orthodoxy and left my Protestant roots behind me. It still doesn't stop me from thinking and musing over my time in the Evangelical world, however, and I am continuously reminded by society around me where I have come from.

I have found my thoughts have been lately about the Charismatic "revival" of the last century, more specifically on the practice of "speaking in tongues". A very prevalent practice in the Protestant world, this practice is almost completely unknown in Orthodoxy.

Introduced to it very young, this is what I was taught, not necessarily directly, but through my observations while at church and discussions among the adults in my life:

1. Speaking in tongues is the supernatural ability for a believer to utter unintelligible sounds from their mouths without knowing what they are saying.
2. This is an evidence of being baptised in the Holy Spirit.
3. These sounds form a language that only God understands
4. This language is unique to the believer and is known as his "private prayer language"
5. When speaking this language, it is the believer's soul that is praying to God.
6. While this gift is not necessarily something that will be given to a believer, practically speaking if one wanted it, it would be granted.
7. It is a most helpful tool to use when you have exhausted all the prayers you can pray of your own accord and you still want to pray. You can start speaking in tongues, letting your soul pray to God, and you can continue for great lengths of time in a posture of prayer.
8. If you don't use it, you'll lose it.
9. The soul's vocabulary in the prayer language can grow over time with new words being added

There are other variations that some may have been taught, such as one must speak in tongues in order to be saved, but that was never taught when I was growing up.

This phenomenon is found in the Scriptures in Acts 2 and 1 Corithians 14. In both places, the believers are being given the ability to speak in "unknown" tongues. Therefore the practice as we know it today is completely scriptural and not suspicious in the least and I should just shut up and accept it as it is.

Or not.

I am very suspicious of the practice. And I have done it. Yes, that's right, when I was 18 I volunteered my time at a youth camp for a week. The speaker for the week was a man whose goal it was that everyone pray in a "heavenly language" - as he called it. But before he began the week, he spoke to us staff that we might speak in tongues first. He laid hands on me and prayed that I would be granted the gift, and just like that I started to speak in a language I could not understand. It was exhilarating. I then spent the rest of the week supporting the speaker in his attempt at getting all the kids at the camp to speak in tongues.

I never was a very big pray-er back then. I liked the fact that I could speak in tongues, but didn't exercise it very much. I would do so every once in a while because I didn't want to lose the ability, but that was about it. Even as I write this, I can still do what I used to do. I doubt very much that it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. In fact, as an experiment I tried a few days ago while walking home from work... Yup, still got it.

I'm probably in the minority of those who can "speak in tongues" and those who are suspicious about it. One may ask why am I suspicious of the practice that I can partake in when it is clearly taught in scripture? Well, if I was still a Protestant I would argue from the New Testament, and maybe throw a reference to Joel 2 in there for good measure. But I'm not going to do that. There are so many different interpretations of the "tongues" passages that I don't need to add my inadequate thoughts. Go ahead and google both sides if you are interested.

What drove me to Orthodoxy is History and Apostolic Tradition. I want to to talk about those right now.

Tongue speaking as we know it today began with the Pentacostal movement at the turn of the 20th century. There's the first red flag for me. 120 years ago people didn't speak in tongues. Think about that. 1900 years of Biblical interpretation at their disposal and nobody spoke in tongues. This tells me something glaring: tongue-speaking need not be a pivotal part of our spiritual lives.

Another thing that nobody seems to be aware of is that the Pentacostal movement, which came out of the Holiness movement of the late 19th century, was still concerned about spreading the gospel to unbelievers and for several decades it was the common thought that the gift of tongues that people were experiencing were for the sole purpose of evangelizing to people groups that spoke languages that the missionaries couldn't understand. It was to mirror the gift as detailed in Acts 2, when the Apostles spoke in the languages of the bystanders around them, spreading the good news of Christ. This was the thought. Until it didn't work.

When missionaries were reporting that they were not achieving success with their evangelistic efforts, the practice of speaking in tongues was re-interpreted to be a private prayer language, sometime around the 1940s.

So, no matter which way you look at it, whether it is an actual language that is spoken for evangelistic purposes, or a heavenly language for personal purposes, the practice is of recent origin. There is no history of it in the last 2000 years. Face it. It's a new thing. 

"But wait! It's in the Bible! That means it's an old thing."

 To this I must reply that while "speaking in tongues" is in the Bible, what evidence is there that the modern phenomenon is identical to what was happening on the day of Pentecost. 

An example of the same kind of error is one the Jehovah's Witnesses make. When asked to prove that Jehovah has set the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society up as His messenger to the world, they point to the following scripture:

Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. (Matt 24:45 - 47)

JW: See? There's a faithful and wise servant that is put in charge of God's servants.

Me: Yes, but why is that you?

JW: Read our explanation here: here. Using the scriptures, we make the following (obvious) logical deductions:

1. That the faithful and wise servant is "A small group of anointed brothers who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food during Christ’s presence. Today, these anointed brothers make up the Governing Body"
2. This group was selected by Jesus in 1919

Therefore it is us. See how that works?

Ummm, no. Just because you can find something in the Bible, doesn't give you the right to use it to validate some truth you have discovered that all Christians for 2000 years have not known.

And that's really what this comes down to. I find it much safer to recognize my spiritual practices in the lives of the saints who have come before me, rather than need to validate my experience my pointing to the Scriptures and interpreting them differently than anyone else in history. If your experience requires that, you just might be deceived.

One of things about us as humans is that we all think that we can't be deceived. Everyone else can, but not me. I've got it together. I know what I'm talking about. It feels good therefore it must be true.

Sigh.

Let us not forget that the words spoken by Christ in Matthew 24:24:

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

The idea is that people who are being deceived think they aren't being deceived.

We need to find solidarity in Church history. We need to find a solid ground for our feet to stand on. We need the Holy Apostolic Tradition.

Bye for now!

Joey