1

Yuliya Minets PhD Candidate

Center for the Study of Early Christianity

Catholic University of America

Searching for tongues Interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

by Greek Christian Authors of the 2nd - 4th c

Abstract

The goal of this study is to investigate the origins and development of different interpretations of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν otherwise known as the gift of tongues that the apostles received on the day of

Pentecost Contrary to those modern scholars who try to understand the nature of this gift (γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν) from the text of the New Testament modern analogies or psychological approaches this work is

looking for early Christian interpretations After the introductory analysis of the related New Testament

passages (Mark 1615-16 Acts 21-12 Acts 1044-46 Acts 191-7 1 Cor 127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1

Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40) the study focuses on the Greek patristic sources from the 2nd to the 4th

century (Irenaeus Origen Eusebius Gregory of Nyssa Gregory of Nazianzus Epiphanius of Salamis

and John Chrysostom) The analysis comes to the conclusions that according to the available Greek

sources the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia (the miraculous ability to speak in foreign

languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century Instead it was often understood as an

ecstatic speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or

unintelligibility of such speech However there is also no reason to equate it to the modern phenomenon

of glossolalia in Pentecostal and Charismatic movements Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest

author who suggested in his works that apostles might need the knowledge of foreign languages in order

to preach all over the world Gregory of Nazianzus was much more explicit in his statement that

Apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned before and communicated with foreigners in

their native tongues By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John

Chrysostom in his interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition Acts

21-12 (positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world could

understand the apostles preaching) and 1 Cor 141-40 (uselessness of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody

understood this speech and could be edified) with the quite confusing and contradictory results The

change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects of the

transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late Roman

Empire

The goal of this study is to investigate the origins and development of different interpretations of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν otherwise known as the gift of tongues that the apostles received on the day of

Pentecost Contrary to those modern scholars who try to understand the nature of this gift (γλώσσαις

2

λαλεῖν) from the text of the New Testament1 modern analogies

2 or psychological approaches

3 this

work is looking for the early Christian interpretations The description of the Pentecostal events in

Jerusalem in Acts 2 and Pauls exhortations in 1 Corinthians 12-14 provide the basis of the whole

discussion on this topic However these accounts are so ambiguous that the fact remains that the

readers in the past as well as nowadays could easily come up with different interpretations The crucial

premise of this research is that no matter how well a modern scholar could argue for one or another

explanation of these biblical fragments γλώσσαις λαλεῖν could gain quite different shades of meaning in

the minds of the Christian authors of the 2nd - 4th centuries CE such as Irenaeus Origen Eusebius

Gregory of Nyssa Gregory Nazianzen Basil of Caesarea Epiphanius of Salamis Cyril of Jerusalem

and John Chrysostom

Despite extensive attempts of some scholars4 to discover the roots of what was designated in the

New Testament and later in the patristic sources as γλώσσαις λαλεῖν the verb λαλεῖν in combination

with γλῶσσα -ττα in dative case in singular or plural forms is not found in the Greek literature of

Classical Antiquity with only one and yet late excerption - the Achilles Tatiuss romance Leucippe and

Clitophon dated to the end of the 2nd century CE The text is about the habit of a person felt in love to

speak to the object of his love only with a tongue without a guidance of reason5

The search in the Septuagint and the Jewish religious texts written in Greek in the

intertestamental period yields nothing but a few not very eloquent results Ps 384 seems to be a

description of a natural way of speaking with the help of ones tongue although in the state of the

emotional turmoil6 In Ps 1082 to speak with a lying tongue means to tell lies

7 The phrase λαλοῦσαι τῇ

1 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation

1970) offers a still useful overview of the field Pinardi Giuseppe La glossolalia nel Nuovo Testamento Salesianum 70 1

(2008) 55-79 gives the lastest updates but is little less organized and does not offer the profound analysis See also Harold

Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980) 125-137 2 Gerhard F Hasel Speaking in Tongues Biblical Speaking in Tongues and Contemporary Glossolalia (Adventist

Theological Society Publications 1991) Speaking in Tongues Letrsquos Talk about it Ed W Mills (Waco Tex Word Books

1973) 3 Samarin William J ldquoGlossolalia as Learned Behaviorrdquo Canadian Journal of Theology 15 No 1 (1969) 60-64 4 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation

1970) p 4-61 5 Achilles Tatius Leucippe and Clitophon ed E Vilborg (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 1955) 1-161 book 6 chapter 18

section 3 line 3 τοιοῦτοι γὰρ οἱ ἐρῶντες ὅταν πρὸς τὰς ἐρωμένας ζητήσωσι λαλεῖνmiddot οὐ γὰρ ἐπιστήσαντες τὸν λογισμὸν τοῖς

λόγοις ἀλλὰ τὴν ψυχὴν εἰς τὸ ἐρώμενον ἔχοντες τῇ γλώττῃ μόνον χωρὶς ἡνιόχου τοῦ λογισμοῦ λαλοῦσιν - For all the lovers

are like this when they try to talk with the beloved ones they do not express the thought with the words but having the soul

[attached] to a beloved one they speak only with a tongue without a guidance of reason 6 Ps 384 ἐθερμάνθη ἡ καρδία μου ἐντός μου καὶ ἐν τῇ μελέτῃ μου ἐκκαυθήσεται πῦρ ἐλάλησα ἐν γλώσσῃ μου - My heart

was hot within me and the fire will be kindled in my thoughts I spoke with my tongue 7 Ps 1082 ὅτι στόμα ἁμαρτωλοῦ καὶ στόμα δολίου ἐπrsquo ἐμὲ ἠνοίχθη ἐλάλησαν κατrsquo ἐμοῦ γλώσσῃ δολίᾳ - For they have

opened the wicked and deceitful mouth against me They have spoken against me with a lying tongue

3

γλώσσῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι in Isa 1918 definitely implies speaking in the specific language of the foreign

people8 In all these examples the expression γλώσσῃ-ττῃ (singular) λαλεῖν is used once it contains the

preposition ἐν twice it has the attributes δολίᾳ - lying and Χανανίτιδι - Canaanite In the latter case it is

clear that one means speaking in the Canaanite language that was foreign for Egyptians As we can see

from the extant Greek texts the phrase γλώσσαις-τταις λαλεῖν (in plural dative) was used in the New

Testament for the first time

The crucial New Testament passages are Mark 1615-17 Acts 21-12 Acts 1044-46 Acts 191-

7 1 Cor 127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40

Acts 2 contains the story about the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended upon the

Christs disciples and filled them with the spiritual gifts9 The gist of the linguistic phenomenon that

assumingly took place there is provided in the following ambiguous description they10

all are Galileans

(Acts 27) and they began to speak with otherdifferent tongues as the Spirit was giving them utterance

(λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις Acts 24) Their audience consisted of Jews living in Jerusalem devout men

from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) and at the same time Parthians and Medes and Elamites

and residents of Mesopotamia Judea and Cappadocia Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Pamphylia Egypt

and the districts of Libya around Cyrene and visitors from Rome both Jews and proselytes Cretans

and Arabs (Acts 29-11) This description is quite a stumbling block for the modern scholars As W

Knox points out it is most unlikely that any Jews of the Dispersion would have understood such native

dialects as survived in the remoter regions of the Middle East since the Jews of the Dispersion were

almost entirely city dwellers he also assumes that Luke used the earlier sources that spoke about the

representatives of the twelve nations and their twelve tongues one for each apostles (with Cretans and

Arabs added later) and Luke himself is responsible for inserting the words Jews in this verse with the

8 Isa 1918 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἔσονται πέντε πόλεις ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ λαλοῦσαι τῇ γλώσσῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι - In that day five cities in

the land of Egypt will be speaking the language of Canaan 9Acts 21Καὶ ἐν τῷ συμπληροῦσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς πεντηκοστῆς ἦσαν πάντες ὁμοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό 2 καὶ ἐγένετο ἄφνω ἐκ τοῦ

οὐρανοῦ ἦχος ὥσπερ φερομένης πνοῆς βιαίας καὶ ἐπλήρωσεν ὅλον τὸν οἶκον οὗ ἦσαν καθήμενοιmiddot 3 καὶ ὤφθησαν αὐτοῖς

διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι ὡσεὶ πυρός καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν 4 καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν πάντες πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ

ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς 5 Ἦσαν δὲ ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες

Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόνmiddot 6 γενομένης δὲ τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης συνῆλθεν τὸ πλῆθος

καὶ συνεχύθη ὅτι ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν 7 ἐξίσταντο δὲ καὶ ἐθαύμαζον λέγοντες Οὐχ ἰδοὺ

ἅπαντες οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ λαλοῦντες Γαλιλαῖοι 8 καὶ πῶς ἡμεῖς ἀκούομεν ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν ἐν ᾗ ἐγεννήθημεν 9

Πάρθοι καὶ Μῆδοι καὶ Ἐλαμῖται καὶ οἱ κατοικοῦντες τὴν Μεσοποταμίαν Ἰουδαίαν τε καὶ Καππαδοκίαν Πόντον καὶ τὴν

Ἀσίαν 10 Φρυγίαν τε καὶ Παμφυλίαν Αἴγυπτον καὶ τὰ μέρη τῆς Λιβύης τῆς κατὰ Κυρήνην καὶ οἱ ἐπιδημοῦντες Ῥωμαῖοι

11 Ἰουδαῖοί τε καὶ προσήλυτοι Κρῆτες καὶ Ἄραβες ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ

θεοῦ 12 ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηπόρουν ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες Τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι 10 It is also a discussion who were those they whether they are only the Twelve (Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles

(Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 82) or the followers of Jesus about 120 in all (Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan

Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation 1970) p 82)

4

result that we are asked to believe that devout Jews would need to hear the Gospel preached in the

language of the countries in which they had been born11

On the contrary N Engelsen puts the main

emphasis on the fact that the listeners were Jews and uses this to prove that the linguistic phenomenon

described in Acts 21-11 is not xenolalia ie the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages at all

but rather an ecstatic speech mostly unintelligible that could sound similar to a particular foreign

language for those who only vaguely familiar with it12

The audience was bewildered since each one among them heard the speakers speaking in τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ - ones own language (Acts 26) This is confusing since it is not clear from the grammar

whose language is meant one of a speaker or one of a listener But Acts 28 sheds some light τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν - our own language said listeners This is solidly confirmed by Acts 211 we hear them

in our tongues speaking of the great deeds of God - ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις

The phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is used in two more instances in the book of Acts in the story about

Cornelius and Peters preaching in Caesarea they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting

God - λαλούντων γλώσσαις καὶ μεγαλυνόντων τὸν θεόν (Acts 1046) and in the episode of Pauls

baptism of the disciples of John the Precursor in Ephesus they spoke with tongues and prophesied -

ἐλάλουν τε γλώσσαις καὶ ἐπροφήτευον (Acts 196) Both of these examples do not add any useful details

to clarify what kind of linguistic phenomenon is meant here Their main purpose is to show that the gifts

of the Spirit could be poured out on the Gentiles (Acts 1044-46) and that these gifts are the proofs of

the true baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 191-7)

The similar lack of clarity could be found in Mark 1615-17 that is a part of the so-called

Longer Ending which is not regarded as the original part of the Gosper of Mark by the vast majority of

scholars but still dated as early as the 2nd century CE It speaks about the signs that will accompany the

believers in My name they will cast out demons they will speak with new tongues - γλώσσαις

λαλήσουσιν καιναῖς The phrase speak with new tongues per se does not necessarily imply speaking in

the foreign languages Although might be understood in this way quite different explanations might be

involved as any form of ecstatic speech as the invented secret languages or argots as some

superhuman way of speaking such as γλῶσσαι τῶν ἀγγέλων from 1 Cor 131

Overall Acts 21-12 and Mark 1617 allow the suggestion that those who had received the Holy

Spirit began to speak in the real foreign languages although the text leaves the possibilities of other

11 Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles (Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 83 12 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14

(Dissertation 1970) 78-101

5

explanations Acts 1046 and Acts 196 do not provide any decisive clues On the other hand 1 Cor

127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40 incline toward the explanation that γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν is a kind of unintelligible ecstatic speaking that Paul compares to the gift of prophecy These

accounts are so different that one could even be confused whether Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 describe

the same phenomenon Interestingly enough the non-Pauline parts of the New Testament use γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν (always in plural dative) which might have the attributes such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις and καιναῖς

(in Mark) or be left without an attribute The preposition ἐν is never employed in this expression

Διάλεκτος is also used as the synonym of γλῶσσα always in singular and always has the attributes such

as ἰδίᾳ and ἡμῶν Φωνή another important synonym of γλῶσσα is never used13

The important feature

of Acts 2 is the possibility of the interpretation that the native speakers of the tongues in which the

disciples of Christ began to speak were present and that they understood those languages as their own

On the contrary Pauls account is strikingly different even in lexical terms He introduces kinds

of tongues - γένη γλωσσῶν and the interpretation of tongues - ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν (1 Cor 1210 1 Cor

1228) The singular form of γλῶσσα ie γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν (1 Cor 142 4 13 14 19 27) is used

interchangeably with the plural form γλώσσαις λαλεῖν (1 Cor 145 6 18 23 39) without any visible

differences in meaning The preposition ἐν is used at least once in Pauls own text (1 Cor 1419) but

also in 1 Cor 1421 Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ This is the

adapted Old Testament quote from Isa 2811 - διὰ φαυλισμὸν χειλέων διὰ γλώσσης ἑτέρας ὅτι

λαλήσουσιν τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ The adaptation includes the change of the preposition (διὰ into ἐν)

correspondingly the change of the noun case (genitive χειλέων and γλώσσης into dative ἑτερογλώσσοις

and χείλεσι) the omission of the unrelated adjective φαυλισμὸν and the introduction of

ἑτερογλώσσοις14

Paul does not use the attributives such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις καιναῖς ἰδίᾳ except in

this adapted quote In addition to λαλεῖν the verb to pray is used in a similar construction προσεύχωμαι

13 There is no single word for the general notion of ldquolanguagerdquo in Greek as well as in English (language tongue voice

speech) and in other languages In the Greek literature of Classical and Late Antiquity one could find several terms each of

which possesses it own semantic and stylistic nuances of the meaning

ἡ φωνή - language as the sound the semantic focus lies on the oral performance of the tongue

ἡ γλῶσσα ndash the most general term for notion of lsquotonguersquo it might refer both to the language and to the physical body as an

instrument of onersquos ability to speak

ἡ διάλεκτος ndash also the general term it refers to the language with specific peculiar features language of a particular group

(local ethnic social) of people

τό χεῖλος ndash it is literally translated as a lip and more broadly ndash as a mouth it also generally refers to lsquospeechrsquo human ability

to speak

ἡ διάλεξις - discourse argument - speech ndash language 14 This word is not Pauls invention and had been used by Polybius Philo Strabo and some other Greek historians and

geographers

6

γλώσσῃ (1 Cor 1414) as well as in another verbal expression to deliver the speech by the tongue - διὰ

τῆς γλώσσης εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε (1 Cor 149) Γλῶσσα is employed outside the dative construction

as a direct object (ἕκαστος γλῶσσαν ἔχει 1 Cor 1426) or a subject of a sentence (αἱ γλῶσσαι εἰς

σημεῖόν εἰσιν 1 Cor 1422) The nature of this phenomenon is to speak mysteries (λαλεῖ μυστήρια 1

Cor 142) to speak to God rather than to people (οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ 1 Cor 142) to edify

the speaker himself not the Church congregation (1 Cor 144) This phenomenon is contrasted to a

conscious way of speaking (πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους

λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ 1 Cor1419) and to the gift of prophecy The most important feature of γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν in 1 Cor 14 is that speaking with tongues is not understandable to anybody except those who

possess the gift of interpretation Moreover even the speaker himself might or might not understand the

meaning of his own speech (1 Cor 1413 27-28) Paul never says that some strangers who could

understand those tongues as their own were present in the audience although verses 1 Cor 1410-11

refer to the different languages in the world and foreigners whose tongues and Pauls were mutually

incomprehensible15

However these lines sound more like a hypothetical assumption rather than the

indication of the real presence of foreigners and may imply an interesting fact that any unintelligible

inspired speech was imagined as a native language of some unknown barbarians Another important

fact is that in these verses and only here Paul shifts from γλῶσσα to its synonym φωνή and uses the

phrases kinds of languages - γένη φωνῶν (1 Cor 1410) and meaningunderstanding of the language -

τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς (1 Cor 1411)

It is not our goal here to discuss the textual history purposes and the cultural background of the

different New Testament texts The analysis above was undertaken to show how different in the

meaning and in the actual wording are the descriptions of the linguistic phenomenon defined as

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in Acts and in 1 Corinthians Although the former seems to be in favor of xenolalia

and the latter may sound like the description of unintelligible ecstatic speaking one would act fairly if

accepts that both of these narratives allow various explanations depending on the emphases that an

interpreter would like to introduce

This confusing situation caused some difficulties for the early Christian authors who dealt with

and wanted to make sense of these biblical passages In the 2nd century Irenaeus wrote In like manner

we hear many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak with different kinds of

15

1 Cor 1410 τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνονmiddot 11 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς

φωνῆς ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

2

λαλεῖν) from the text of the New Testament1 modern analogies

2 or psychological approaches

3 this

work is looking for the early Christian interpretations The description of the Pentecostal events in

Jerusalem in Acts 2 and Pauls exhortations in 1 Corinthians 12-14 provide the basis of the whole

discussion on this topic However these accounts are so ambiguous that the fact remains that the

readers in the past as well as nowadays could easily come up with different interpretations The crucial

premise of this research is that no matter how well a modern scholar could argue for one or another

explanation of these biblical fragments γλώσσαις λαλεῖν could gain quite different shades of meaning in

the minds of the Christian authors of the 2nd - 4th centuries CE such as Irenaeus Origen Eusebius

Gregory of Nyssa Gregory Nazianzen Basil of Caesarea Epiphanius of Salamis Cyril of Jerusalem

and John Chrysostom

Despite extensive attempts of some scholars4 to discover the roots of what was designated in the

New Testament and later in the patristic sources as γλώσσαις λαλεῖν the verb λαλεῖν in combination

with γλῶσσα -ττα in dative case in singular or plural forms is not found in the Greek literature of

Classical Antiquity with only one and yet late excerption - the Achilles Tatiuss romance Leucippe and

Clitophon dated to the end of the 2nd century CE The text is about the habit of a person felt in love to

speak to the object of his love only with a tongue without a guidance of reason5

The search in the Septuagint and the Jewish religious texts written in Greek in the

intertestamental period yields nothing but a few not very eloquent results Ps 384 seems to be a

description of a natural way of speaking with the help of ones tongue although in the state of the

emotional turmoil6 In Ps 1082 to speak with a lying tongue means to tell lies

7 The phrase λαλοῦσαι τῇ

1 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation

1970) offers a still useful overview of the field Pinardi Giuseppe La glossolalia nel Nuovo Testamento Salesianum 70 1

(2008) 55-79 gives the lastest updates but is little less organized and does not offer the profound analysis See also Harold

Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980) 125-137 2 Gerhard F Hasel Speaking in Tongues Biblical Speaking in Tongues and Contemporary Glossolalia (Adventist

Theological Society Publications 1991) Speaking in Tongues Letrsquos Talk about it Ed W Mills (Waco Tex Word Books

1973) 3 Samarin William J ldquoGlossolalia as Learned Behaviorrdquo Canadian Journal of Theology 15 No 1 (1969) 60-64 4 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation

1970) p 4-61 5 Achilles Tatius Leucippe and Clitophon ed E Vilborg (Stockholm Almqvist amp Wiksell 1955) 1-161 book 6 chapter 18

section 3 line 3 τοιοῦτοι γὰρ οἱ ἐρῶντες ὅταν πρὸς τὰς ἐρωμένας ζητήσωσι λαλεῖνmiddot οὐ γὰρ ἐπιστήσαντες τὸν λογισμὸν τοῖς

λόγοις ἀλλὰ τὴν ψυχὴν εἰς τὸ ἐρώμενον ἔχοντες τῇ γλώττῃ μόνον χωρὶς ἡνιόχου τοῦ λογισμοῦ λαλοῦσιν - For all the lovers

are like this when they try to talk with the beloved ones they do not express the thought with the words but having the soul

[attached] to a beloved one they speak only with a tongue without a guidance of reason 6 Ps 384 ἐθερμάνθη ἡ καρδία μου ἐντός μου καὶ ἐν τῇ μελέτῃ μου ἐκκαυθήσεται πῦρ ἐλάλησα ἐν γλώσσῃ μου - My heart

was hot within me and the fire will be kindled in my thoughts I spoke with my tongue 7 Ps 1082 ὅτι στόμα ἁμαρτωλοῦ καὶ στόμα δολίου ἐπrsquo ἐμὲ ἠνοίχθη ἐλάλησαν κατrsquo ἐμοῦ γλώσσῃ δολίᾳ - For they have

opened the wicked and deceitful mouth against me They have spoken against me with a lying tongue

3

γλώσσῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι in Isa 1918 definitely implies speaking in the specific language of the foreign

people8 In all these examples the expression γλώσσῃ-ττῃ (singular) λαλεῖν is used once it contains the

preposition ἐν twice it has the attributes δολίᾳ - lying and Χανανίτιδι - Canaanite In the latter case it is

clear that one means speaking in the Canaanite language that was foreign for Egyptians As we can see

from the extant Greek texts the phrase γλώσσαις-τταις λαλεῖν (in plural dative) was used in the New

Testament for the first time

The crucial New Testament passages are Mark 1615-17 Acts 21-12 Acts 1044-46 Acts 191-

7 1 Cor 127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40

Acts 2 contains the story about the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended upon the

Christs disciples and filled them with the spiritual gifts9 The gist of the linguistic phenomenon that

assumingly took place there is provided in the following ambiguous description they10

all are Galileans

(Acts 27) and they began to speak with otherdifferent tongues as the Spirit was giving them utterance

(λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις Acts 24) Their audience consisted of Jews living in Jerusalem devout men

from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) and at the same time Parthians and Medes and Elamites

and residents of Mesopotamia Judea and Cappadocia Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Pamphylia Egypt

and the districts of Libya around Cyrene and visitors from Rome both Jews and proselytes Cretans

and Arabs (Acts 29-11) This description is quite a stumbling block for the modern scholars As W

Knox points out it is most unlikely that any Jews of the Dispersion would have understood such native

dialects as survived in the remoter regions of the Middle East since the Jews of the Dispersion were

almost entirely city dwellers he also assumes that Luke used the earlier sources that spoke about the

representatives of the twelve nations and their twelve tongues one for each apostles (with Cretans and

Arabs added later) and Luke himself is responsible for inserting the words Jews in this verse with the

8 Isa 1918 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἔσονται πέντε πόλεις ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ λαλοῦσαι τῇ γλώσσῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι - In that day five cities in

the land of Egypt will be speaking the language of Canaan 9Acts 21Καὶ ἐν τῷ συμπληροῦσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς πεντηκοστῆς ἦσαν πάντες ὁμοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό 2 καὶ ἐγένετο ἄφνω ἐκ τοῦ

οὐρανοῦ ἦχος ὥσπερ φερομένης πνοῆς βιαίας καὶ ἐπλήρωσεν ὅλον τὸν οἶκον οὗ ἦσαν καθήμενοιmiddot 3 καὶ ὤφθησαν αὐτοῖς

διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι ὡσεὶ πυρός καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν 4 καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν πάντες πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ

ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς 5 Ἦσαν δὲ ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες

Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόνmiddot 6 γενομένης δὲ τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης συνῆλθεν τὸ πλῆθος

καὶ συνεχύθη ὅτι ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν 7 ἐξίσταντο δὲ καὶ ἐθαύμαζον λέγοντες Οὐχ ἰδοὺ

ἅπαντες οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ λαλοῦντες Γαλιλαῖοι 8 καὶ πῶς ἡμεῖς ἀκούομεν ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν ἐν ᾗ ἐγεννήθημεν 9

Πάρθοι καὶ Μῆδοι καὶ Ἐλαμῖται καὶ οἱ κατοικοῦντες τὴν Μεσοποταμίαν Ἰουδαίαν τε καὶ Καππαδοκίαν Πόντον καὶ τὴν

Ἀσίαν 10 Φρυγίαν τε καὶ Παμφυλίαν Αἴγυπτον καὶ τὰ μέρη τῆς Λιβύης τῆς κατὰ Κυρήνην καὶ οἱ ἐπιδημοῦντες Ῥωμαῖοι

11 Ἰουδαῖοί τε καὶ προσήλυτοι Κρῆτες καὶ Ἄραβες ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ

θεοῦ 12 ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηπόρουν ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες Τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι 10 It is also a discussion who were those they whether they are only the Twelve (Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles

(Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 82) or the followers of Jesus about 120 in all (Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan

Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation 1970) p 82)

4

result that we are asked to believe that devout Jews would need to hear the Gospel preached in the

language of the countries in which they had been born11

On the contrary N Engelsen puts the main

emphasis on the fact that the listeners were Jews and uses this to prove that the linguistic phenomenon

described in Acts 21-11 is not xenolalia ie the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages at all

but rather an ecstatic speech mostly unintelligible that could sound similar to a particular foreign

language for those who only vaguely familiar with it12

The audience was bewildered since each one among them heard the speakers speaking in τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ - ones own language (Acts 26) This is confusing since it is not clear from the grammar

whose language is meant one of a speaker or one of a listener But Acts 28 sheds some light τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν - our own language said listeners This is solidly confirmed by Acts 211 we hear them

in our tongues speaking of the great deeds of God - ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις

The phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is used in two more instances in the book of Acts in the story about

Cornelius and Peters preaching in Caesarea they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting

God - λαλούντων γλώσσαις καὶ μεγαλυνόντων τὸν θεόν (Acts 1046) and in the episode of Pauls

baptism of the disciples of John the Precursor in Ephesus they spoke with tongues and prophesied -

ἐλάλουν τε γλώσσαις καὶ ἐπροφήτευον (Acts 196) Both of these examples do not add any useful details

to clarify what kind of linguistic phenomenon is meant here Their main purpose is to show that the gifts

of the Spirit could be poured out on the Gentiles (Acts 1044-46) and that these gifts are the proofs of

the true baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 191-7)

The similar lack of clarity could be found in Mark 1615-17 that is a part of the so-called

Longer Ending which is not regarded as the original part of the Gosper of Mark by the vast majority of

scholars but still dated as early as the 2nd century CE It speaks about the signs that will accompany the

believers in My name they will cast out demons they will speak with new tongues - γλώσσαις

λαλήσουσιν καιναῖς The phrase speak with new tongues per se does not necessarily imply speaking in

the foreign languages Although might be understood in this way quite different explanations might be

involved as any form of ecstatic speech as the invented secret languages or argots as some

superhuman way of speaking such as γλῶσσαι τῶν ἀγγέλων from 1 Cor 131

Overall Acts 21-12 and Mark 1617 allow the suggestion that those who had received the Holy

Spirit began to speak in the real foreign languages although the text leaves the possibilities of other

11 Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles (Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 83 12 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14

(Dissertation 1970) 78-101

5

explanations Acts 1046 and Acts 196 do not provide any decisive clues On the other hand 1 Cor

127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40 incline toward the explanation that γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν is a kind of unintelligible ecstatic speaking that Paul compares to the gift of prophecy These

accounts are so different that one could even be confused whether Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 describe

the same phenomenon Interestingly enough the non-Pauline parts of the New Testament use γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν (always in plural dative) which might have the attributes such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις and καιναῖς

(in Mark) or be left without an attribute The preposition ἐν is never employed in this expression

Διάλεκτος is also used as the synonym of γλῶσσα always in singular and always has the attributes such

as ἰδίᾳ and ἡμῶν Φωνή another important synonym of γλῶσσα is never used13

The important feature

of Acts 2 is the possibility of the interpretation that the native speakers of the tongues in which the

disciples of Christ began to speak were present and that they understood those languages as their own

On the contrary Pauls account is strikingly different even in lexical terms He introduces kinds

of tongues - γένη γλωσσῶν and the interpretation of tongues - ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν (1 Cor 1210 1 Cor

1228) The singular form of γλῶσσα ie γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν (1 Cor 142 4 13 14 19 27) is used

interchangeably with the plural form γλώσσαις λαλεῖν (1 Cor 145 6 18 23 39) without any visible

differences in meaning The preposition ἐν is used at least once in Pauls own text (1 Cor 1419) but

also in 1 Cor 1421 Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ This is the

adapted Old Testament quote from Isa 2811 - διὰ φαυλισμὸν χειλέων διὰ γλώσσης ἑτέρας ὅτι

λαλήσουσιν τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ The adaptation includes the change of the preposition (διὰ into ἐν)

correspondingly the change of the noun case (genitive χειλέων and γλώσσης into dative ἑτερογλώσσοις

and χείλεσι) the omission of the unrelated adjective φαυλισμὸν and the introduction of

ἑτερογλώσσοις14

Paul does not use the attributives such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις καιναῖς ἰδίᾳ except in

this adapted quote In addition to λαλεῖν the verb to pray is used in a similar construction προσεύχωμαι

13 There is no single word for the general notion of ldquolanguagerdquo in Greek as well as in English (language tongue voice

speech) and in other languages In the Greek literature of Classical and Late Antiquity one could find several terms each of

which possesses it own semantic and stylistic nuances of the meaning

ἡ φωνή - language as the sound the semantic focus lies on the oral performance of the tongue

ἡ γλῶσσα ndash the most general term for notion of lsquotonguersquo it might refer both to the language and to the physical body as an

instrument of onersquos ability to speak

ἡ διάλεκτος ndash also the general term it refers to the language with specific peculiar features language of a particular group

(local ethnic social) of people

τό χεῖλος ndash it is literally translated as a lip and more broadly ndash as a mouth it also generally refers to lsquospeechrsquo human ability

to speak

ἡ διάλεξις - discourse argument - speech ndash language 14 This word is not Pauls invention and had been used by Polybius Philo Strabo and some other Greek historians and

geographers

6

γλώσσῃ (1 Cor 1414) as well as in another verbal expression to deliver the speech by the tongue - διὰ

τῆς γλώσσης εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε (1 Cor 149) Γλῶσσα is employed outside the dative construction

as a direct object (ἕκαστος γλῶσσαν ἔχει 1 Cor 1426) or a subject of a sentence (αἱ γλῶσσαι εἰς

σημεῖόν εἰσιν 1 Cor 1422) The nature of this phenomenon is to speak mysteries (λαλεῖ μυστήρια 1

Cor 142) to speak to God rather than to people (οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ 1 Cor 142) to edify

the speaker himself not the Church congregation (1 Cor 144) This phenomenon is contrasted to a

conscious way of speaking (πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους

λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ 1 Cor1419) and to the gift of prophecy The most important feature of γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν in 1 Cor 14 is that speaking with tongues is not understandable to anybody except those who

possess the gift of interpretation Moreover even the speaker himself might or might not understand the

meaning of his own speech (1 Cor 1413 27-28) Paul never says that some strangers who could

understand those tongues as their own were present in the audience although verses 1 Cor 1410-11

refer to the different languages in the world and foreigners whose tongues and Pauls were mutually

incomprehensible15

However these lines sound more like a hypothetical assumption rather than the

indication of the real presence of foreigners and may imply an interesting fact that any unintelligible

inspired speech was imagined as a native language of some unknown barbarians Another important

fact is that in these verses and only here Paul shifts from γλῶσσα to its synonym φωνή and uses the

phrases kinds of languages - γένη φωνῶν (1 Cor 1410) and meaningunderstanding of the language -

τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς (1 Cor 1411)

It is not our goal here to discuss the textual history purposes and the cultural background of the

different New Testament texts The analysis above was undertaken to show how different in the

meaning and in the actual wording are the descriptions of the linguistic phenomenon defined as

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in Acts and in 1 Corinthians Although the former seems to be in favor of xenolalia

and the latter may sound like the description of unintelligible ecstatic speaking one would act fairly if

accepts that both of these narratives allow various explanations depending on the emphases that an

interpreter would like to introduce

This confusing situation caused some difficulties for the early Christian authors who dealt with

and wanted to make sense of these biblical passages In the 2nd century Irenaeus wrote In like manner

we hear many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak with different kinds of

15

1 Cor 1410 τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνονmiddot 11 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς

φωνῆς ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

3

γλώσσῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι in Isa 1918 definitely implies speaking in the specific language of the foreign

people8 In all these examples the expression γλώσσῃ-ττῃ (singular) λαλεῖν is used once it contains the

preposition ἐν twice it has the attributes δολίᾳ - lying and Χανανίτιδι - Canaanite In the latter case it is

clear that one means speaking in the Canaanite language that was foreign for Egyptians As we can see

from the extant Greek texts the phrase γλώσσαις-τταις λαλεῖν (in plural dative) was used in the New

Testament for the first time

The crucial New Testament passages are Mark 1615-17 Acts 21-12 Acts 1044-46 Acts 191-

7 1 Cor 127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40

Acts 2 contains the story about the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended upon the

Christs disciples and filled them with the spiritual gifts9 The gist of the linguistic phenomenon that

assumingly took place there is provided in the following ambiguous description they10

all are Galileans

(Acts 27) and they began to speak with otherdifferent tongues as the Spirit was giving them utterance

(λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις Acts 24) Their audience consisted of Jews living in Jerusalem devout men

from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) and at the same time Parthians and Medes and Elamites

and residents of Mesopotamia Judea and Cappadocia Pontus and Asia Phrygia and Pamphylia Egypt

and the districts of Libya around Cyrene and visitors from Rome both Jews and proselytes Cretans

and Arabs (Acts 29-11) This description is quite a stumbling block for the modern scholars As W

Knox points out it is most unlikely that any Jews of the Dispersion would have understood such native

dialects as survived in the remoter regions of the Middle East since the Jews of the Dispersion were

almost entirely city dwellers he also assumes that Luke used the earlier sources that spoke about the

representatives of the twelve nations and their twelve tongues one for each apostles (with Cretans and

Arabs added later) and Luke himself is responsible for inserting the words Jews in this verse with the

8 Isa 1918 τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἔσονται πέντε πόλεις ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ λαλοῦσαι τῇ γλώσσῃ τῇ Χανανίτιδι - In that day five cities in

the land of Egypt will be speaking the language of Canaan 9Acts 21Καὶ ἐν τῷ συμπληροῦσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς πεντηκοστῆς ἦσαν πάντες ὁμοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό 2 καὶ ἐγένετο ἄφνω ἐκ τοῦ

οὐρανοῦ ἦχος ὥσπερ φερομένης πνοῆς βιαίας καὶ ἐπλήρωσεν ὅλον τὸν οἶκον οὗ ἦσαν καθήμενοιmiddot 3 καὶ ὤφθησαν αὐτοῖς

διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι ὡσεὶ πυρός καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν 4 καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν πάντες πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ

ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς 5 Ἦσαν δὲ ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες

Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόνmiddot 6 γενομένης δὲ τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης συνῆλθεν τὸ πλῆθος

καὶ συνεχύθη ὅτι ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν 7 ἐξίσταντο δὲ καὶ ἐθαύμαζον λέγοντες Οὐχ ἰδοὺ

ἅπαντες οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ λαλοῦντες Γαλιλαῖοι 8 καὶ πῶς ἡμεῖς ἀκούομεν ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν ἐν ᾗ ἐγεννήθημεν 9

Πάρθοι καὶ Μῆδοι καὶ Ἐλαμῖται καὶ οἱ κατοικοῦντες τὴν Μεσοποταμίαν Ἰουδαίαν τε καὶ Καππαδοκίαν Πόντον καὶ τὴν

Ἀσίαν 10 Φρυγίαν τε καὶ Παμφυλίαν Αἴγυπτον καὶ τὰ μέρη τῆς Λιβύης τῆς κατὰ Κυρήνην καὶ οἱ ἐπιδημοῦντες Ῥωμαῖοι

11 Ἰουδαῖοί τε καὶ προσήλυτοι Κρῆτες καὶ Ἄραβες ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ

θεοῦ 12 ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηπόρουν ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες Τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι 10 It is also a discussion who were those they whether they are only the Twelve (Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles

(Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 82) or the followers of Jesus about 120 in all (Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan

Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14 (Dissertation 1970) p 82)

4

result that we are asked to believe that devout Jews would need to hear the Gospel preached in the

language of the countries in which they had been born11

On the contrary N Engelsen puts the main

emphasis on the fact that the listeners were Jews and uses this to prove that the linguistic phenomenon

described in Acts 21-11 is not xenolalia ie the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages at all

but rather an ecstatic speech mostly unintelligible that could sound similar to a particular foreign

language for those who only vaguely familiar with it12

The audience was bewildered since each one among them heard the speakers speaking in τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ - ones own language (Acts 26) This is confusing since it is not clear from the grammar

whose language is meant one of a speaker or one of a listener But Acts 28 sheds some light τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν - our own language said listeners This is solidly confirmed by Acts 211 we hear them

in our tongues speaking of the great deeds of God - ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις

The phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is used in two more instances in the book of Acts in the story about

Cornelius and Peters preaching in Caesarea they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting

God - λαλούντων γλώσσαις καὶ μεγαλυνόντων τὸν θεόν (Acts 1046) and in the episode of Pauls

baptism of the disciples of John the Precursor in Ephesus they spoke with tongues and prophesied -

ἐλάλουν τε γλώσσαις καὶ ἐπροφήτευον (Acts 196) Both of these examples do not add any useful details

to clarify what kind of linguistic phenomenon is meant here Their main purpose is to show that the gifts

of the Spirit could be poured out on the Gentiles (Acts 1044-46) and that these gifts are the proofs of

the true baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 191-7)

The similar lack of clarity could be found in Mark 1615-17 that is a part of the so-called

Longer Ending which is not regarded as the original part of the Gosper of Mark by the vast majority of

scholars but still dated as early as the 2nd century CE It speaks about the signs that will accompany the

believers in My name they will cast out demons they will speak with new tongues - γλώσσαις

λαλήσουσιν καιναῖς The phrase speak with new tongues per se does not necessarily imply speaking in

the foreign languages Although might be understood in this way quite different explanations might be

involved as any form of ecstatic speech as the invented secret languages or argots as some

superhuman way of speaking such as γλῶσσαι τῶν ἀγγέλων from 1 Cor 131

Overall Acts 21-12 and Mark 1617 allow the suggestion that those who had received the Holy

Spirit began to speak in the real foreign languages although the text leaves the possibilities of other

11 Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles (Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 83 12 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14

(Dissertation 1970) 78-101

5

explanations Acts 1046 and Acts 196 do not provide any decisive clues On the other hand 1 Cor

127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40 incline toward the explanation that γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν is a kind of unintelligible ecstatic speaking that Paul compares to the gift of prophecy These

accounts are so different that one could even be confused whether Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 describe

the same phenomenon Interestingly enough the non-Pauline parts of the New Testament use γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν (always in plural dative) which might have the attributes such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις and καιναῖς

(in Mark) or be left without an attribute The preposition ἐν is never employed in this expression

Διάλεκτος is also used as the synonym of γλῶσσα always in singular and always has the attributes such

as ἰδίᾳ and ἡμῶν Φωνή another important synonym of γλῶσσα is never used13

The important feature

of Acts 2 is the possibility of the interpretation that the native speakers of the tongues in which the

disciples of Christ began to speak were present and that they understood those languages as their own

On the contrary Pauls account is strikingly different even in lexical terms He introduces kinds

of tongues - γένη γλωσσῶν and the interpretation of tongues - ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν (1 Cor 1210 1 Cor

1228) The singular form of γλῶσσα ie γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν (1 Cor 142 4 13 14 19 27) is used

interchangeably with the plural form γλώσσαις λαλεῖν (1 Cor 145 6 18 23 39) without any visible

differences in meaning The preposition ἐν is used at least once in Pauls own text (1 Cor 1419) but

also in 1 Cor 1421 Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ This is the

adapted Old Testament quote from Isa 2811 - διὰ φαυλισμὸν χειλέων διὰ γλώσσης ἑτέρας ὅτι

λαλήσουσιν τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ The adaptation includes the change of the preposition (διὰ into ἐν)

correspondingly the change of the noun case (genitive χειλέων and γλώσσης into dative ἑτερογλώσσοις

and χείλεσι) the omission of the unrelated adjective φαυλισμὸν and the introduction of

ἑτερογλώσσοις14

Paul does not use the attributives such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις καιναῖς ἰδίᾳ except in

this adapted quote In addition to λαλεῖν the verb to pray is used in a similar construction προσεύχωμαι

13 There is no single word for the general notion of ldquolanguagerdquo in Greek as well as in English (language tongue voice

speech) and in other languages In the Greek literature of Classical and Late Antiquity one could find several terms each of

which possesses it own semantic and stylistic nuances of the meaning

ἡ φωνή - language as the sound the semantic focus lies on the oral performance of the tongue

ἡ γλῶσσα ndash the most general term for notion of lsquotonguersquo it might refer both to the language and to the physical body as an

instrument of onersquos ability to speak

ἡ διάλεκτος ndash also the general term it refers to the language with specific peculiar features language of a particular group

(local ethnic social) of people

τό χεῖλος ndash it is literally translated as a lip and more broadly ndash as a mouth it also generally refers to lsquospeechrsquo human ability

to speak

ἡ διάλεξις - discourse argument - speech ndash language 14 This word is not Pauls invention and had been used by Polybius Philo Strabo and some other Greek historians and

geographers

6

γλώσσῃ (1 Cor 1414) as well as in another verbal expression to deliver the speech by the tongue - διὰ

τῆς γλώσσης εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε (1 Cor 149) Γλῶσσα is employed outside the dative construction

as a direct object (ἕκαστος γλῶσσαν ἔχει 1 Cor 1426) or a subject of a sentence (αἱ γλῶσσαι εἰς

σημεῖόν εἰσιν 1 Cor 1422) The nature of this phenomenon is to speak mysteries (λαλεῖ μυστήρια 1

Cor 142) to speak to God rather than to people (οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ 1 Cor 142) to edify

the speaker himself not the Church congregation (1 Cor 144) This phenomenon is contrasted to a

conscious way of speaking (πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους

λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ 1 Cor1419) and to the gift of prophecy The most important feature of γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν in 1 Cor 14 is that speaking with tongues is not understandable to anybody except those who

possess the gift of interpretation Moreover even the speaker himself might or might not understand the

meaning of his own speech (1 Cor 1413 27-28) Paul never says that some strangers who could

understand those tongues as their own were present in the audience although verses 1 Cor 1410-11

refer to the different languages in the world and foreigners whose tongues and Pauls were mutually

incomprehensible15

However these lines sound more like a hypothetical assumption rather than the

indication of the real presence of foreigners and may imply an interesting fact that any unintelligible

inspired speech was imagined as a native language of some unknown barbarians Another important

fact is that in these verses and only here Paul shifts from γλῶσσα to its synonym φωνή and uses the

phrases kinds of languages - γένη φωνῶν (1 Cor 1410) and meaningunderstanding of the language -

τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς (1 Cor 1411)

It is not our goal here to discuss the textual history purposes and the cultural background of the

different New Testament texts The analysis above was undertaken to show how different in the

meaning and in the actual wording are the descriptions of the linguistic phenomenon defined as

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in Acts and in 1 Corinthians Although the former seems to be in favor of xenolalia

and the latter may sound like the description of unintelligible ecstatic speaking one would act fairly if

accepts that both of these narratives allow various explanations depending on the emphases that an

interpreter would like to introduce

This confusing situation caused some difficulties for the early Christian authors who dealt with

and wanted to make sense of these biblical passages In the 2nd century Irenaeus wrote In like manner

we hear many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak with different kinds of

15

1 Cor 1410 τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνονmiddot 11 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς

φωνῆς ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

4

result that we are asked to believe that devout Jews would need to hear the Gospel preached in the

language of the countries in which they had been born11

On the contrary N Engelsen puts the main

emphasis on the fact that the listeners were Jews and uses this to prove that the linguistic phenomenon

described in Acts 21-11 is not xenolalia ie the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages at all

but rather an ecstatic speech mostly unintelligible that could sound similar to a particular foreign

language for those who only vaguely familiar with it12

The audience was bewildered since each one among them heard the speakers speaking in τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ - ones own language (Acts 26) This is confusing since it is not clear from the grammar

whose language is meant one of a speaker or one of a listener But Acts 28 sheds some light τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ ἡμῶν - our own language said listeners This is solidly confirmed by Acts 211 we hear them

in our tongues speaking of the great deeds of God - ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις

The phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is used in two more instances in the book of Acts in the story about

Cornelius and Peters preaching in Caesarea they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting

God - λαλούντων γλώσσαις καὶ μεγαλυνόντων τὸν θεόν (Acts 1046) and in the episode of Pauls

baptism of the disciples of John the Precursor in Ephesus they spoke with tongues and prophesied -

ἐλάλουν τε γλώσσαις καὶ ἐπροφήτευον (Acts 196) Both of these examples do not add any useful details

to clarify what kind of linguistic phenomenon is meant here Their main purpose is to show that the gifts

of the Spirit could be poured out on the Gentiles (Acts 1044-46) and that these gifts are the proofs of

the true baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 191-7)

The similar lack of clarity could be found in Mark 1615-17 that is a part of the so-called

Longer Ending which is not regarded as the original part of the Gosper of Mark by the vast majority of

scholars but still dated as early as the 2nd century CE It speaks about the signs that will accompany the

believers in My name they will cast out demons they will speak with new tongues - γλώσσαις

λαλήσουσιν καιναῖς The phrase speak with new tongues per se does not necessarily imply speaking in

the foreign languages Although might be understood in this way quite different explanations might be

involved as any form of ecstatic speech as the invented secret languages or argots as some

superhuman way of speaking such as γλῶσσαι τῶν ἀγγέλων from 1 Cor 131

Overall Acts 21-12 and Mark 1617 allow the suggestion that those who had received the Holy

Spirit began to speak in the real foreign languages although the text leaves the possibilities of other

11 Knox Wilfred L The Acts of the apostles (Cambridge [Eng] University Press 1948) p 83 12 Engelsen Nils Ivar Johan Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to I Corinthians 12-14

(Dissertation 1970) 78-101

5

explanations Acts 1046 and Acts 196 do not provide any decisive clues On the other hand 1 Cor

127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40 incline toward the explanation that γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν is a kind of unintelligible ecstatic speaking that Paul compares to the gift of prophecy These

accounts are so different that one could even be confused whether Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 describe

the same phenomenon Interestingly enough the non-Pauline parts of the New Testament use γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν (always in plural dative) which might have the attributes such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις and καιναῖς

(in Mark) or be left without an attribute The preposition ἐν is never employed in this expression

Διάλεκτος is also used as the synonym of γλῶσσα always in singular and always has the attributes such

as ἰδίᾳ and ἡμῶν Φωνή another important synonym of γλῶσσα is never used13

The important feature

of Acts 2 is the possibility of the interpretation that the native speakers of the tongues in which the

disciples of Christ began to speak were present and that they understood those languages as their own

On the contrary Pauls account is strikingly different even in lexical terms He introduces kinds

of tongues - γένη γλωσσῶν and the interpretation of tongues - ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν (1 Cor 1210 1 Cor

1228) The singular form of γλῶσσα ie γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν (1 Cor 142 4 13 14 19 27) is used

interchangeably with the plural form γλώσσαις λαλεῖν (1 Cor 145 6 18 23 39) without any visible

differences in meaning The preposition ἐν is used at least once in Pauls own text (1 Cor 1419) but

also in 1 Cor 1421 Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ This is the

adapted Old Testament quote from Isa 2811 - διὰ φαυλισμὸν χειλέων διὰ γλώσσης ἑτέρας ὅτι

λαλήσουσιν τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ The adaptation includes the change of the preposition (διὰ into ἐν)

correspondingly the change of the noun case (genitive χειλέων and γλώσσης into dative ἑτερογλώσσοις

and χείλεσι) the omission of the unrelated adjective φαυλισμὸν and the introduction of

ἑτερογλώσσοις14

Paul does not use the attributives such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις καιναῖς ἰδίᾳ except in

this adapted quote In addition to λαλεῖν the verb to pray is used in a similar construction προσεύχωμαι

13 There is no single word for the general notion of ldquolanguagerdquo in Greek as well as in English (language tongue voice

speech) and in other languages In the Greek literature of Classical and Late Antiquity one could find several terms each of

which possesses it own semantic and stylistic nuances of the meaning

ἡ φωνή - language as the sound the semantic focus lies on the oral performance of the tongue

ἡ γλῶσσα ndash the most general term for notion of lsquotonguersquo it might refer both to the language and to the physical body as an

instrument of onersquos ability to speak

ἡ διάλεκτος ndash also the general term it refers to the language with specific peculiar features language of a particular group

(local ethnic social) of people

τό χεῖλος ndash it is literally translated as a lip and more broadly ndash as a mouth it also generally refers to lsquospeechrsquo human ability

to speak

ἡ διάλεξις - discourse argument - speech ndash language 14 This word is not Pauls invention and had been used by Polybius Philo Strabo and some other Greek historians and

geographers

6

γλώσσῃ (1 Cor 1414) as well as in another verbal expression to deliver the speech by the tongue - διὰ

τῆς γλώσσης εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε (1 Cor 149) Γλῶσσα is employed outside the dative construction

as a direct object (ἕκαστος γλῶσσαν ἔχει 1 Cor 1426) or a subject of a sentence (αἱ γλῶσσαι εἰς

σημεῖόν εἰσιν 1 Cor 1422) The nature of this phenomenon is to speak mysteries (λαλεῖ μυστήρια 1

Cor 142) to speak to God rather than to people (οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ 1 Cor 142) to edify

the speaker himself not the Church congregation (1 Cor 144) This phenomenon is contrasted to a

conscious way of speaking (πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους

λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ 1 Cor1419) and to the gift of prophecy The most important feature of γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν in 1 Cor 14 is that speaking with tongues is not understandable to anybody except those who

possess the gift of interpretation Moreover even the speaker himself might or might not understand the

meaning of his own speech (1 Cor 1413 27-28) Paul never says that some strangers who could

understand those tongues as their own were present in the audience although verses 1 Cor 1410-11

refer to the different languages in the world and foreigners whose tongues and Pauls were mutually

incomprehensible15

However these lines sound more like a hypothetical assumption rather than the

indication of the real presence of foreigners and may imply an interesting fact that any unintelligible

inspired speech was imagined as a native language of some unknown barbarians Another important

fact is that in these verses and only here Paul shifts from γλῶσσα to its synonym φωνή and uses the

phrases kinds of languages - γένη φωνῶν (1 Cor 1410) and meaningunderstanding of the language -

τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς (1 Cor 1411)

It is not our goal here to discuss the textual history purposes and the cultural background of the

different New Testament texts The analysis above was undertaken to show how different in the

meaning and in the actual wording are the descriptions of the linguistic phenomenon defined as

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in Acts and in 1 Corinthians Although the former seems to be in favor of xenolalia

and the latter may sound like the description of unintelligible ecstatic speaking one would act fairly if

accepts that both of these narratives allow various explanations depending on the emphases that an

interpreter would like to introduce

This confusing situation caused some difficulties for the early Christian authors who dealt with

and wanted to make sense of these biblical passages In the 2nd century Irenaeus wrote In like manner

we hear many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak with different kinds of

15

1 Cor 1410 τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνονmiddot 11 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς

φωνῆς ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

5

explanations Acts 1046 and Acts 196 do not provide any decisive clues On the other hand 1 Cor

127-11 1 Cor 1228-31 1 Cor 131 1 Cor 141-40 incline toward the explanation that γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν is a kind of unintelligible ecstatic speaking that Paul compares to the gift of prophecy These

accounts are so different that one could even be confused whether Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 describe

the same phenomenon Interestingly enough the non-Pauline parts of the New Testament use γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν (always in plural dative) which might have the attributes such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις and καιναῖς

(in Mark) or be left without an attribute The preposition ἐν is never employed in this expression

Διάλεκτος is also used as the synonym of γλῶσσα always in singular and always has the attributes such

as ἰδίᾳ and ἡμῶν Φωνή another important synonym of γλῶσσα is never used13

The important feature

of Acts 2 is the possibility of the interpretation that the native speakers of the tongues in which the

disciples of Christ began to speak were present and that they understood those languages as their own

On the contrary Pauls account is strikingly different even in lexical terms He introduces kinds

of tongues - γένη γλωσσῶν and the interpretation of tongues - ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν (1 Cor 1210 1 Cor

1228) The singular form of γλῶσσα ie γλώσσῃ λαλεῖν (1 Cor 142 4 13 14 19 27) is used

interchangeably with the plural form γλώσσαις λαλεῖν (1 Cor 145 6 18 23 39) without any visible

differences in meaning The preposition ἐν is used at least once in Pauls own text (1 Cor 1419) but

also in 1 Cor 1421 Ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέρων λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ This is the

adapted Old Testament quote from Isa 2811 - διὰ φαυλισμὸν χειλέων διὰ γλώσσης ἑτέρας ὅτι

λαλήσουσιν τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ The adaptation includes the change of the preposition (διὰ into ἐν)

correspondingly the change of the noun case (genitive χειλέων and γλώσσης into dative ἑτερογλώσσοις

and χείλεσι) the omission of the unrelated adjective φαυλισμὸν and the introduction of

ἑτερογλώσσοις14

Paul does not use the attributives such as ἡμετέραις ἑτέραις καιναῖς ἰδίᾳ except in

this adapted quote In addition to λαλεῖν the verb to pray is used in a similar construction προσεύχωμαι

13 There is no single word for the general notion of ldquolanguagerdquo in Greek as well as in English (language tongue voice

speech) and in other languages In the Greek literature of Classical and Late Antiquity one could find several terms each of

which possesses it own semantic and stylistic nuances of the meaning

ἡ φωνή - language as the sound the semantic focus lies on the oral performance of the tongue

ἡ γλῶσσα ndash the most general term for notion of lsquotonguersquo it might refer both to the language and to the physical body as an

instrument of onersquos ability to speak

ἡ διάλεκτος ndash also the general term it refers to the language with specific peculiar features language of a particular group

(local ethnic social) of people

τό χεῖλος ndash it is literally translated as a lip and more broadly ndash as a mouth it also generally refers to lsquospeechrsquo human ability

to speak

ἡ διάλεξις - discourse argument - speech ndash language 14 This word is not Pauls invention and had been used by Polybius Philo Strabo and some other Greek historians and

geographers

6

γλώσσῃ (1 Cor 1414) as well as in another verbal expression to deliver the speech by the tongue - διὰ

τῆς γλώσσης εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε (1 Cor 149) Γλῶσσα is employed outside the dative construction

as a direct object (ἕκαστος γλῶσσαν ἔχει 1 Cor 1426) or a subject of a sentence (αἱ γλῶσσαι εἰς

σημεῖόν εἰσιν 1 Cor 1422) The nature of this phenomenon is to speak mysteries (λαλεῖ μυστήρια 1

Cor 142) to speak to God rather than to people (οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ 1 Cor 142) to edify

the speaker himself not the Church congregation (1 Cor 144) This phenomenon is contrasted to a

conscious way of speaking (πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους

λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ 1 Cor1419) and to the gift of prophecy The most important feature of γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν in 1 Cor 14 is that speaking with tongues is not understandable to anybody except those who

possess the gift of interpretation Moreover even the speaker himself might or might not understand the

meaning of his own speech (1 Cor 1413 27-28) Paul never says that some strangers who could

understand those tongues as their own were present in the audience although verses 1 Cor 1410-11

refer to the different languages in the world and foreigners whose tongues and Pauls were mutually

incomprehensible15

However these lines sound more like a hypothetical assumption rather than the

indication of the real presence of foreigners and may imply an interesting fact that any unintelligible

inspired speech was imagined as a native language of some unknown barbarians Another important

fact is that in these verses and only here Paul shifts from γλῶσσα to its synonym φωνή and uses the

phrases kinds of languages - γένη φωνῶν (1 Cor 1410) and meaningunderstanding of the language -

τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς (1 Cor 1411)

It is not our goal here to discuss the textual history purposes and the cultural background of the

different New Testament texts The analysis above was undertaken to show how different in the

meaning and in the actual wording are the descriptions of the linguistic phenomenon defined as

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in Acts and in 1 Corinthians Although the former seems to be in favor of xenolalia

and the latter may sound like the description of unintelligible ecstatic speaking one would act fairly if

accepts that both of these narratives allow various explanations depending on the emphases that an

interpreter would like to introduce

This confusing situation caused some difficulties for the early Christian authors who dealt with

and wanted to make sense of these biblical passages In the 2nd century Irenaeus wrote In like manner

we hear many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak with different kinds of

15

1 Cor 1410 τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνονmiddot 11 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς

φωνῆς ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

6

γλώσσῃ (1 Cor 1414) as well as in another verbal expression to deliver the speech by the tongue - διὰ

τῆς γλώσσης εὔσημον λόγον δῶτε (1 Cor 149) Γλῶσσα is employed outside the dative construction

as a direct object (ἕκαστος γλῶσσαν ἔχει 1 Cor 1426) or a subject of a sentence (αἱ γλῶσσαι εἰς

σημεῖόν εἰσιν 1 Cor 1422) The nature of this phenomenon is to speak mysteries (λαλεῖ μυστήρια 1

Cor 142) to speak to God rather than to people (οὐκ ἀνθρώποις λαλεῖ ἀλλὰ θεῷ 1 Cor 142) to edify

the speaker himself not the Church congregation (1 Cor 144) This phenomenon is contrasted to a

conscious way of speaking (πέντε λόγους τῷ νοΐ μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους

λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ 1 Cor1419) and to the gift of prophecy The most important feature of γλώσσαις

λαλεῖν in 1 Cor 14 is that speaking with tongues is not understandable to anybody except those who

possess the gift of interpretation Moreover even the speaker himself might or might not understand the

meaning of his own speech (1 Cor 1413 27-28) Paul never says that some strangers who could

understand those tongues as their own were present in the audience although verses 1 Cor 1410-11

refer to the different languages in the world and foreigners whose tongues and Pauls were mutually

incomprehensible15

However these lines sound more like a hypothetical assumption rather than the

indication of the real presence of foreigners and may imply an interesting fact that any unintelligible

inspired speech was imagined as a native language of some unknown barbarians Another important

fact is that in these verses and only here Paul shifts from γλῶσσα to its synonym φωνή and uses the

phrases kinds of languages - γένη φωνῶν (1 Cor 1410) and meaningunderstanding of the language -

τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς (1 Cor 1411)

It is not our goal here to discuss the textual history purposes and the cultural background of the

different New Testament texts The analysis above was undertaken to show how different in the

meaning and in the actual wording are the descriptions of the linguistic phenomenon defined as

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in Acts and in 1 Corinthians Although the former seems to be in favor of xenolalia

and the latter may sound like the description of unintelligible ecstatic speaking one would act fairly if

accepts that both of these narratives allow various explanations depending on the emphases that an

interpreter would like to introduce

This confusing situation caused some difficulties for the early Christian authors who dealt with

and wanted to make sense of these biblical passages In the 2nd century Irenaeus wrote In like manner

we hear many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak with different kinds of

15

1 Cor 1410 τοσαῦτα εἰ τύχοι γένη φωνῶν εἰσιν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν ἄφωνονmiddot 11 ἐὰν οὖν μὴ εἰδῶ τὴν δύναμιν τῆς

φωνῆς ἔσομαι τῷ λαλοῦντι βάρβαρος καὶ ὁ λαλῶν ἐν ἐμοὶ βάρβαρος

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

7

languages through the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit and

expound Gods mysteries16

It is not exactly clear what kind of speech Irenaeus meant here on the one

hand different kinds of languages - παντοδαπαῖς17

- might hint at the foreign tongues on the other

hand speaking through the Spirit - διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος - could imply an ecstatic speech The author

has rather a positive attitude to the gift We are told nothing about the presence of any foreigners who

understood those languages as their own However there is no indication of unintelligibility of the

speech Quite the opposite is declared τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ

συμφέροντι - [they] lead the hidden things of people into clearness for [their] benefit

Origen uses the expression γλώσσαις λαλεῖν many times in his works However in some

instances he just quotes the New Testament passages and does not add his own explanations18

Whenever Origen comments on 1 Cor 131 he seems to be in favor of the idea that the human

tongues in the passage in question were real languages of different peoples in the world There are at

least two examples in Origens works that confirm this In the 1 Homily on Jeremiah Origen discusses

the hesitance of the prophet to accept a prophetic gift I do not know how to speak (Jer 16) Origen

asserts that the Savior does not know how to speak since He is the Word of God that was in the

beginning with God (John 11-2) He has the dialect of God and can converse with God but He has not

yet adopted human speech and does not know how to converse with men19

According to Origen the

reasons are first to speak is a specifically human activity and second He knows what is greater than

speaking either in the human or in the angelic languages (reference to 1 Cor 131) Origen does not use

16 Irenaeus Theol Adversus haereses (liber 5) Fragment 7 Καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων (L Doutreleau BC Mercier and A

Rousseau Ireacuteneacutee de Lyon Contre les heacutereacutesies livre 5 vol 2 Sources chreacutetiennes 153 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1969) 14-16

20-24 32-48 50 52 54 62 64 66 68 70 74 98 114 116 118 120 140 142 144 146 148 150 166-168 172-174 216-

222 232-234 300-304 334-336 342-380 384 394 416 452-458 17 παντο-δ πός ή όν (cf ἀλλοδαπός) of every kind of all sorts manifold the word is not often used to describe different

kinds of languages The only other case that we were able to identify is in J Geffcken Die Oracula Sibyllina Die

griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 8 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1902) 1-226 section 3 line 105 in the story about the Babel

tower αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ πύργος τrsquo ἔπεσεν γλῶσσαί τrsquo ἀνθρώπων παντοδαπαῖς φωναῖσι διέστρεφον 18 Origenes Selecta in Psalmos (fragmenta e catenis) In PG 12 page 1685 line 3 1684 line 51-1685 line 9 (dubious)

γλώσσαις λαλῶν is used in the quote 1 Cor 131 only

Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 55 n1-n3 (C Jenkins Documents

Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) quotation

from 1 Cor 146

19 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 51-55 Λέγει οὖν τὸ οὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα

μείζονα τοῦ λαλεῖν οἶδά τινα μείζονα τοῦ φθόγγου τούτου τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνουmiddotθέλεις με λαλεῖν ἀνθρώποις οὔπω διάλεκτον

ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφα ἔχω διάλεκτον σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος εἰμὶ σοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ σοὶ οἶδα προσδιαλέγεσθαι ἀνθρώποις οὐκ

ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖν νεώτερός εἰμι (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris

Eacuteditions du Cerf 1976) 196-430)

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

8

the very phrase γλώσσαις λαλεῖν but makes the interesting remark that to speak is to use languages

(τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν) Referring to the different human tongues Origen introduces the

word διάλεκτος which is absent in 1 Cor 131 He brings the examples of διάλεκτος such as the Greek

or Hebrew languages (Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ἢ ἄλλων τινῶν)20

The second example is from the fragments of Origens Commentaries on 1 Corinthians

(fragments) He asks whether the expression the tongues of angels implies the different angelic

languages as one may think of an analogy with the different human languages Do angels speaking to

each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Origen denies this idea and proposes another explanation

And as there is one language (διάλεκτος) of children and another one of those who have learned a

language (φωνήν) in the same way are all the human languages (διάλεκτος) like a dialect (διάλεκτος) of

children And is the angelic language like a language of those who are adult and educated Thus

according to Origen the language of angels is so much different from the human languages as the

childrens poorly-articulated speech is different from the skilful speaking of adults21

20 Origenes In Jeremiam (homiliae 1ndash11) hom 1 section 8 lines 25-37 πῶς γὰρ παραστήσεις μέγα καὶ ἔνδοξον εἶναι τὸ

laquoοὐκ ἐπίσταμαι λαλεῖνraquo λεγόμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος Τὸ λαλεῖν ἀνθρώπινόν ἐστι τὸ λαλεῖν διαλέκτῳ χρήσασθαί ἐστιν ὥστε

εἰπεῖν Ἑβραίων φέρε εἰπεῖν φωνὴν ἢ Ἑλλήνων ltἢ ἄλλωνgt τινῶν Ἐὰν ἀναβῇς ἐπὶ τὸν σωτῆρα καὶ εἰδῇς αὐτὸν λόγον laquoἐν

ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόνraquo ὄψει ὅτι οὐκ ἐπίσταται λαλεῖν ἀνθρωπίνου ὄντος τοῦ λαλεῖν ἀλλrsquo ἐπεί ἐστι μεῖζον ὃ ἐπίσταται τοῦ

λαλεῖνmiddot ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας συγκρίνῃς ἀνθρώπων γλώσσαις καὶ εἰδῇς ὅτι οὗτος μείζων ἐστὶ καὶ ἀγγέλων ὡς

ἐμαρτύρησεν ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπιστολῇ ἐρεῖς ὅτι καὶ τῆς ἀγγέλων γλώσσης μείζων ἦν ὅτε lsquoθεὸς ἦν λόγος

πρὸς τὸν πατέραrsquo (Origegravene Homeacutelies sur Jeacutereacutemie ed P Nautin vol 1 Sources chreacutetiennes 232 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf

1976) 196-430) - How indeed can you demonstrate that the statement if made by the Savior I do not know how to speak

(Jerem 16) is great and glorious To speak is a human trait to speak is to use a language as one speaks the dialect of the

Hebrews for example or that of the Greek or some others If you approach the Savior and know him as the Word in the

beginning with God (John 12) you will perceive that he does not know how to speak since to speak is human but he does

not speak since what he knows is greater than speaking And if you compare the language of angels to the language of men

(1 Cor 131) you will see also that he is greater than angels as the Apostle in the Letter to the Hebrews attested (Heb 14-

5) you will say that he was greater also than the language of angels when he was God the Word with the Father (John 11-2)

Transl from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC

Catholic University of America Press 1998) p 11 and my changes 21 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 49 line 32-49 Ἆρα δὲ ἄγγελοι

διαλεγόμενοι πρὸς ἀλλήλους ταύταις ταῖς γλώσσαις διαλέγονται αἷς καὶ ἄνθρωποι ὥστε τῶν ἀγγέλων τινὰς μὲν Ἕλληνας

εἶναι τυχὸντινὰς δὲ Ἑβραίους καὶ ἄλλους Αἰγυπτίους ἢ τοῦτο ἄτοπον λέγειν περὶ τῶν ἄνω ἀγγελικῶν ταγμάτων μή ποτε οὖν

ὥσπερ εἰσὶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτοι πολλαί οὕτως εἰσὶ καὶ ἐν ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἐὰν ὁ θεὸς ἡμῖν χαρίσηται ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης

φύσεως ἐπὶ τὴν ἀγγελικὴν καταταγῆνltαιgt τοῦ κυρίου μου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπαγγελίαν λέγοντος Ἰϲάγγελοι ἔσονται καὶ υἱοὶ

θεοῦ τῆϲ ἀναϲτάϲεωϲ υἱοὶ ὄντεϲ οὐκέτι χρησόμεθα διαλέκτῳ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ διαλέκτῳ τῇ ἀγγελικῇ καὶ ὥσπερ ἄλλη

διάλεκτος παιδίων καὶ ἄλλη τετρανωμένων τὴν φωνήν οὕτως πᾶσα ἐν ἀνθρώποις διάλεκτος οἱονεὶ παιδίων ἐστὶ διάλεκτοςmiddot ἡ

δὲ ἀγγελικὴ οἱονεὶ ἀνδρῶν ἐστι τελείων καὶ τετρανωμένων ἴσως δὲ κἀκεῖ κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς καταστάσεως καὶ

διάλεκτοί εἰσιν ἐὰν οὖν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ὥσπερ ὁ χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἄσημον δίδωσι φωνήν ὥσπερ τὸ κύμβαλον τὸ ἀλαλάζον οὐδὲν τρανόν τὸν

αὐτὸν τρόπον χωρὶς μὲν ἀγάπης γλῶσσα κἂν ἀγγέλων ἐν ἀνθρώποις καθrsquo ὑπόθεσιν ᾖ ἀτράνωτός ἐστινmiddot οὐδὲν γὰρ ποιεῖ τῶν

ἀνθρώπων ἤ τοι τῶν ἀγγέλων τρανῆ καὶ σαφῆ ὡς ἡ ἀγάπηmiddotἀγάπης δὲ μὴ παρούσης τὸ λαλούμενον οὐδέν ἐστιν (C Jenkins

Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51)

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

9

In the dubious Fragments on Psalms there is another interesting reflection on 1 Cor 131 The

author allegedly Origen quotes Ps 1505 Praise Him with well-sounded cymbals (ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις) Praise Him with cymbals of a loud sound (ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ) This is combined with 1

Cor 131 One who has love is a well-sounded cymbal (κύμβαλόν εὔηχον Ps 1505) with respect to

the spoken languages due to the beautifully sounded love or due to the language which is made clear by

love (it is better to interpret in this way) and probably a clanging cymbal (ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον 1 Cor

131) is not at all a [cymbal] of a loud sound (ἀλαλαγμοῦ Ps 1505) For the [cymbal] of a loud sound

sounds for the Lord as it is clear from the end of the last line22

Unlike other early Christian authors for

whom a (clanging) cymbal (1 Cor 131) does not imply any positive characteristics Origen here tries to

play on the contrast between a well-sounded cymbal and a cymbal of a loud sound that praise God (Ps

150) and a clanging cymbal that produces a noisy and annoying sound without love (1 Cor131)

In other instances Origen follows Pauls reasoning in 1 Cor14 In the Homily on 1 Kings 28 the

Old Testament prophets who did not know Christ and therefore their prophecies were imperfect are

compared with those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414)

This means that Origen agrees with Pauls idea that speaking in tongues is not entirely understandable

even for a speaker himself Origen also repeats 1 Cor 144 that a prophet edifies the Church while one

who speaks in tongues does not23

- Do angels speaking to each other speak in those languages in which humans speak as if some angels happen to be Greeks

some other Jews some other Egyptians Or it is inappropriate to speak about the arrangements of angels above Never there

are many languages (διάλεκτοι) among angels as it is among humans are they And if God gave us a gift to evolve from

human nature to angelic one as my Lord Jesus Christ says the sons of God will be equal to angels for being the sons of

resurrection would we no more use the human language (διαλέκτῳ) but the angelic language(διαλέκτῳ) And as there is one

language (διάλεκτος)of children and another one of those who have learned a language (φωνήν) in the same way are all

human languages (διάλεκτος) like the dialect (διάλεκτος) of children and is the angelic language like a language of those

who are adult and educated If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love I have become a noisy

gong or a clanging cymbal As a noisy gong gives an indistinct sound as a clanging cymbal gives nothing clear in this

manner without love even if hypothetically the language (γλῶσσα) of angels became human it would be unclear Nothing

makes human and even angelic [language] distinct and clear if not love When love is not present nothing would be said

(My translation) 22 Origenes Fragmenta in Psalmos 1-150 Psalm 150 verse 3-5 lines 1-24 Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν ἤχῳ σάλπιγγος Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν

ψαλτηρίῳ καὶ κιθάρᾳ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν τυμπάνῳ καὶ χορῷ αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν χόρδαις καὶ ὀργάνῳ Αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις

εὐήχοις αἰνεῖτε αὐτὸν ἐν κυμβάλοις ἀλαλαγμοῦ Πᾶσα πνοὴ αἰνέσατο τὸν Κύριον (Ps 1503-6) Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἑορτὴ ψαλτήριον

δὲ καὶ κιθάρα πνεῦμα καὶ ψυχὴ νεκρωθεῖσα μέλεσι τοῖς ἐπὶ γῆς καὶ πολλοῖς καὶ πνεύματι ἑνὶ καὶ ψυχῇ μιᾷ καὶ αὐτῷ νοῒ

καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμῃmiddot κἂν πολλοὶ δὲ ὦσι μὴ συμφωνοῦντες οὐκ εἰσὶ χορός mdashΚαὶ ὁ μὲν γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἢ τῶν

ἀγγέλων λαλῶν ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχων χαλκός ἐστιν ἠχῶν ἢ κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον (1 Cor 131) Ὁ δὲ πρὸς ταῖς εἰρημέναις

γλώσσαις ἀγάπην ἔχων κύμβαλόν ἐστιν εὔηχον διὰ τὴν καλὸν ἠχοῦσαν ἀγάπην ἢ διὰ τὴν γλῶσσαν ὑπὸ ἀγάπης

τρανουμένην μάλιστα ὅτε καὶ διερμηνεύει καὶ τάχα οὐ πάντως τὸ ἀλαλάζον κύμβαλον καὶ ἀλαλαγμοῦ ἐστιmiddot τὸ γὰρ τοῦ

ἀλαλαγμοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀλαλάζει τὸ δὲ τέλος δηλοῦται διὰ τοῦ τελευταίου στίχου (JB Pitra Analecta sacra spicilegio

Solesmensi parata (Paris Tusculum 1884) Vol2 3 23 Origenes De engastrimytho (Homilia in i Reg [i Sam] 283ndash25) section 9 lines 1-14 Καὶ τοῦτο δὲ προσθετέον τῷ λόγῳ

ὅτι ltεἰgt Σαμουὴλ προφήτης ἦν καὶ ἐξελθόντος ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καὶ ἀπέστη ἀπrsquo αὐτοῦ ἡ προφητεία

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

10

In another Origens text one could find the unusual statement that If one who speaks in tongues

also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation the one who prophesies

is no longer the greater This seems to be obvious from 1 Cor 145 but hardly any early Christian

author expresses this directly preferring to emphasize the inferiority of the gift of tongues in comparison

with other gifts of the Spirit

Although speaking in tongues is not always understandable even for a speaker himself Origen

reminds that its subject is lofty and that this speech is addressed to God and to a speaker himself24

Moreover he develops Pauls ideas from 1 Cor 14 even further and insists that speaking in tongues is

inferior to the prophecy only as long as the Church needs the instruction As soon as the congregation of

catechumens becomes the congregation of believers they will not need the instruction in Pauls five

words ie five bodily senses25

Perhaps Origen thinks that speaking in tongues is not so useless after all

οὐκ ἄρα ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπόστολοςmiddot laquoἄρτι προφητεύω ἐκ μέρους καὶ ἐκ μέρους γινώσκωmiddot ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ τὸ τέλειον τότε

τὸ ἐκ μέρους καταργηθήσεταιraquo οὐκοῦν τὸ τέλειον μετὰ τὸν βίον ἐστίν καὶ εἴ τι ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας ἐκ μέρους

προεφήτευσεν μετὰ πάσης παρρησίαςmiddot μεμαρτύρηται δὲ τὰ ἐνθάδε ὁ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον τῆς προφητείας οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὖν

τὴν χάριν τὴν προφητικὴν Σαμουήλ ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἀπέβαλεν οὕτως αὐτῇ ἐχρῆτο ὡς οἱ γλώσσαις λαλοῦντες ὥστε ἂν εἰπεῖνmiddot

laquoτὸ πνεῦμά μου προσεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦς μου ἄκαρπός ἐστινraquo καίτοι ἐκκλησίαν οὐκ οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ γλώσσῃ λαλῶνmiddot καὶ γὰρ

λέγει ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖ ὁ προφητεύων αὐταῖς λέξεσι λέγωνmiddot laquoὁ δὲ προφητεύων ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖraquo (E

Klostermann Origenes Werke vol 3 Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 6 (Leipzig Hinrichs 1901) p 283-294) -

And one must also apply this to the text if Samuel was a Prophet and after dying the Holy Spirit left him and the prophetic

gift left him then the apostle does not speak truly when he says I prophesy in part and I know in part but when the

perfectaccomplishment comes then what is in part will pass away (1 Cor 139-10) Thus the accomplishment is after life

An if Isaiah prophesied something he prophesied in part with all boldness (Acts 429) Yet about David it has been here

testified about what is perfectaccomplishment of prophecy Samuel then did not discard the prophetic grace and because he

did not discard it it thus belongs to him that he might say like those who speak in tongues My spirit prays but my mind is

unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) And yet he who speaks in a tongue does not edify the Church For Paul too says that the one who

prophesies edifies the Church for he literally says it The one who prophesies edifies the Church (1 Cor 144) Translation

from Origen Homilies on Jeremiah Homily on 1 Kings 28 translated by John Clark Smith (Washington DC Catholic

University of America Press 1998) p 330-331 my changes 24 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 54 line n1 lines n1-6 [Μείζων

γὰρ ὁ προφητεύων ἢ ὁ λαλῶν γλώσσαις ἐκτὸς εἰ μὴ διερμηνεύει ἵνα ἡ ἐκκλησία οἰκοδομὴν λάβῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Ὁ τὸ

οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων χάρισμα μείζων ἐστὶν τοῦ μὴ τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔχοντος ἅτε κοινltωgtφltεgtλέστερος ὢν ὁ τὸ οἰκοδομοῦν ἔχων

χάρισμαmiddot ἐὰν δὲ γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἔχῃ καὶ τὸ διερμηνεύειν ἐπὶ τῷ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οἰκοδομεῖν οὐκέτι μείζων ὁ προφητεύων

ἔστι γὰρ ὅτε ὑψηλὰ λαλεῖ ἑαυτῷ λαλεῖ καὶ τῷ θεῷ ὡς μὴ δύνασθαι ἀκούειν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν (C Jenkins Documents Origen

on I Corinthians Journal of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - Greater is one who

prophesies than one who speaks in tongues unless he interprets so that the church may receive edifying One who possesses

the charisma of edification is greater than one who does not since one who possesses the charisma of edification is better for

common benefit If one speaking in tongues also possesses the charisma of interpretation for edification of the congregation

the one prophesying is no longer the greater For there are a lofty things he is speaking about he speaks to himself and to

God since the congregation cannot understand 25 Origenes Fragmenta ex commentariis in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) Section 63 n1-8 [Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου

πάντων ὑμῶν μᾶλλον γλώσσαις λαλῶν ἀλλrsquo ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ θέλω πέντε λόγους διὰ τοῦ νοός μου λαλῆσαι ἵνα καὶ ἄλλους

κατηχήσω ἢ μυρίους λόγους ἐν γλώσσῃ] [Ὠριγένους] Καὶ τὸ πνευματικῶς λαλεῖν τοὺς αἰσθητοὺς λόγους τὰς πέντε

αἰσθήσεις τὸ κοινωφελές ἐστιν ζητεῖνmiddot ὁ δὲ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ὁ διὰ τῶν πέντε αἰσθήσεων ἐπὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἐν

ἐκκλησίᾳ τέτακται ὡς καὶ αὐτῶν ὑπὸ τῶν πέντε λόγων κατηχουμένων οἱ γὰρ μὴ εἰδότες τὴν τῶν λεγομένων τρανότητα

ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ ψιλῇ τῶν γραφῶν περιηχήσει προσέχοντες κατηχούμενοι χρηματίζουσινmiddot οἱ δὲ τῆς τῶν φθόγγων διαϲτολῆϲ

ἀκούοντες ἀπὸ τῆς γραφῆς οὗτοι οὐ κατηχούμενοι ἀλλὰ πιστοί (C Jenkins Documents Origen on I Corinthians Journal

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

11

and will become even more useful as the Church gains the maturity Speaking in tongues by the Spirit

constitutes an important counterpart of the intellectual approach of the divine what confirmed by the

statement Defective is the prayer of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is

clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the

mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also

(Cor 1415) For Origen when believers are mature enough two types of the divine inspiration which

Paul put in the opposition (the tongues and the prophecy) will both become useful and necessary to

reach the perfection26

Overall although Origen understands the tongues of humans in 1 Cor 131 as the real languages

such as Greek or Hebrew there is no indication that he might think about speaking in foreign languages

whenever he makes any comments on 1 Cor 14

Eusebius of Caesarea might be the earliest author who suggested that the apostles might need the

knowledge of foreign languages in order to preach all over the world There are several remarkable

passages in his works that clearly indicate that Eusebius was well aware of and placed a particular

emphasis on this problem Speaking about the difficult task of the apostles who were wanderers and

uneducated men unable to speak or understand any other language but their native27

to preach the

Gospel all over the world to the listeners who were the speakers of the foreign tongues28

Eusebius

puts the reasonable concerns into the mouth of the apostles But how can we do it How pray can we

of Theological Studies 9 10 (1908) 9232-247 353-372 500-514 1029-51) - I thank God I speak in tongues more than you

all however in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also rather than ten

thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1418-19) To say spiritually sensible words with respect to that are five senses is to seek

common benefit The word of catechesis through five senses is arranged for listeners in Church since they are catechized

with five words For those who do not know the clearness of what was said but pay attention only to bare resounding of the

Scripture are called catechumens Those who are understand the clear sound of precepts [of God] not catechumens are they

but believers 26 Origenes Commentarii in epistulam ad Romano Section 48 lines 4-12 ἐν δυσεξαριθμήτοις τὸ πνεῦμα ἀντιλαμβάνεται τῇ

ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ καὶ ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι ἡμᾶς ἐπὰν διαβαίνωμεν ὥστε προϲεύχεϲθαι πνεύματι τότε γὰρ τί

προσευξόμεθα καθrsquo ὃ δεῖ οὐκ εἰδότες ἀντιλαμβανομένου τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ἐν ἡμῖν ἀσθενείας διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τούτου βοήθειαν

προϲευχόμεθα πνεύματιmiddot εἶτrsquo ἐφεπομένου αὐτῷ βοηθοῦντι τοῦ νοῦ προϲευχόμεθα καὶ τῷ νοΐ ἐλλιπὴς δὲ ἡ εὐχὴ τοῦ μὴ

προσευχομένου ἀμφοτέροις ὡς δῆλον ἐκ τοῦ ἐὰν γλώϲϲαιϲ λαλῶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου προϲεύχεται ὁ δὲ νοῦϲ μου ἄκαρποϲ ἐϲτιν

ἵνα οὖν μὴ ἄκαρπος ᾖ ὁ νοῦς προϲεύξομαί φησι τῷ πνεύματι προϲεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοΐ (A Ramsbotham Documents The

commentary of Origen on the epistle to the Romans Journal of Theological Studies 13 14 (1912) 13210-224 357-368

1410-22) - The Spirit takes care of our countless weaknesses not less than of us when we are praying so that we would

advance to the prayer by spirit Then when the mind is following his helper we pray with the mind Defective is the prayer

of one who does not pray with both [the mind and the spirit] as it is clear from if I speak in tongues my spirit prays but my

mind is unfruitful (1 Cor 1414) So that the mind might not be unfruitful I will pray - he says - with the spirit and I will

pray with the mind also (Cor 1415) 27 Book 3 chapter 5 section 67 2-3 πλάνους ἄνδρας καὶ ἰδιώτας μήτε λαλεῖν μήτε ἀκούειν πλέον

τῆς πατρίου φωνῆς ἐπισταμένους 28Book 3 chapter 7 section 18 6-7 τοὺς ἀκούοντας ξενοφωνουμένους

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

12

preach to Romans How can we argue with Egyptians We are men bred up to use the Syrian tongue

only what language shall we speak to Greeks How shall we persuade Persians Armenians Chaldeans

Scythians Indians and other barbarous nations to give up their ancestral gods and worship the Creator

of all29

Nevertheless Eusebius writes some of these uneducated and completely ignorant men or

rather barbarians with no knowledge of any tongue but Syrian30

these low and ignorant people31

preached to the Roman Empire and the kingly City itself and others - to the Persians others - to the

Armenians some others to the Parthian race and yet others to the Scythians some [of them] already

went the very ends of the world and reached the land of the Indians and some crossed the Ocean to

reach the so-called Isles of Britain32

They succeeded and The Gospel then in a short time was

preached in the whole world for the testimony to the nations and Barbarians and Greeks alike

possessed the writings about Jesus in their ancestral script and language33

Eusebius seems never overtly declared that this success was at least partially due to the apostles

miraculous ability to speak in foreign tongues In the only instance where he extensively quotes the

Pentecost story from Acts 234

Eusebius juxtaposes it with the statement based on Isa 19 That indeed

was the seed (Isa 19) of the apostles and the disciples and the evangelists of the prophecy - a remnant

that has come to be according to the choice of grace (Rom 115) from the Jewish people that was

dispersed among the all peoples for some of the Jewish people were dispersed in the Assyrian country

and in Egypt and in Babylon and in Ethiopia and in the land of Elamites and in the rest of the

world35

This implies that the apostles and disciples had some special connection with the different

29 Book 3 chapter 7 section 10-11 καὶ πῶς εἶπον ἂν οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ διδασκάλῳ πάντως που ἀποκρινάμενοι τοῦθrsquo ἡμῖν ἔσται

δυνατόν πῶς γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις φέρε κηρύξομεν πῶς δrsquo Αἰγυπτίοις διαλεχθησόμεθα ποίᾳ δὲ χρησόμεθα λέξει πρὸς Ἕλληνας

ἄνδρες τῇ Σύρων ἐντραφέντες μόνῃ φωνῇ Πέρσας δὲ καὶ Ἀρμενίους καὶ Χαλδαίους καὶ Σκύθας καὶ Ἰνδούς καὶ εἴ τινα

βαρβάρων γένοιτο ἔθνη πῶς πείσομεν τῶν μὲν πατρίων θεῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἕνα δὲ τὸν πάντων δημιουργὸν σέβειν 30 Book 3 chapter 4 section 44 lines 2-4 ἀπαίδευτοι καὶ παντελῶς ἰδιῶται μᾶλλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ τῆς Σύρων οὐ

πλέον ἐπαΐοντες φωνῆς 31 Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 line 11 εὐτελεῖς καὶ ἰδιώτας 32Book 3 chapter 4 section 45 lines 5-10 καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν τὴν Ῥωμαίων ἀρχὴν καὶ αὐτήν τε τὴν βασιλικωτάτην πόλιν

νείμασθαι τοὺς δὲ τὴν Περσῶν τοὺς δὲ τὴν Ἀρμενίων ἑτέρους δὲ τὸ Πάρθων ἔθνος καὶ αὖ πάλιν τὸ Σκυθῶν τινὰς δὲ ἤδη

καὶ ἐπrsquo αὐτὰ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐλθεῖν τὰ ἄκρα ἐπί τε τὴν Ἰνδῶν φθάσαι χώραν καὶ ἑτέρους ὑπὲρ τὸν Ὠκεανὸν παρελθεῖν ἐπὶ

τὰς καλουμένας Βρεττανικὰς νήσους 33 Book 3 chapter 7 section 15 4-7 κεκήρυκτο γοῦν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν βραχεῖ χρόνῳ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ οἰκουμένῃ εἰς μαρτύριον τοῖς

ἔθνεσιν καὶ βάρβαροι καὶ Ἕλληνες τὰς περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γραφὰς πατρίοις χαρακτῆρσιν καὶ πατρίῳ φωνῇ μετελάμβανον 34 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 45-58 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975)) 35 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 63 line 30-35 τοῦτο δὲ ἦν τὸ lsaquoσπέρμαrsaquo τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ μαθητῶν

καὶ εὐαγγελιστῶν τοῦ θεσπιζομένου ὃ δὴ laquoλεῖμμα κατrsquo ἐκλογὴν χάριτος γέγονενraquo ἀπὸ παντὸς τοῦ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι

διεσπαρμένου Ἰουδαίων λαοῦ lceilεἴτε γὰρ ἐν τῇ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων χώρᾳ εἴτrsquo ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἴτε ἐν Βαβυλῶνι εἴτε ἐν Αἰθιοπίᾳ εἴτrsquo

ἐν τῇ γῇ τῶν Ἐλαμιτῶν εἴτrsquo ἐν τῇ λοιπῇ οἰκουμένῃ διεσπαρμένοι τινὲς ἦσαν τοῦ Ἰουδαίων ἔθνους (J Ziegler Eusebius

Werke Band 9 Der Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975))

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

13

groups of the Jewish people living in many countries and they might have the natural or miraculous

ability to speak the local languages

There is a couple of other cases where Eusebius uses γλώσσαις λαλεῖν that helps to shed light on

what the meaning Eusebius puts in this expression Section 7 of book 5 of Eusebiuss Church History is

devoted to Irenaeus and his treatise Against Heresies Eusebius quotes Irenaeus who said we hear

many brothers in the Church who possess prophetic gifts and speak different kinds of languages through

the Spirit and lead the hidden things of people into clearness for benefit and expound Gods mysteries

Eusebius puts special emphasis on the fact that the examples of divine and miraculous power continued

up to his [Irenaeuss] time in some the churches and various gifts remained among those who were

worthy even until that [Irenaeuss] time36

In the Commentary on Isaiah Eusebius speaks about the holy

men who receive the better gifts among which he mentions γλώσσαις σοφίας τε λαλεῖν37

Grammatically that could be either speaking in tongues of wisdom or speaking the wisdoms in

tongues but the former probably makes better sense It is not entirely clear what Eusebius means with

this new expression but it is unlikely that the foreign languages are intended here

Although we did not find direct evidence that Eusebius thought that speaking in tongues was the

gift of miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages but the examples above could imply this

Moreover he was the first author who clearly articulated that the apostles must have faced the problem

of foreign languages while preaching among different peoples

The only instance in the authentic works of Athanasius of Alexandria when he mentions

speaking in tongues is The first letter to Serapion or The first letter concerning the Holy Spirit written

later in 359 or early in 360 CE38

However it is simply the quotation Acts 24 that does not include any

Athanasiuss explanations on the issue39

36 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica Book 5 chapter 7 (Eusegravebe de Ceacutesareacutee Histoire eccleacutesiastique ed G Bardy 3 vols

Sources chreacutetiennes 31 41 55 (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1967) καθὼς καὶ πολλῶν ἀκούομεν ἀδελφῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ

προφητικὰ χαρίσματα ἐχόντων καὶ παντοδαπαῖς λαλούντων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος γλώσσαις καὶ τὰ κρύφια τῶν ἀνθρώπων εἰς

φανερὸν ἀγόντων ἐπὶ τῷ συμφέροντι καὶ τὰ μυστήρια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκδιηγουμένων ὅτι δὴ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ὑποδείγματα τῆς θείας

καὶ παραδόξου δυνάμεως ἐν ἐκκλησίαις τισὶν ὑπολέλειπτο διὰ τούτων ἐπισημαίνεται λέγων ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ διαφορὰς

χαρισμάτων μέχρι καὶ τῶν δηλουμένων χρόνων παρὰ τοῖς ἀξίοις διαμεῖναι 37 Eusebius Commentarius in Isaiam Book 1 section 41 line 93-105 (J Ziegler Eusebius Werke Band 9 Der

Jesajakommentar (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1975) See also Michael J Hollerich Eusebius of Caesarearsquos Commentary on

Isaiah Christian exegesis in the age of Constantine (Oxford Oxford University Press 1999) 38 C R B Shapland Introduction In The letters of Saint Athanasius concerning the Holy Spirit tr with introduction and

notes by C R B Shapland (London Epworth press 1951) 18 39 Athanasius Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem Epistle 1 section 6 subsection 4 lines 1-8 (K Savvidis Athanasius

Werke Band I Die dogmatischen Schriften Erster Teil 4 (Berlin New York De Gruyter 2010)

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

14

In the vast majority of instances when Basil of Caesarea mentions γλώσσαις λαλεῖν he quotes 1

Cor 131 and speaks mostly to the monastic audience about the necessity of brotherly love and the

danger of hypocritical deeds committed without real love in order to earn praise and reward40

Once he

cites 1 Cor 1430 and 23 as the illustrations of disagreement and lack of order in the Church that should

be avoided41

Here Basil does not provide any further explanations of the phenomenon γλώσσαις λαλεῖν

His another work On In the beginning was the Word contains the interesting reflection on this line from

John 11 in connection with Pauls 1 Cor 131 the tongues of men and of angels Basil asks What kind

of the word [was in the beginning] The human word or the word of the angels For the apostle hints to

us that the angels have their own tongue saying If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor

131)42

The most important details from Basil could be found in the Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah

dated to the beginning of 360s43

For the long time Basils authorship of this work was regarded as

dubious Now there is still no consensus on this issue among the scholars of Early Christianity but the

combination of the external and internal textual evidence speaks rather in favor of Basil44

Basil writes

about the wonders worked by the apostles At first they were speaking in tongues being uneducated

people and Galileans they made clear for everyone the presence of the Spirit45

Here the apostles are

described as ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι uneducated or ignorant people similarly to what we have already seen in

Eusebiuss works Not only the lack of education is emphasized but also their provenance Basil

highlights that they are Galileans so the very gist of the miracle is how they being Galileans spoke in

other peoples tongues One can see here that the text implies speaking in foreign languages This

interpretation is confirmed by another passage in the same text Thinking about the lines from Isaiah

40 Basilius Caesariensis Epistulae Epistle 204 section 1 lines 9-27 (Saint Basile Lettres ed Y Courtonne (Paris Les

Belles Lettres 1957-1966) 3 vols) Basilius Caesariensis Prologus 8 (de fide) Migne PG 31 p 688 lines 20-38 Basilius

Caesariensis De baptismo libri duo Migne PG 31 p 1565 line 42 - p 1568 line 16p 1609 lines 1 - 40 Basilius

Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae brevius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1280 lines 29-44 41 Basilius Caesariensis Asceticon magnum sive Quaestiones (regulae fusius tractatae) Migne PG 31 p 1032 line 43 - p

1033 line 12 42 Basilius Caesariensis In illud In principio erat verbum Migne PG 31 p 476 line 42 - p 477 line 7 Ποῖος λόγος ὁ

ἀνθρώπινος λόγος ἀλλrsquo ὁ τῶν ἀγγέλων λόγος Καὶ γὰρ ᾐνίξατο ἡμῖν ὁ Ἀπόστολος ὡς καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἰδίαν ἐχόντων

γλῶσσαν εἰπώνmiddot Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων 43 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011) 74-75 See also Basil the

Great Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah translated into English by Nikolai A Lipatov (Cambridge Edition cicero 2001) 44 [NA Lipatov] Н А Липатов Вопрос об авторстве laquoТолкования на Пророка Исайюraquo сохранившегося под именем

св Василия Великого Вестник ПСТГУ Серия I Богословие Философия 1 (33) (2011)69-84 45 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 8 section 218 lines 6-8 οἱ πρῶτον μὲν γλώσσαις

λαλοῦντες ἰδιῶται ἄνθρωποι καὶ Γαλιλαῖοι πᾶσι φανερὰν ἐποίησαν τὴν ἐπιδημίαν τοῦ Πνεύματος (San Basilio Commento

al profeta Isaia ed P Trevisan (Turin Societagrave Editrice Internazionale 1939) 2 vols)

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

15

The voice of many nations on the mountains upon which the sign is lifted up is like the [voices] of many

nations (Isa 132 4) Basil writes The voice is both single and yet resembles the voices of many

nations It is single through the concord of faith but resembles many voices since it was distributed by

the Holy Spirit in tongues of fire upon each of the apostle who were to sow the Gospel among the

nations of the world (Acts 23-4)46

It is a clear statement that the apostles having received the tongues

of fire were going to preach among the different peoples The combination of the voices of many

nations from Isa 134 with the Pentecost story definitely indicates that according to Basil the apostles

began to speak in foreign languages The purpose of the gift is to evangelize all the nations in the world

Interestingly enough although Basil mentions the tower of Babylon and the confusion of tongues

(Gen 111-9) several times in this work47

he never tries to connect this account with the gift of tongues

and the Pentecost story - the connection that we will find in the Oration 41 by Gregory Nazianzen and

that later became a topos in the texts of the Christian authors

In the texts that belong to the corpus of Ps-Macariuss writings one could find several interesting

features of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν In most cases this expression is used in the quotation 1 Cor 131 when the

author speaks about the necessity to reach the fullness of spiritual perfection in this life through genuine

love48

In one instance he quotes 1 Cor144-5 that one who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in

tongues since the former edifies the Church This interpretation follows Pauls position in 1 Corinthians

on unintelligibility of speaking in tongues49

Overall reading Ps-Macariuss texts one could hardly

avoid the impression that the author could not make sense of the gift of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and did not see

any useful for his spiritual teaching way to interpret it When he quotes 1 Cor 131 he almost always

46 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 260 lines 8-15 Καί φησι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον

διὰ τοῦ Προφήτουmiddot Φωνὴ ἐθνῶν πολλῶν ἐπὶ τῶν ὀρέων (ἐφrsquo ὧν ἤρθη τὸ σημεῖον) ὁμοία ἐθνῶν πολλῶν Καὶ μία ἐστὶν ἡ

φωνὴ καὶ ἔοικε φωναῖς πολλαῖς ἐθνῶν Μία μὲν κατὰ τὴν συμφωνίαν τῆς πίστεως πολλαῖς δὲ φωναῖς ἔοικε διὰ τὸ

μερισθῆναι γλώσσαις πυρὸς παρὰ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος ἐφrsquo ἕκαστον τῶν Ἀποστόλων τῶν μελλόντων τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ

ἔθνεσιν ἐπισπείρειν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον 47 Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 13 section 256 lines 7-9 Χωρίον οὖν συγχύσεώς ἐστιν ὁ

Βαβυλῶνος τόπος οὐ διαλέκτου μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δογμάτων καὶ νοημάτων καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ταῦτα βλέπειν νοῦ - Babylon

is a place of confusion not only of language but also of doctrines ideas and of the mind itself which imagines that it

perceives them Basilius Caesariensis Enarratio in prophetam Isaiam Chapter 10 section 236 lines 18-20 ἐπειδὴ ἡ

Βαβυλῶν ἐστιν ἐπώνυμος τῇ συγχύσει τῶν γλωσσῶν ἃς συνέχεεν ὁ Κύριος τὴν πρὸς τὸ κακὸν συμφωνίαν διασπῶν -

Babylon is named after the confusion of tongues which the Lord confused tearing asunder the conspiracy for evil 48 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 7 section 3 lines 1-11 (H Berthold MakariosSymeon

Reden und Briefe (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1973) 2 vols PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 43 chapter

1 sections 3-5 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 (H Doumlrries E

Klostermann and M Kruumlger Die 50 geistlichen Homilien des Makarios (Berlin De Gruyter 1964) PseudondashMacarius

Epistula magna In W Jaeger Two rediscovered works of ancient Christian literature Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius

(Leiden Brill 1954) p 249 line 20 - p 250 line 20 PseudondashMacarius Sermo 28 (recensio expletior) In H Berthold and E

Klostermann Neue Homilien des MakariusSymeon (Berlin Akademie Verlag 1961) p 166 lines 1-21 49 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 6 lines 65-69

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

16

mentions just the tongues of angels and omits the tongues of men probably because he understands the

human ability to speak as something obvious and taken for granted and the gift of speaking in tongues

is all about the angelic tongues whatever it might be Moreover even this expression is used only in

quotations while Ps-Macariuss own explanations on the gifts of the Spirit include only prophecy

healings and revelation50

Ps-Macarius provides many examples of peoples who had received the

spiritual gifts or had endured sufferings described in 1 Cor 13 and in other New Testament passages

(renunciation of the world giving over ones body to persecution compunction the gift of healing

driving out demons) but eventually fell because they did not have love However the author never

mentions anyone who spoke in tongues51

probably because he could not imagine how this gift looks

like in reality The only instance where Ps-Macarius refers to speaking in tongues in relation to the

Pentecost story is quite interesting This fire [ie the Spirit] exerted its power over the apostles when

they spoke with the tongues of fire (Acts 23-5)52

This expression - spoke in the fiery tongues - is

unique It is not clear what he means with it The best possible explanation we could think about is that

they spoke under influence of the fiery tongues Ps-Macarius does not provides any clues that would

make us think that he understands the gift of tongues as xenolalia

Gregory of Nyssa in De instituto Christiano that in large parts is a revision and modification of

Ps-Macariuss Great Letter53

and could be dated between 381-395 follows the typical for Ps-Macarius

neglecting of the tongues of men in the vast majority of instances when he cites 1 Cor 131 Although

Gregory does not omit the tongues of men in the direct quotation54

later he explains that by the spiritual

gifts I mean the tongues of angels prophecy knowledge and the gifts of healing55

This means that

Gregory understands or follows Ps-Macariuss understanding that the gift of tongues is the gift of

speaking in angelic tongues whatever it is while the tongues of men from 1 Cor 131 refer the normal

human ability to speak and probably do not belong to the gifts of the Spirit

50 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 26 lines 204-216 51 PseudondashMacarius Sermones 64 (collectio B) Homily 7 chapter 14 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio

H) Homily 27 lines 204-237 52 PseudondashMacarius Homiliae spirituales 50 (collectio H) Homily 25 lines 133-134 τοῦτο τὸ πῦρ ἐνήργησεν ἐν τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις ἡνίκα ἐλάλουν γλώσσαις πυρίναις 53 Reinhart Staats Gregor von Nyssa und die Messalianer die Frage der Prioritaumlt zweier altkirchlicher Schriften (Berlin

De Gruyter 1968) 1-15 54 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 59 line 22-24 ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ καὶ τῶν ἀγγέλων ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον quote 1 Cor 131 55 Gregorius Nyssenus De instituto Christiano In W Jaeger Gregorii Nysseni opera (Leiden Brill 1963) Volume 81

page 60 lines 11-12 γλώσσας λέγω ἀγγέλων καὶ προφητείαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

17

Gregory Nazianzens Oration 41 (On Pentecost) dated 381 clearly indentifies the linguistic

phenomenon described in Acts 2 as xenolalia He writes They spoke with foreign tongues and not

those of their native land and the wonder was great - a speech (λόγος) spoken by those who had not

learned it56

Gregory unambiguously speaks about the real foreign languages first by introducing the

attribute foreign or strange - ξέναις - that is absent in the New Testament account and second by

contrasting it to the language of their native land - οὐ πατρίοις He also emphasizes the miraculous

dimension of the event the speakers had never learned the language they suddenly began to speak

Then Gregory wants to show that Acts 2 and 1 Cor 14 describe the same phenomenon Therefore he

repeats Pauls words that this sign is to unbelievers not to believers (1 Cor1422) and introduces this

idea into his analysis of the Pentecost account57

Gregory seems to be the first author in the history of the Christian exegesis of Acts 2 who points

out the problems with the text itself its ambiguity and emphasizes the importance of punctuation for the

correct understanding of the story He focuses on the line from Acts 26 ἤκουον εἷς ἕκαστος τῇ ἰδίᾳ

διαλέκτῳ λαλούντων αὐτῶν and writes Here stop for a while and raise a question how you are to

divide (or punctuate58

) the text For this expression has some ambiguity determined by the punctuation

Whether they each heard in their own languages so that lets say one sound was uttered but many

[sounds] were heard - so that when the air was made to resound and - let me say it clearer - the

[different] sounds were produced from the [original] sound Or they heard and one should stop here -

and then one should to add this them speaking in their own languages so that it would be them

speaking in languages their own to the hearers which would be not-their-own59

[to the speakers]60

For

the first time Gregory outlines the possibility of the interpretation that later was defined as akolalia the

phenomenon in which the speaker uses one language and the audience hears the words in different

56Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 8-10 Ἐλάλουν μὲν οὖν ξέναις γλώσσαις καὶ

οὐ πατρίοις καὶ τὸ θαῦμα μέγα λόγος ὑπὸ τῶν οὐ μαθόντων λαλούμενος 57 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 10-15 καὶ τὸ σημεῖον τοῖς ἀπίστοις οὐ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν ἵνrsquo ᾖ τῶν ἀπίστων κατήγορον (1 Cor 1422) καθὼς γέγραπταιmiddot Ὅτι ἐν ἑτερογλώσσοις καὶ ἐν χείλεσιν ἑτέροις

λαλήσω τῷ λαῷ τούτῳ καὶ οὐδrsquo οὕτως εἰσακούσονταί μου λέγει Κύριος (1 Cor 1421 adapted quote Isa 2811) 58 διαιρήσεις analyze divide interpret or punctuate 59 ἀλλοτρίαις somebody elses foreign 60 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 15-25 Ἤκουον δέ Μικρὸν ἐνταῦθα

ἐπίσχες καὶ διαπόρησον πῶς διαιρήσεις τὸν λόγον Ἔχει γάρ τι ἀμφίβολον ἡ λέξις τῇ στιγμῇ διαιρούμενον Ἆρα γὰρ ἤκουον

ταῖς ἑαυτῶν διαλέκτοις ἕκαστος ὡς φέρε εἰπεῖν μίαν μὲν ἐξηχεῖσθαι φωνὴν πολλὰς δὲ ἀκούεσθαι οὕτω κτυπουμένου τοῦ

ἀέρος καὶ ἵνrsquo εἴπω σαφέστερον τῆς φωνῆς φωνῶν γινομένωνmiddotἢ τὸ μὲν Ἤκουον ἀναπαυστέον τὸ δὲ Λαλούντων ταῖς

ἰδίαις φωναῖς τῷ ἑξῆς προσθετέον ἵνrsquo ᾖ Λαλούντων φωναῖς ταῖς ἰδίαις τῶν ἀκουόντων ὅπερ γίνεται ἀλλοτρίαιςmiddot

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

18

languages61

Analyzing the Pentecost narrative in 1919 Karl L Schmidt suggested a Houmlrwunder rather

than a speech wonder62

Nevertheless Gregory himself does not like this explanation and prefers to think about the

miracle of xenolalia His reason is simple I prefer the latter For otherwise it would be rather the

miracle of the hearers than of the speakers while in this case it would be [the miracle] of the speakers

And it was they who were reproached for drunkenness obviously because they by the Spirit worked a

miracle in the matter of the tongues63

Another novelty introduced by Gregory into the exegesis of the Pentecost story is its connection

with the narrative Gen 111-9 on the tower of Babylon But as the old division (διαίρεσις) of tongues

was laudable when men who were of one language in wickedness and impiety even as some dare to be

now were building the tower (Gen 117) and by the separation (διαστάσει) of their language the

unanimity was dissolved and their undertaking destroyed so much more worthy is the present

miraculous [division] For being poured from the One Spirit upon many men it brings [them] again into

the harmony64

Gregory does not say that the Pentecost event is the reversion of the Babylonian

division of languages and the restoration of status quo Rather these two events illustrate the same

paradigm - the division of tongues ie of spoken languages in the Genesis narration and the fiery

tongues of the Spirit that distribute themselves and rested on each one of the apostles in Acts 23

Interestingly enough the word διαίρεσις (division) that Gregory uses both for the Babylonian confusion

(Gen 119 σύγχυσις) of the tongues and for the divided fiery tongues of the Spirit on the Pentecost day

(Acts 23 διαμεριζόμεναι γλῶσσαι) is not found in both accounts and both belongs to Gregorys

innovations According to Gregory both linguistic phenomena are laudable but the latter is much

worthy since it brought people back to the union and harmony

Turning back to other textual problems with Acts 2 we should mention that Gregory seems to be

consciously concerned about the ambiguity in the description of the audience ie people who were

present and who heard the apostles speaking Gregory notices some contradictions between the devout

61 Harold Hunter ldquoTongues-Speech A Patristic Analysisrdquo Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 no 2 (1980)

125 62 KL Schmidt Die Pfingsterzahlung und das Pfingstereignis (Leipzig J E Hinrich 1919) 20-22 63 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 25-29 καθὰ καὶ μᾶλλον τίθεμαι Ἐκείνως

μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἀκουόντων ἂν εἴη μᾶλλον ἣ τῶν λεγόντων τὸ θαῦμαmiddot οὕτω δὲ τῶν λεγόντωνmiddot οἳ καὶ μέθην καταγινώσκονται

δῆλον ὡς αὐτοὶ θαυμα τουργοῦντες περὶ τὰς φωνὰς τῷ Πνεύματι 64 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 449 lines 33-40 Πλὴν ἐπαινετὴ μὲν καὶ ἡ παλαιὰ

διαίρεσις τῶν φωνῶν (ἡνίκα τὸν πύργον ᾠκοδόμουν οἱ κακῶς καὶ ἀθέως ὁμοφωνοῦντες ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν νῦν τολμῶσί τινες)middot

τῇ γὰρ τῆς φωνῆς διαστάσει συνδιαλυθὲν τὸ ὁμόγνωμον τὴν ἐγχείρησιν ἔλυσενmiddot ἀξιεπαι νετωτέρα δὲ ἡ νῦν

θαυματουργουμένη Ἀπὸ γὰρ ἑνὸς Πνεύματος εἰς πολλοὺς χυθεῖσα εἰς μίαν ἁρμονίαν πάλιν συνάγεται

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

19

Jews (Acts 25) who probably did not know the local languages even if they lived in the diaspora and

people from every nation under heaven (Acts 25) who were native speakers of different foreign

languages He writes the tongues spoke to those who lived in Jerusalem - most devout Jews Parthians

Medes and Elamites Egyptians and Libyans Cretans too and Arabians and Mesopotamians and my

own Cappadocians65

rephrasing Acts 25 and Acts 9-11 in such a way that it is clear that he prefers the

idea that hearers were representatives of the different countries This makes a perfect sense if one

understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a miracle of xenolalia However Gregory is aware of the possibility of

another interpretation and continues and [the tongues spoke] to Jews out of every nation under

heaven66

if any one prefers to understand it in this way67

adds he immediately This comment

demonstrates that Gregory himself is not in favor of this idea The following speculation about which

Jewish captivity is spoken of here shows that Gregory is not quite sure who these Jews from abroad

might be68

Epiphanius of Salamis began to write his Panarion or Adversus haereses in 374 or 375 and

issued the work about 3 years later Among other heresies he denies the position that Mani could be the

Paraclete since the Holy Spirit the Paraclete was sent to the apostles on the day of Pentecost

Epiphanius retells Acts 2 but curiously enough he never says that the audience consists of the Jews

living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) Instead he omits this confusing detail from the story and

65 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 8-12 Ἐπεὶ δὲ τοῖς κατοικοῦσιν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

εὐλαβεστάτοις Ἰουδαίοις Πάρθοις καὶ Μήδοις καὶ Ἐλαμίταις Αἰγυπτίοις καὶ Λίβυσι Κρησί τε καὶ Ἄραψι

Μεσοποταμίταις τε καὶ τοῖς ἐμοῖς Καππαδόκαις ἐλάλουν αἱ γλῶσσαι 66 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 12-13 καὶ τοῖς ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ

τὸν οὐρανὸν Ἰουδαίοις 67 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 13-14 εἴ τῳ φίλον οὕτω νοεῖν 68 Gregorius Nazianzenus In pentecosten (orat 41) Migne PG 36 p 452 lines 14-30 ἄξιον ἰδεῖν τίνες ἦσαν οὗτοι καὶ τῆς

ποίας αἰχμαλωσίας Ἡ μὲν γὰρ εἰς Αἴγυπτον καὶ Βαβυλῶνα περίγραπτός τε ἦν καὶ πάλαι τῇ ἐπανόδῳ λέλυτο Ἡ δὲ ὑπὸ

Ῥωμαίων οὔπω γεγένητο ἔμελλε δὲ εἴσπραξις οὖσα τῆς κατὰ τοῦ Σωτῆρος θρασύτητος Λείπεται δὴ τὴν ὑπrsquo Ἀντιόχου

ταύτην ὑπολαμβάνειν οὐ πολὺ τούτων οὖσαν τῶν καιρῶν πρεσβυτέραν Εἰ δέ τις ταύτην μὲν οὐ προσίεται τὴν ἐξήγησιν ὡς

περιεργοτέραν (οὔτε γὰρ παλαιὰν εἶναι τὴν αἰχμαλωσίαν οὔτrsquo ἐπὶ πολὺ τῆς οἰκουμένης χεθεῖσαν) ζητεῖ δὲ τὴν πιθανωτέραν

ἐκεῖνο ἴσως ὑπολαβεῖν ἄμεινον ὅτι πολλάκις καὶ ὑπὸ πλειόνων τοῦ ἔθνους μεταναστάντος ὡς τῷ Ἔσδρᾳ ἱστόρηται αἱ μὲν

τῶν φυλῶν ἀνεσώθησαν αἱ δὲ ὑπελείφθησανmiddot ὧν εἰκὸς διασπαρεισῶν εἰς ἔθνη πλείονα τηνικαῦτα παρεῖναί τινας καὶ

μετέχειν τοῦ θαύματος - it is worth to see who they were and of what captivity For the captivity in Egypt and Babylon was

circumscribed and had long since been resolved by the return And that under the Romans was not yet but was about to

come being a punishment for audacity against the Savior It remains then to understand it of the captivity under Antiochus

which happened not so very long before this time But if any does not accept this explanation as being too elaborate seeing

that this captivity was neither ancient nor widespread over the world and is looking for a more persuasive mdash perhaps it is

better to take this the nation was often moved by many as Esdras informed and some of the tribes were recovered and

some were left behind probably from them who were dispersed among many nations some would have been present and

shared the miracle

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

20

speaks of the representatives of every nation under heaven69

This helps him to make much more

coherent sense of the episode these foreigners from abroad heard the apostles that suddenly began to

speak their own languages70

The purpose of the gift is also clear all the nations were comforted by

the Spirit through the sound of Gods wondrous teaching71

in their own tongues Therefore Epiphanius

definitely means the gift of xenolalia

However when for some reason the same author needs to put another specific emphasis he

interprets speaking in tongues in a different way Thus criticizing Marcions interpretation of However

in the Church I want to speak five words with my mind (1 Cor 1419) Epiphanius explains that this

Epistle was written by Paul so that some of the Corinthians who caused the disturbance and discords

and to whom the letter was sent may know that the languages (sic plural φωνὰς) of the Hebrews are

excellent and variegated in every expression and are beautifully adorned with wisdom but they [the

Corinthians] boast of the vainglorious language of the Greeks that they pronounce in Attic Aeolic and

Doric manner72

Here speaking in tongues is interpreted as the pretentious bombastic way of speaking

using the obsolete vocabulary and pronunciation of the Classical Greek dialects that were

incomprehensible for most people at that time This corresponds with the specific meaning that the word

γλῶσσα could have iean obsolete or foreign word which needs explanation Moreover speaking in

tongues includes also knowledge of the Hebrew language literature and the Law (it is a spiritual gift to

use the Hebrew expressions and to teach the Law73

) as well as knowledge of the Greek paideia taken

in its broad meaning including the poetical and rhetorical skills74

philosophy75

history and literature76

69 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 17 ἀπὸ παντὸς γένους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν quote Acts 25 (K Holl

Epiphanius Baumlnde 1-3 Ancoratus und Panarion (Leipzig Hinrichs 1915-1933)) 70 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 line 16 τῇ ἰδίᾳ γλώσσῃ adapted quote Acts 26 8 71 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 3 page 43 lines 17-19 καὶ ἕκαστος διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος παρεκαλοῦντοraquo οἵ τε ἀπόστολοι

διὰ τῆς δωρεᾶς καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη διὰ τῆς ἐνηχήσεως τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ θαυμαστῆς διδασκαλίας 72 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 11-17 ὅπως γνῶσιν οἱ τὰς φωνὰς τὰς Ἑβραΐδας τὰς διαφόρως καὶ

ποικίλως ἐν ἑκάστῃ λέξει καλῶς μετὰ σοφίας ποικιλθείσας ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν κομπώδη γλῶσσαν τῶν Ἑλλήνων αὐχοῦντες τὸ

ἀττικίζειν καὶ αἰολίζειν καὶ Δωρικῶς φθέγγεσθαι τινὲς τῶν παρὰ τοῖς Κορινθίοις τὰς πτύρσεις καὶ στάσεις ἐργασαμένων οἷς

ἡ ἐπιστολὴ ἐπεστέλλετο 73 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 18-19 χάρισμα εἶναι πνευματικὸν τὸ ταῖς Ἑβραϊκαῖς λέξεσι κεχρῆσθαί τε

καὶ τὸν νόμον διδάσκειν 74 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 25 - 169 3 ἔτι δὲ προστιθεὶς ltπρὸςgt τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑλλήνων ποιητῶν καὶ

ῥητόρων ὁρμωμένους τὰ ἴσα φάσκων ὁμοίως ἔφη laquoπάντων πλέον ὑμῶν λαλῶ γλώσσαιςraquo ἵνα δείξῃ καὶ τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς

παιδείας αὐτὸν ἐν πείρᾳ ὑπερβαλλόντως γεγενῆσθαι - Moreover he added saying the same about followers of Greek poets

and orators like he said I speak in tongues more than you all in order to show that he is extensively experienced in Greek

paideia 75 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 4 - 9 καὶ γὰρ καὶ ὁ χαρακτὴρ αὐτοῦ σημαίνει αὐτὸν ὑπάρχειν ἐν προπαιδείᾳ

οὗ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν Ἐπικούρειοι καὶ Στωϊκοὶ ἀντιστῆναι ἀνατρεπόμενοι διὰ τῆς λογίως παρrsquo αὐτοῦ ἀναγνωσθείσης τοῦ

βωμοῦ ἐπιγραφῆς τῆς ἐπιγεγραμμένης laquoτῷ θεῷ ἀγνώστῳraquo ῥητῶς ἀναγνωσθείσης παρrsquo αὐτοῦ καὶ εὐθὺς μεταφραστικῶς

ῥηθείσης laquoὃν ἀγνοοῦντες εὐσεβεῖτε τοῦτον ἐγὼ καταγγέλλω ὑμῖνraquo - For his style indicates that he was highly educated

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

21

Correspondingly the apostles assurance that I speak in tongues more than you all (1 Cor 1418) means

for Epiphanius that Paul was well-versed both in the Hebrew77

and Greek learning His desire to say five

words with my mind rather than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Cor 1419) indicates his preference

to express himself clearly78

I wish to speak for understanding and edification of the Church and not to

edify myself with the boastful knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages that I have already

learned instead of edifying the Church with the language that the Church understands79

According to

Epiphanius five words (1 Cor 1419) means the easy colloquial way of speaking using the vernacular

dialects or the low-style language in order to be understandable for people On the contrary speaking in

tongues relates not so much to the Greek and Hebrew languages but rather to the vainglorious

demonstration of ones education and pretentious way of speaking and pronunciation such as the use of

the obsolete dialects of the Greek language or the learned form of Hebrew

The anonymous work On Trinity that was traditionally attributed to Didymus the Blind but now

is regarded as of rather a dubious authorship80

was written no earlier than January 37981

There is a clear

evidence that the author of this text whoever it might be definitely understands γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as a

miracle of xenolalia speaking in foreign languages that had not been learned before They spoke with

different languages as he said as the Spirit was giving them utterance (Acts 24) and the Galileans

whom Epicureans and Stoics could not withstand being overturned by his learned reading of the inscription written on the

altar To the unknown God - by his literal reading and then by the immediate paraphrasical saying Whom you worship

in ignorance this I proclaim to you (Acts 1723) 76 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 9 - 16 καὶ πάλιν φήσαντος laquoεἶπέν τις ἴδιος αὐτῶν προφήτηςmiddotΚρῆτες ἀεὶ

ψεῦσται κακὰ θηρία γαστέρες ἀργαίraquo ἵνα τὸν Ἐπιμενίδην δείξῃ ἀρχαῖον ὄντα φιλόσοφον καὶ κτιστὴν τοῦ παρὰ Κρησὶν

εἰδώλουmiddot ἀφrsquo οὗπερ καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Λίβυς τὴν μαρτυρίαν εἰς ἑαυτὸν συνανέτεινε ψευδῶς περὶ Διὸς λέγωνmiddot

Κρῆτες ἀεὶ ψεῦσταιmiddot καὶ γὰρ τάφον ὦ ἄνα σεῖο

Κρῆτες ἐτεκτήναντο σὺ δrsquo οὐ θάνεςmiddot ἐσσὶ γὰρ αἰεί

and again by saying Some prophet of their own said Cretans are always liars evil beasts lazy gluttons (Tit 112) in order

to indicate Epimenides who was an ancient philosopher and a builder of an idol in Crete from whom Callimachus the

Libyan also applied this testimony to himself falsely saying of Zeus Cretans are always liars O Lord Cretans built you

tomb You never died You are forever 77Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 168 lines 21-24 τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν Ἑβραῖον ἐξ Ἑβραίων παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιὴλ

ἀνατεθραμμένον ὧν Ἑβραίων τὰ γράμματα ἐν ἐπαίνοις τίθησι καὶ τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος δωρεᾶς ὄντα χαρίσματα - he was a

Hebrew from Hebrews and had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel and he put the learnings of these Hebrews in praise

since theythose are giftsfavors of the gifts of the Spirit 78 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 17-19 καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς διηγεῖται περὶ γλωσσῶν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος laquoἀλλὰ

θέλω πέντε λόγους ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ τῷ νοΐ μουraquo τουτέστιν διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας laquoφράσαιraquo 79 Epiphanius Panarion Volume 2 page 169 lines 20-23 οὕτως κἀγὼ θέλω φησί λαλῆσαι εἰς ἀκοὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ

οἰκοδομὴν καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦ κόμπου Ἑλληνίδος τε καὶ Ἑβραΐδος ἑαυτὸν οἰκοδομεῖν τὸν εἰδότα καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν διrsquo ἧς

ἐπίσταται γλώσσης 80 Claudio Moreschini Enrico Norelli Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature A Literary History Vol 2 From the

Council of Nicea to the Beginning of the Medieval Period tr by Matthew J OrsquoConnell (Peabody Hendrickson 2005) 77-

78 81 The texts refers to Basil as being deceased (322)

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

22

understood82

the speech of the Parthians Medes Persians and other peoples who were the speakers of

the strange tongues and [they understood] also the Greek and Italian languages Having become

multilingual they indicated what kind of things we are about to find in the future age when we will

have been released from the worldly bonds according to Pauls saying Where there is no Greek no

barbarian no Scythian but Christ is all and in all (Col 311)83

One of the most elaborated and emotional reflections on the Pentecost events and speaking in

tongues in particular can be found in the Catecheses ad illuminandos by Cyril of Jerusalem dated to

370s-380s Commenting the line And they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them

utterance (Acts 24) he writes The Galilean Peter or Andrew spoke Persian or Median John and the

rest of the apostles spoke every tongue to those of the nations84

The text does not leave any doubts

about the nature of the miracle because it does not have the vague speaking in tongues but instead

there are the verbs derived from the names of the nations such as ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν The grammatical

construction of the second sentence is also unusual Γλῶσσα is used here as a direct object of the verb

ἐλάλουν in the accusative instead of the traditional construction with the dative Cyril makes efforts to

explain why the crowd of foreigners was there for not in our time have multitudes of strangers first

begun to assemble here [in Jerusalem] from everywhere but they have done so since that time85

Cyril

emphasizes how quickly the apostles began to speak in foreign languages and the fact that they had

never learned them before This result is impossible for any teacher What teacher can be found so

great as to teach at once things which they have not learned86

Cyril develops the comparison with the

proper studying of the language So many years they have been in learning through grammar and

[rhetorical] techniques to speak only Greek well nor yet they all speak this equally well a rhetorician

perhaps succeeds in speaking well and a grammarian sometimes not well and one who knows grammar

82 or perceived συνίημι 83 Didymus Caecus De trinitate (lib 28ndash27) Migne PG 39 p 727 line 32 - p 729 line 10 Ἐλάλουν δὲ καὶ ἑτέραις

γλώσσαις laquoκαθὼςraquo φησὶν laquoτὸ Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτούςmiddotraquo καὶ συνίεσαν ὁμιλίαν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι Πάρθων

Μήδων Περσῶν καὶ ἀλλοθρόων ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων ἔτι δὲ καὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα καὶ Αὐσονίαν γλῶτταν πολύφωνοί τε ἐγίνοντο

καὶ ἀνεδείκνυντο οἷοί περ ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι εὑρίσκεσθαι μέλλομεν τῶν τοῦδε τοῦ κόσμου ἀπολυθέντες δεσμῶν κατὰ

τὴν Παύλου φωνήνmiddot laquoὍπου οὐκ ἔνι Ἕλλην βάρβαρος Σκύθηςmiddot ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν Χριστόςraquo 84 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 1-5 Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν

ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐδίδου ἀποφθέγγεσθαι αὐτοῖς Γαλιλαῖος ὁ Πέτρος καὶ Ἀνδρέας ἢ ἐπέρσιζεν ἢ ἐμήδιζεν

Ἰωάννης καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι πᾶσαν γλῶσσαν ἐλάλουν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν (WC Reischl J Rupp Cyrilli

Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (Munich Lentner) 2 vols) 85 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 5-6 οὐ γὰρ νῦν ἐνταῦθα

ἤρξατο τῶν ξένων πλήθη συναθροίζεσθαι πανταχόθεν ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τότε 86 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 6-8 ποῖος τοσοῦτος

διδάσκαλος εὑρίσκεται διδάσκων ἀθρόως ἃ μὴ μεμαθήκασιν

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

23

does not know the subjects of philosophy87

The process is long (for years) and exhausting (through

grammar and rhetorical techniques) the result is still imperfect (nor yet they all speak this equally well)

even in the case of the professionals (a rhetorician and a grammarian)

Cyril is speaking about Greek in this case although it is not clear how well he realizes that Greek

was not the native tongue for the apostles It is also no indication whether he means here studying Greek

as a native or as a foreign language Anyway for Cyril γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is definitely not a normal way

to learn foreign languages But the Holy Spirit taught them many languages at once languages which

in all their life they never knew This is truly the vast wisdom this is the divine power What a contrast

of their ignorance for a long time to their complete and outstanding and strange exercise of these

languages suddenly88

Speaking about embarrassment and confusion of the audience Cyril clearly makes a mental

connection with the Babylonian confusion of tongues it was a second confusion instead of that first

evil one at Babylon For in that confusion of tongues there was a division of the faculty of free will

because the thought was hostile but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds because the

object of interest was devout The means of falling were the means of recover Unlike Gregory

Nazianzen Cyril uses the same term for both confusions - σύγχυσις (Gen 119) and defines the

Babylonian confusion as that first evil one in contrast to the Gregorys attitude that both confusions

were laudable Cyril emphasizes that apostless speaking in tongues was a metaphorical reversion of the

Babylonian confusion (the second came instead of or in contrast to- ἀντὶ - the first one) and a

restoration but in this case there was a restoration and unity of minds (ἀποκατάστασις) The means

of falling were the means of recover (ἐπάνοδος)89

The Apostolic Constitutions (dated circa 375-380) does not provide such an unambiguous

account as Gregory Nazianzen or Cyril of Jerusalem The text carefully mentions that we [the apostles]

87Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 8-12 τοσούτοις ἔτεσι διὰ

γραμματικῆς καὶ διὰ τεχνῶν μανθάνουσι μόνον ἑλληνιστὶ καλῶς λαλεῖν καὶ οὐδὲ πάντες λαλοῦσιν ὁμοίως ἀλλrsquo ὁ ῥήτωρ μὲν

ἴσως κατορθοῖ λαλεῖν καλῶς ὁ γραμματικὸς δὲ ἐνίοτε οὐ καλῶς καὶ ὁ τὴν γραμματικὴν εἰδὼς τὰ φιλοσοφούμενα οὐκ οἶδεν 88Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 16 lines 12-17 τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ

ἅγιον ἅμα διδάσκει πολλὰς γλώσσας ἅσπερ ἐν παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ ἐκεῖνοι οὐκ οἴδασιν τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀληθῶς σοφία πολλή τοῦτο

θεία δύναμις ποία σύγκρισις τῆς ἐν πολλῷ χρόνῳ ἀμαθείας ἐκείνων πρὸς τὴν ἀθρόαν καὶ διάφορον καὶ ξένην ἐξαίφνης τῶν

γλωσσῶν ἐνέργειαν 89 Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus Catecheses ad illuminandos 1ndash18 Catechesis 17 chapter 17 lines 1-6 Ἐγένετο σύγχυσις τοῦ

πλήθους τῶν ἀκουσάντων δευτέρα σύγχυσις ἀντὶ τῆς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρώτης κακῆς ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τῆς συγχύσεως τῶν γλωσσῶν

διαίρεσις ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως ἐπειδὴ ἀντίθεον ἦν τὸ φρόνημα ὧδε δὲ ἀποκατάστασις καὶ ἕνωσις τῶν γνωμῶν ἐπειδὴ

εὐσεβὲς ἦν τὸ σπουδαζόμενον διrsquo ὧν ἡ ἀπόπτωσις διὰ τούτων ἡ ἐπάνοδος

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

24

spoke with the new tongues as that Spirit did suggest to us90

This particular adjective new - καιναῖς -

is used not only in the quotation Mark 161791

from where it was originally taken but also it is

introduced into the retelling of the Pentecost events92

although other attributives were used in Acts The

expression as that Spirit did suggest to us (ὑπήχει) remains equally ambiguous did the Spirit suggest

the contents of the speech or the medium ie language The purpose of the gift is declared as to

preach both to the Jews and to the Gentiles93

what may imply going abroad and correspondingly

speaking in foreign languages although the statement here is too general and might mean simply all

groups of people regardless of their cultural background This very suggestion is confirmed by another

sentence These gifts were first bestowed on us the apostles when we were about to preach the Gospel

to every creature94

The text also mentions that later the gifts of the Spirit were given to other people -

those who believed by means of our [apostles] help95

Probably this is the reference to Cornelius (Acts

1044-46) and to the disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus (Acts 191-7) The text explains that the

gifts are not for the advantage of those who perform them but for the conviction of unbelievers for

whom the word did not persuade the power of signs might convince For signs are not for us who

believe but for unbelievers - for the Jews and Greeks96

This statement helps to prevent the question

that potentially might be raised at the second half of the 4th century why there are no contemporary

evidence of speaking in tongues despite the growing number of Christians Therefore it is not

necessary that every believer should cast out demons or raise the dead or speak with tongues but one

who is worthy of this gift for some reason that is beneficial for the salvation of unbelievers who are

often convinced not by proof of the words but rather by exercising of the signs and they are worthy of

salvation97

90 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 33-34 γλώσσαις καιναῖς ἐλαλήσαμεν καθὼς ἐκεῖνο ὑπήχει ἐν ἡμῖν

(BM Metzger Les constitutions apostoliques (Paris Eacuteditions du Cerf 1985-1987) 3 vols [Sources chreacutetiennes 320 329

336]) 91 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 line 13 92 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 lines 29-36 93 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 5 chapter 20 line 34-36 καὶ ἐκηρύξαμεν Ἰουδαίοις τε καὶ ἔθνεσιν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν

Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν ὡρισμένον ὑπrsquo αὐτοῦ κριτὴν ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν 94 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 15-17 τούτων τῶν χαρισμάτων πρότερον μὲν ἡμῖν δοθέντων τοῖς

ἀποστόλοις μέλλουσιν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον καταγγέλλειν πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει 95 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 17-18 ἔπειτα τοῖς διrsquo ἡμῶν πιστεύσασιν ἀναγκαίως χορηγουμένων 96 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 18-23 οὐκ εἰς τὴν τῶν ἐνεργούντων ὠφέλειαν ἀλλrsquo εἰς τὴν τῶν

ἀπίστων συγκατάθεσιν ἵνα οὓς οὐκ ἔπεισεν ὁ λόγος τούτους ἡ τῶν σημείων δυσωπήσῃ δύναμις Τὰ γὰρ σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς

πιστοῖς ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ἰουδαίων τε καὶ Ἑλλήνων 97 Constitutiones apostolorum Book 8 chapter 1 lines 30-35 Οὐκ ἐπάναγκες οὖν πάντα πιστὸν δαίμονας ἐκβάλλειν ἢ

νεκροὺς ἀνιστᾶν ἢ γλώσσαις λαλεῖν ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀξιωθέντα χαρίσματος ἐπί τινι αἰτίᾳ χρησίμῃ εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν ἀπίστων

δυσωπουμένων πολλάκις οὐ τὴν τῶν λόγων ἀπόδειξιν ἀλλὰ τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐνέργειαν ἀξίων ὄντων σωτηρίας

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

25

Severian the bishop of Gabala in Syria and a preacher in Constantinople at the late 4th - early

5th century proposes one of the most ingenious interpretation of the tongues of men and angels from 1

Cor 131 For him the tongue of angels is some kind of a nations guardian angel or volkgeist that was

appointed by God to every people after the Babylonian confusion According to one of the versions of

Severians text (cod Vat 762) And what is the tongue of angels for whom there is no breast no

throat no tongue no voice But when as Moses says in Deuteronomy God set the boundaries of the

nations according to the number of angels of God (Deut 328) - at that time obviously he set them

because he divided languages of those who tried to build the tower (Gen 112-8) For when they are no

longer protected by monolingualism in concord but became alienated from each other by changes of the

language the angels were set so that the each [angel] could protect the nation that was entrusted [to

him] so that it might not be wasted and perish98

It seems that speaking about the tongues of angels Severian does not think it was a linguistic

phenomenon at all It should be recognized that as the bread of angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of

is not related to eating in the same way the languages of angels are not related to speaking The former

and the later [expressions] are like some help for [understanding of] Gods regulation99

Keeping in

mind the Babylonian confusion Severian asserts By this tongues of angels he [Paul] calls the

distinction of tongues100

98Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) In K Staab Pauluskommentar aus der griechischen

Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt (Muumlnster Aschendorff 1933) p 265 col 1 lines 1-17 Καὶ τίς γλῶσσα

ἀγγέλων παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ λάρυγξ οὐ γλῶσσα οὐ φωνή ἀλλrsquo ἐπειδή ὡς λέγει Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ Δευτερονομίῳ ἔστησεν

ὁ θεὸς ὅρια ἐθνῶν κατὰ ἀριθμὸν ἀγγέλων θεοῦ - τότε δὲ δηλαδὴ ἔστησεν ὅτε εἰς γλώσσας ἐμέρισεν τοὺς τὸν πύργον

οἰκοδομεῖν ἐπιχειρήσαντας - ἐπειδὴ γὰρ οὐκέτι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμοφωνίας ἐφυλάττοντο εἰς συμφωνίαν ἀλλrsquo ὥσπερ ἠλλοτριώθησαν

ἀλλήλων ταῖς τῆς γλώσσης ἐναλλαγαῖς ἐτέθησαν ἄγγελοι ἵνα ἕκαστος φυλάσσῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος καὶ μηδὲν παραναλωθῇ

καὶ ἀπόληται 99 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 20-25 δεῖ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὥσπερ ἄρτον

ἀγγέλων λέγει ὁ Δαυὶδ οὐχ ὡς ἐσθιόντων οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας οὐχ ὡς λαλούντωνmiddot ἐκεῖνό τε γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο ὡς

ὑπουργούντων τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ διατάξει 100 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 18-19 διὰ τοῦτο ἀγγέλων γλώσσαις

καλεῖ τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν γλωσσῶν Another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) gives a similar but not an

identical account ποία δὲ γλῶσσα παρrsquo ἀγγέλοις παρrsquo οἷς οὐ στῆθος οὐ φάρυγξ οὐ φωνή οὐκ ἄλλο τι σωματικόν ἀγγέλων

γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς ἐπέστησαν οἱ ἄγγελοι κατὰ τὸ τῆς διασπορᾶς τῆς ἐπὶ τῆς πυργοποΐας ἵνα ἕκαστος

φυλάττῃ ὃ ἐπιστεύθη ἔθνος ὥσπερ δὲ ἄρτον ἀγγέλων νοοῦμεν τὸν διὰ τῆς ἐπιταγῆς τῶν ἀγγέλων χορηγούμενον - οὐχ ὅτι οἱ

ἄγγελοι ἤσθιον ἀλλrsquo ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι παρέχειν ἐπετάγησαν - οὕτως καὶ ἀγγέλων γλώσσας τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν αἷς

ἐπέστησαν ἄγγελοι - What language angels have who do not have a breast a throat a voice not anything else of a body

Languages of angels are distinction of languages to which angels were appointed because of [the events of ]dispersion after

the building of tower so that each one might protect the nation that was entrusted [to him] As we think about the bread of

angels (Ps 7725) that David spoke of as about something provided through the angelic commandment not that angels were

eating but that angels were commanded to offer In the same way [we think about] languages of angels as distinction of

languages to which angels appointed (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 4-

20)

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

26

However he somehow contrasts the tongues of men and the tongues of angels On the one

hand the tongue of men is teachable - for this skill is not naturally given On the other hand the tongue

of angels was divided in many according to the nature101

There are several possible ways to decipher

Severians views on what is now commonly known as historical linguistic

The first option is that his tongues of angels correspond with the concept of a native language

According to this opinion native languages are consequences of the Babylonian confusion where they

were divided and distributed to the peoples Since that time they have been being given naturally (κατὰ

φύσιν) unlike the tongues of men ie foreign languages Instead foreign languages are teachable

(πεπαιδευμένη) for this skill is not naturally given (ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ

ἔντεχνος) to those who are not the native speakers

The second option is that according to Severian the tongue of angels is a pre-Babylonian

tongue however this idea contradicts Severians own statement that tongues of angels is a distinction

(διαφορὰν) of tongues

The third option is that the tongues of angels differ from the tongues of men in the way they

were acquired Although the tongues of angels were given by the miraculous act of Gods intervention

one can say that this acquirement of a language still was natural (κατὰ φύσιν) since the builders of the

Babylonian tower had not gone through any artificial process of learning of languages they suddenly

began to speak Unlike those builders all the next generations of people have to learn their languages

because they are not born with knowledge of a language even if one speaks of a native language

Therefore tongues of men are πεπαιδευμένη This idea might be bolstered up with the following

statement from the another version of Severians text (cod Athous Pantokrat 28) Speaking of the

tongues of men he [Paul] means rhetoric grammar philosophical issues semantics skills of

composition techniques and skills of disputation102

Severians comment on I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal (1 Cor131b) does not

significantly clarify the situation here it is obvious that he speaks of the change and distinction of the

angelic languages For one who speaks with different languages to those who do not know them is like a

cymbal that only produces noise and does not convey any meaning103

It is not clear whether the phrase

101 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 26-31 ἀνθρώπων μὲν οὖν γλῶσσα ἡ

πεπαιδευμένη - ἐπείσακτος γὰρ αὕτη παρὰ τὴν φυσικὴν ἡ ἔντεχνος - ἀγγέλων δὲ γλῶσσα ἡ κατὰ φύσιν εἰς πολλὰ μερισθεῖσα 102 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 1-4 Ἀνθρώπων γλῶσσαν λέγει τὴν

ῥητορικήν γραμματικήν φιλοσοφικήν νοητικήν συγγραφικήν τεχνικήν συζητητικήν 103 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 1 lines 32-40 Γέγονα χαλκὸς ἠχῶν ἢ

κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον ἐντεῦθεν φαίνεται ὅτι ἀγγέλων λέγει τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τῶν γλωσσῶν καὶ τὴν διαφοράνmiddot ὁ γὰρ λαλῶν

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

27

the change and distinction of the angelic languages relates to the events of the Babylonian confusion

and the very origin of the angelic languages or it is about the later changes of these angelic languages

into the different human dialects that became mutually incomprehensible

The next pages of Severians work contain his comments on 1 Cor 14 Generally speaking

Severian follows Pauls ideas that speaking in tongues is a delivery of the mysteries given by the Spirit

but it is not understood by the Church congregation and therefore it is useless for their edification He

repeats Pauls thesis that a prophet is greater than one who speaks in tongues unless the latter interprets

There are no association with speaking in foreign languages104

By the end of the 4th c the idea that Pentecost story in Acts 2 describes the phenomenon of

xenolalia had been earning more and more popularity John Chrysostom who undertook the

fundamental task of the Scriptural exegesis in the scope never seen before tried to present the coherent

Christian theology and interpret different books and chapters of the Bible in the light of each other As a

result discussing γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the context of the Pentecost events and the Corinthians

controversy he had to face the fact that the phenomenon defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν -

has such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2 and in 1 Cor 14

John Chrysostom clearly is a leader for the number of the passages in his legacy where he

reflects on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν He has in mind a well-developed explanation of this phenomenon that he

declared no less than four times using the similar line of arguments and expressions - in De Sancta

Pentecoste 14 In principium Actorum 34 In Acta apostolorum 401-2 In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios

291 5

First of all John Chrysostom pays attention to the ambiguity of the text in 1 Cor This whole

place is very obscure and immediately explains why so but the obscurity is produced by [our]

ignorance of these matters and by the cessation of what happened then but no longer takes place105

Then he anticipates the reasonable questions Why does this not happen now Look for the reason of

ἄλλαις γλώσσαις παρὰ τοῖς οὐκ εἰδόσιν αὐτὰς ὥσπερ κύμβαλόν ἐστι μόνον ἦχον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐδὲν ἐπιδεικνύμενον

The version of Cod Athous Pantokrat 28 Χαλκοῦ δὲ ἦχον καὶ κυμβάλου ἀλαλαγμὸν τὰς διαφορὰς τῶν γλωσσῶν εἶπενmiddotὅταν

γὰρ οὐκ οἶδέν τις τὰ ἐν ἑτέρᾳ γλώσσῃ λαλούμενα οὕτως ἔχει τὸν λαλοῦντα ὡς κύμβαλον ἄσημον ἀποτελοῦν νόημα δὲ οὐκ

ἐμφαῖνον - A noisy gong and a clanging cymbal he said this about the distinction of languages for somebody who does not

know what is said in another language for him the saying produces something meaningless like a cymbal and does not

reveal any meaning (Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 265 col 2 lines 32-39) 104 Severianus Fragmenta in epistulam i ad Corinthios (in catenis) p 267-270 105Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 22-25 Τοῦτο ἅπαν τὸ χωρίον σφόδρα

ἐστὶν ἀσαφέςmiddot τὴν δὲ ἀσάφειαν ἡ τῶν πραγμάτων ἄγνοιά τε καὶ ἔλλειψις ποιεῖ τῶν τότε μὲν συμβαινόντων νῦν δὲ οὐ

γινομένων

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

28

obscurity there is another question for us why it took place then but no longer does106

The statement

that the signs including speaking in tongues no longer exist in the Church at his time Chrysostom

repeats elsewhere107

After this Chrysostom explains the nature of the speaking in tongues leaving no

doubts that he means the miraculous ability to speak in real foreign languages First it is necessary to

say what is kinds of tongues (γένη γλωσσῶν 1 Cor 1210) So what is kinds of tongues In the past a

baptized person and a believer immediately began to speak in different tongues by revelation of the

Spirit A baptized person immediately spoke in our tongue and in Persian in Indian in Scythian to

teach unbelievers about the dignity of the holy Spirit So this sign is named kinds of tongues He who

had one tongue according to the nature began to speak in many different tongues by the grace It was

possible to see a single person in number but manifold in graces who has different mouths and different

tongues108

It is interesting that in another text Chrysostom gives almost identical definition to λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις Lets first learn what is speaking in tongues (λαλεῖν γλώσσαις) and then we will say its

cause So what is speaking in tongues A baptized person immediately began to speak in Indian tongue

Egyptian Persian Scythian Thracian and one person received many languages and if those who are

baptized now were baptized then you would immediately hear them speaking in different

languages109

This means that for Chrysostom λαλεῖν γλώσσαις and γένη γλωσσῶν refer to the same

phenomenon described in Acts 2 (despite the fact that there is no γένη γλωσσῶν in Acts 2 only in 1 Cor

12-14) This phenomenon is the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages It is also interesting

106 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 25-28 Καὶ τίνος ἕνεκεν οὐ γίνεται

νῦν Ἰδοὺ γὰρ καὶ ἡ αἰτία πάλιν τῆς ἀσαφείας ἕτερον ἡμῖν ζήτημα ἔτεκε Τί δήποτε γὰρ τότε μὲν ἐγίνετο νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι

See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 line 12-16 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν

φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς καὶ ἀεὶ

ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 107 See the similar accounts Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 12-16 Τίνος οὖν

ἕνεκεν φησὶ σημεῖα οὐ γίνεται νῦν Ἐνταῦθά μοι μετὰ ἀκριβείας προσέχετε παρὰ πολλῶν γὰρ ἀκούω τοῦτο καὶ συνεχῶς

καὶ ἀεὶ ζητούμενον διὰ τί τότε γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν πάντες οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι νῦν δὲ οὐκέτι 108 Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 38-41 45-48 53 - page 93 line 2 Πρῶτον δὲ

ἀναγκαῖον εἰπεῖν τί ποτέ ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τί οὖν ἐστι γένη γλωσσῶν Τὸ παλαιὸν ὁ βαπτισθεὶς καὶ πιστεύσας εὐθέως

πρὸς τὴν φανέρωσιν τοῦ Πνεύματος διαφόροις ἐλάλει γλώσσαιςκαὶ ὁ βαπτισθεὶς εὐθέως καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ γλώσσῃ καὶ τῇ

τῶν Περσῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν καὶ τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν ἐφθέγγετο ὥστε μαθεῖν καὶ τοὺς ἀπίστους ὅτι Πνεύματος ἁγίου

ἠξίωτο Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ σημεῖον ἐκαλεῖτο γένη γλωσσῶν Ὁ γὰρ μίαν γλῶσσαν ἔχων ἀπὸ τῆς φύσεως ποικίλαις ἐλάλει

γλώσσαις καὶ διαφόροις ἀπὸ τῆς χάριτος καὶ ἦν ἰδεῖν ἄνθρωπον ἕνα μὲν τῷ ἀριθμῷ ποικίλον δὲ τοῖς χαρίσμασι καὶ διάφορα

στόματα ἔχοντα καὶ διαφόρους γλώσσας 109 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 16-23 Μάθωμεν πρότερον τί τὸ λαλεῖν

γλώσσαις καὶ τότε ἐροῦμεν καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν Τί οὖν ἐστι γλώσσαις λαλεῖν Ὁ βαπτιζόμενος εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο τῇ τῶν Ἰνδῶν

φωνῇ τῇ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων τῇ τῶν Περσῶν τῇ τῶν Σκυθῶν τῇ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν καὶ εἷς ἄνθρωπος πολλὰς ἐλάμβανε γλώσσας καὶ

οὗτοι οἱ νῦν εἰ ἦσαν τότε βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως ἂν ἤκουσας αὐτῶν διαφόροις φθεγγομένων φωναῖς

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

29

that in all instances when Chrysostom provides the list of languages that the apostles began to speak110

it only partially corresponds with the enumeration of the peoples in Acts 29-11 (with the only exception

of a direct quote)

The same references to speaking in foreign languages could be found in Chrysostoms

interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 where the text itself hardly implies this111

and in his explanations

what are the tongues of men spoken about in 1 Corinthians 131 For he did not say if I speak with

tongues but if I speak with the tongues of men (1 Cor 131) What is of men Of all the nations in every

part of the world112

Meanwhile Chrysostom asserts concerning the tongues of angels from the same

biblical line that he [Paul] calls it a tongue not meaning the instrument of flesh but intending to

indicate their [angels] converse with each other by the manner which is known among us113

Chrysostom continues with the explanation why speaking in tongues was necessary in the

apostles times people newly converted from idolatry were week ignorant and immature they needed

the visible manifestations of the spiritual gifts that believers received and were not yet able to

appreciate the invisible noetical grace Speaking in tongues was an easy-observable proof it astonished

people more than any other gift114

For Chrysostom the visibility of this gift was such an important

110 Another example Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 38-40 καὶ ὁ μὲν τῇ

Περσῶν ὁ δὲ τῇ Ῥωμαίων ὁ δὲ τῇ Ἰνδῶν ὁ δὲ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ τοιαύτῃ εὐθέως ἐφθέγγετο γλώσσῃ 111 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p 309 lines 51-56 Οὐκ ἔστι δὲ ἴσον εἰσελθόντα

τινὰ ἰδεῖν μὲν Περσιστὶ τὸν δὲ Συριστὶ φθεγγόμενον καὶ εἰσελθόντα ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα τῆς αὐτοῦ διανοίας καὶ εἴτε

πειράζων καὶ μετὰ πονηρᾶς γνώμης εἴτε ὑγιῶς εἰσελήλυθε καὶ ὅτι τὸ καὶ τὸ αὐτῷ πέπρακται καὶ τὸ βεβούλευται 112 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 line 24-27 Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν Ἐὰν γλώσσαις

λαλῶ ἀλλrsquo Ἐὰν ταῖς γλώσσαις τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαλῶ Τί ἐστι Τῶν ἀνθρώπων Πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐθνῶν 113 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 268 lines 39-52 Γλῶτταν δὲ ἀγγέλων ἐνταῦθά

φησιν οὐχὶ σῶμα περιτιθεὶς ἀγγέλοις ἀλλrsquo ὃ λέγει τοιοῦτόν ἐστι Κἂν οὕτω φθέγγωμαι ὡς ἀγγέλοις νόμος πρὸς ἀλλήλους

διαλέγεσθαι ταύτης ἄνευ οὐδέν εἰμι ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπαχθὴς καὶ φορτικός Οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ ὅταν λέγῃ ὅτι Αὐτῷ κάμψει

πᾶν γόνυ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων οὐ γόνατα καὶ ὀστᾶ περιτιθεὶς τοῖς ἀγγέλοις ταῦτα λέγει ἄπαγε ἀλλὰ

τὴν ἐπιτεταμένην προσκύνησιν διὰ τοῦ παρrsquo ἡμῖν σχήματος αἰνίξασθαι βούλεται Οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα γλῶσσαν ἐκάλεσεν οὐ

σαρκὸς ὄργανον δηλῶν ἀλλὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους αὐτῶν ὁμιλίαν τῷ γνωρίμῳ παρrsquo ἡμῖν τρόπῳ αἰνίξασθαι βουλόμενος 114 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 page 459 lines 31-32 34-56 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ

ἀνῃρέθη ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Ἀνοητότερον οἱ ἄνθρωποι διέκειντο τότε τῶν εἰδώλων προσφάτως

ἀπηλλαγμένοι καὶ παχυτέρα καὶ ἀναισθητοτέρα αὐτῶν ἡ διάνοια ἔτι ἦν καὶ πρὸς τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ἐπτόηντο καὶ

ἐκεχήνεσαν καὶ οὐδεμία αὐτοῖς οὐδέπω ἔννοια δωρεῶν ἀσωμάτων ἦν οὐδὲ εἴδεσαν τί ποτέ ἐστι νοητὴ χάρις καὶ πίστει

μόνῃ θεωρουμένη διὰ τοῦτο σημεῖα ἐγίνετο Τῶν γὰρ χαρισμάτων τῶν πνευματικῶν τὰ μὲν ἀόρατά ἐστι καὶ πίστει

καταλαμβάνεται μόνῃ τὰ δὲ καὶ αἰσθητὸν ἐνδείκνυται σημεῖον πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἀπίστων πληροφορίαν Οἷόν τι λέγω ἁμαρτιῶν

ἄφεσις νοητόν ἐστι πρᾶγμα ἀόρατόν ἐστι χάρισμα πῶς γὰρ καθαίρονται ἡμῶν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι οὐχ ὁρῶμεν τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς

ὀφθαλμοῖς Τί δήποτε Ὅτι ψυχή ἐστιν ἡ καθαιρομένηbull ψυχὴ δὲ ὀφθαλμοῖς σώματος οὐχ ὁρᾶται Ἡ μὲν οὖν κάθαρσις τῶν

ἁμαρτημάτων νοητὴ δωρεά τίς ἐστιν ὀφθαλμοῖς οὐ δυναμένη σώματος γενέσθαι φανερά τὸ δὲ γλώσσαις διαφόροις λαλεῖν

ἐστι μὲν καὶ αὐτὸ νοητῆς ἐνεργείας τοῦ Πνεύματος αἰσθητὸν μέντοι παρέχεται τὸ σημεῖον καὶ τοῖς ἀπίστοις εὐσύνοπτον

Τῆς γὰρ ἔνδον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ γινομένης ἐνεργείας τῆς ἀοράτου λέγω ἡ ἔξω γλῶττα ἀκουομένη φανέρωσίς τίς ἐστι καὶ ἔλεγχος

Joannes Chrysostomus In principium Actorum Migne PG 51 page 92 lines 42-45 49-53 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἔτι ἀσθενέστερον

διέκειντο οἱ τότε καὶ τὰ νοητὰ χαρίσματα ὁρᾷν οὐκ ἠδύναντο τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐδίδοτο αἰσθητὸν χάρισμα ὥστε

τὸ νοητὸν γενέσθαι καταφανές Καὶ ἦν τὸ μὲν σημεῖον αἰσθητὸν ἡ τοιαύτη φωνὴ λέγωbull τῇ γὰρ αἰσθήσει τοῦ σώματος

αὐτῆς ἤκουον τὴν δὲ νοητὴν καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένην τοῦ Πνεύματος χάριν πᾶσι τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο σημεῖον κατάδηλον ἐποίει

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

30

feature that he introduces γλώσσαις λαλεῖν into his commentaries on the story about the attempts of

Simon to buy the apostolic power Although the text Acts 89-24 speaks generally about the receiving of

the Holy Spirit (Acts 817 19) for Chrysostom it clearly refers to speaking in tongues in particular

because otherwise how Simon would notice rather the invisible gifts115

According to Chrysostom the gift of tongues had died out by his time because Christians had

learned to believe without the support of the visible pledge such as signs and miracles They are no

longer necessary for establishing of Christianity116

By cessation of tongues God does not bring

contemporary people to dishonor but rather does honor to them117

To sum up the characteristics that Chrysostom gives to λαλεῖν γλώσσαις first in apostles time

second all newly-baptized began to speak third in many foreign tongues forth immediately At the

beginning this sign was received by the apostles - not by the Twelve only but by one hundred and

twenty118

Later other believers began to receive the tongues119

It was the first gift and such a strange

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 33-38 40-41 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀπὸ τῶν

εἰδώλων προσιόντες οὐδὲν εἰδότες σαφῶς οὐδὲ ταῖς παλαιαῖς ἐντραφέντες βίβλοις βαπτισθέντες εὐθέως Πνεῦμα

ἐλάμβανον τὸ δὲ Πνεῦμα οὐχ ἑώρωνmiddot ἀόρατον γάρ ἐστινmiddot αἴσθητόν τινα ἔλεγχον ἐδίδου τῆς ἐνεργείας ἐκείνης ἡ χάριςmiddot καὶ

τοῦτο ἐφανέρου τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὅτι Πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ φθεγγομένῳ

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 40 Minge PG 60 page 283 lines 47-49 Εἰκὸς τοίνυν ἦν Πνεῦμα μὲν αὐτοὺς

ἔχειν μὴ φαίνεσθαι δέ ἀλλrsquo ἐκ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ ἀφrsquo ὧν γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν τοῦτο ἐνέφαινον 115 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 18 Minge PG 60 page 144 lines 33-37 Ἰδὼν δὲ φησὶ Σίμων ὅτι διὰ τῆς

ἐπιθέσεως τῶν χειρῶν τῶν ἀποστόλων δίδοται τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (Acts 818) Οὐκ ἂν οὕτως εἶπεν εἰ μὴ αἰσθητόν τι ἐγίνετο

Τοῦτο καὶ Παῦλος ἐποίησεν ὅτε ταῖς γλώσσαις ἐλάλουν 116 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 line 58 - p 460 line 13 Ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν νῦν χρείαν οὐκ

ἔχω σημείων Τίνος ἕνεκεν Ὅτι καὶ χωρὶς σημείου δόσεως πιστεύειν μεμάθηκα τῷ Δεσπότῃ Ὁ γὰρ ἀπιστῶν ἐνεχύρου

δεῖται ἐγὼ δὲ πιστεύων οὐ δέομαι ἐνεχύρου οὐδὲ σημείου ἀλλὰ κἂν μὴ λαλήσω γλώσσῃ οἶδα ὅτι ἐκαθάρθην ἐκ τῶν

ἁμαρτιῶν Ἐκεῖνοι δὲ τότε οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον σημεῖον τοῦτο αὐτοῖς ἐδίδοτο σημεῖα ὥσπερ ἐνέχυρον τῆς πίστεως

ἧς ἐπίστευον Ὥστε οὐχ ὡς πιστοῖς ἀλλrsquo ὡς ἀπίστοις ἐδίδοτο τὰ σημεῖα ἵνα γένωνται πιστοί οὕτω καὶ Παῦλός φησι Τὰ

σημεῖα οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις Ὁρᾶτε ὅτι οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τιμῶντός ἐστι τὸ

συστεῖλαι τὴν τῶν σημείων ἐπίδειξιν Βουλόμενος γὰρ δεῖξαι τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν ὅτι χωρὶς ἐνεχύρων καὶ σημείων αὐτῷ

πιστεύομεν τοῦτο πεποίηκεν ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ εἰ μὴ ἔλαβον πρῶτον σημεῖον καὶ ἐνέχυρον οὐκ ἂν αὐτῷ ἐπίστευον περὶ τῶν

ἀφανῶν ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ χωρὶς τούτου πᾶσαν ἐπιδείκνυμι πίστιν τοῦτο οὖν αἴτιον τοῦ μὴ γίνεσθαι σημεῖα νῦν 117 Joannes Chrysostomus De sancta pentecoste Migne PG 50 p 459 lines 31-34 Τίνος οὖν χάριν συνεστάλη καὶ ἀνῃρέθη

ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἡ χάρις αὕτη νῦν Οὐχὶ ἀτιμάζοντος ἡμᾶς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ σφόδρα τιμῶντος 118 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 14-16 ἆρα ἐπὶ τοὺς δώδεκα μόνους ἦλθεν

οὐχὶ δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς λοιπούς Οὐδαμῶς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν

Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 30-42 Ἐκάθισε φησὶν ἐφrsquo ἕνα ἕκαστον αὐτῶν

Οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν καταλειφθέντα Διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲ ἀλγεῖ λοιπὸν μὴ αἱρεθεὶς ὡς ὁ Ματθίας Καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φησὶν

ἅπαντες Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἔλαβον τοῦ Πνεύματος τὴν χάριν ἀλλrsquo ἐπλήσθησαν Καὶ ἤρξαντο λαλεῖν ἑτέραις γλώσσαις καθὼς τὸ

Πνεῦμα ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἀποφθέγγεσθαι Οὐκ ἂν εἶπε Πάντες καὶ ἀποστόλων ὄντων ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι μετέσχον Ἄλλως

δὲ οὐδὲ ἄνω κατrsquo ἰδίαν αὐτοὺς προειπὼν καὶ ὀνομαστὶ νῦν ἂν συνῆψεν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ πράγματι Εἰ γὰρ ὅπου εἰπεῖν ἦν ὅτι

παρῆσαν κατrsquo ἰδίαν τῶν ἀποστόλων μνημονεύει πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐνταῦθα 119 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 45-47 Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι

τοῦτο πρῶτον σημεῖον ἔλαβον καὶ οἱ πιστοὶ τοῦτο ἐλάμβανον τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 33-35 Ἐδόκει δὲ τοῦτο χάρισμα μέγα

εἶναι ἐπειδὴ καὶ πρῶτον αὐτὸ ἔλαβον οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ παρὰ Κορινθίοις οἱ πλείους τοῦτο ἐκέκτηντο

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

31

one that there was no need for another one120

Eventually the gift of tongues became more abundant

than all other gifts among the early Christians121

Who according to Chrysostom was present among the audience when the apostles began to

speak in tongues Unlike some authors before him Chrysostom does not omit any part of the ambiguous

characteristic of the witnesses of the Pentecost event in Acts 25 there were devout Jews and at the same

time representatives of every people under heaven Instead he expands the list including the citizens

foreigners and proselytes First he makes attempts to dismiss the contradiction There were he said

Jews living in Jerusalem devout men (Acts 25) The fact that they lived there was a sign of their piety

How Being from so many nations leaving the native countries and homes and relatives they lived

here There were he said Jews living in Jerusalem devout men from every nation under heaven122

This does not explain however whether those were locals newly converted to Judaism (but there could

not be a lot of them) or those were the Jews from the diaspora (but it this case they hardly knew the

local languages) The statement Since it was possible according to the law for them to appear thrice in

the year in the temple therefore the devout people from all the nations lived there123

might imply that

Chrysostom has in mind a rather dubious idea about the foreigners who professed Judaism However he

well understands the confusing situation and provides the reasonable explanation in favor of the mixed

audience that was not limited by the Jews only but included the gentiles from everywhere So much

the sound terrified them that the greater part of the world came there Since Jews were in captivity it

well could be that many of the [different] nations came together with them at that time Or that the

dogmatic matters had already been spread among the nations For this reason many of them were

present here because of the memorable things they had heard Therefore the testimony was

incontrovertible [and confirmed] from everywhere - by citizens by foreigners and by proselytes124

120 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 28-30 Οὐ λαμβάνουσιν ἕτερον σημεῖον

ἀλλὰ τοῦτο πρῶτον ξένον γὰρ ἦν καὶ οὐ χρεία ἦν ἑτέρου σημείου 121 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 239 lines 48-52 Καὶ γὰρ καὶ νεκροὺς ἤγειρον

πολλοὶ καὶ δαίμονας ἤλαυνον καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα ἐθαυματούργουν καὶ χαρίσματα δὲ εἶχον οἱ μὲν ἐλάττονα οἱ δὲ

πλείω Πλέον δὲ πάντων τὸ τῶν γλωσσῶν ἦν παρrsquo αὐτοῖς χάρισμα 122 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 43 lines 49-55 Ἦσαν δὲ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ

κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες εὐλαβεῖς Τὸ κατοικεῖν εὐλαβείας ἦν σημεῖον Πῶς Ἀπὸ τοσούτων γὰρ ἐθνῶν ὄντες καὶ

πατρίδας ἀφέντες καὶ οἰκίας καὶ συγγενεῖς ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ Ἦσαν γὰρ φησὶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατοικοῦντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἄνδρες

εὐλαβεῖς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔθνους τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν 123 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 31-34 Ἐπεὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον τρὶς τοῦ

ἐνιαυτοῦ φαίνεσθαι ἐν τῷ ναῷ διὰ τοῦτο ᾤκουν ἐκεῖ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐλαβεῖς ἄνδρες 124 Joannes Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 44-45 51-61 Οὕτως αὐτοὺς ἐπτόησεν ὁ

ἦχος ὅτι καὶ τὸ πλέον τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐνταῦθα κατέλαβε Ἅτε δὲ ὄντων ἐν αἰχμαλωσίᾳ τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰκὸς αὐτοῖς

συμπαρεῖναι τηνικαῦτα πολλοὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἢ ὅτι καὶ πρὸς τὰ ἔθνη τὰ τῶν δογμάτων ἤδη κατέσπαρτο Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πολλοὶ

καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν παρῆσαν ἐκεῖ κατὰ μνήμην ὧν ἤκουσαν Πάντοθεν τοίνυν ἀναντίῤῥητος ἡ μαρτυρία παρὰ τῶν πολιτῶν παρὰ

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

32

One can find an interesting contradiction in Chrysostoms position concerning the question

whether speaking in tongues was understandable for a speaker himself On the one hand

comprehensibility of such a speech is assumed since the apostles needed to know what they were talking

about while preaching abroad However even if the meaning of their speech was clear for the apostles

Chrysostom lets us know that they were not aware of the medium they happened to use ie the apostles

did not know the fact that they spoke in a particular foreign language and learned this from the listeners

This gave strength to the apostles for they had not known before that it was speaking in the Parthian

tongue but now they learned from those [who recognized their tongues]125

Elsewhere Chrysostom also

writes that the meaning of speaking in tongues was understandable for the speaker he just was unable to

explain this to other unless he had the gift of interpretation126

On the other hand Chrysostom writes that speaking in tongues may not imply understanding of

this speech by the speaker himself Therefore speaking in tongues the person becomes a foreigner for

himself For if somebody speaks only in Persian or any other foreign tongue and he does not

understand what he says then eventually he will be a barbarian to himself not to another only because

of not knowing the meaning of the sound127

The same is said about the gift of praying in tongues ie

one who prayed did not understand the meaning of his prayer128

According to Chrysostom Paul warned

that unless speaking in tongues will be combined with the understanding of the things spoken there

would be another confusion (σύγχυσις the term used for the Babylonian confusion of tongues)129

In different works Chrysostom points out several distinct functions of the gift of tongues

Besides the task for the apostles to preach the Gospel abroad these functions are first to encourage

τῶν ξένων παρὰ τῶν προσηλύτων Ἀκούομεν λαλούντων αὐτῶν ταῖς ἡμετέραις γλώσσαις τὰ μεγαλεῖα τοῦ Θεοῦ 125 Chrysostomus In Acta apostolorum 4 Minge PG 60 page 45 lines 45-48 Τοῦτο δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐνεύρου τοὺς ἀποστόλους

ὅτι τί ποτε Παρθιστὶ ἦν φθέγγεσθαι οὐκ ᾔδεσαν ἀλλὰ παρrsquo ἐκείνων τότε ἐμάνθανον 126 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 29 Migne PG 61 p 245 lines 29-32 Ἄλλῳ δὲ γένη γλωσσῶν ἄλλῳ

δὲ ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ᾔδει τὸ τί ἔλεγεν αὐτὸς ἑτέρῳ δὲ ἑρμηνεῦσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ δὲ καὶ ἀμφότερα ταῦτα

ἐκέκτητο ἢ τούτων θάτερον

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 11-13 Ἀλλὰ τέως περὶ τῶν εἰδότων ἃ

λέγουσι διαλέγεται εἰδότων μὲν αὐτῶν οὐκ ἐπισταμένων δὲ εἰς ἑτέρους ἐξενεγκεῖν 127 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 2-6 Ἂν γάρ τις φθέγγηται μόνον τῇ

Περσῶν γλώσσῃ ἢ ἑτέρᾳ τινὶ ἀλλοτρίᾳ μὴ εἰδῇ δὲ ἃ λέγει ἄρα καὶ ἑαυτῷ λοιπὸν ἔσται βάρβαρος οὐχ ἑτέρῳ μόνον διὰ τὸ

μὴ εἰδέναι τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φωνῆς 128 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p300 lines 6-10 Καὶ γὰρ ἦσαν τὸ παλαιὸν καὶ

χάρισμα εὐχῆς ἔχοντες πολλοὶ μετὰ γλώττης καὶ ηὔχοντο μὲν καὶ ἡ γλῶττα ἐφθέγγετο ἢ τῇ Περσῶν ἢ τῇ Ῥωμαίων φωνῇ

εὐχομένη ὁ νοῦς δὲ οὐκ ᾔδει τὸ λεγόμενον 129 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 300 lines 18-21 Τὸ αὐτὸ πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα

δηλοῖ Ἵνα καὶ ἡ γλῶττα φθέγγηται καὶ ὁ νοῦς μὴ ἀγνοῇ τὰ λεγόμενα Ἂν γὰρ μὴ τοῦτο ᾖ καὶ ἑτέρα σύγχυσις ἔσται

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 37 Migne PG 61 p 315 lines 33-36 Περικόψας τὸν θόρυβον τὸν ἀπὸ

τῶν γλωττῶν καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῶν προφητειῶν καὶ νομοθετήσας ὥστε μὴ σύγχυσιν γίνεσθαι τούς τε γλώσσαις λαλοῦντας ἀνὰ

μέρος τοῦτο ποιεῖν τούς τε προφητεύοντας ἀρξαμένου ἑτέρου σιγᾷν

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

33

Christians to be closely connected with their fellow believers so that their gifts such as the tongues and

their interpretation could be mutually complementary130

second to benefit a speaker himself although

Chrysostom does not always agree with this131

third to produce a shocking effect since speaking in

tongues was a sign for unbelievers that astonished and confused them132

Chrysostom tries to convince

that the last one was not really a useful function because it did not profit anybody but provides the

showing off only For this [speaking in tongues] has display only while that [the gift of prophecy] is

very helpful133

Elsewhere Chrysostom follows Pauls argumentation in 1 Cor and shows speaking in

tongues as an inferior gift134

Thus besides apostles preaching abroad there are no other contexts in

130 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 267 line 20-27 Μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσι

μὴ πάντες διερμηνεύουσιν Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μεγάλα οὐ πᾶσιν ἐχαρίσατο ὁ Θεὸς πάντα ἀλλὰ τοῖς μὲν τοῦτο τοῖς δὲ ἐκεῖνοmiddot

οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐλαττόνων ἐποίησεν οὐδὲ ταῦτα πᾶσι προθείς Ἐποίησε δὲ τοῦτο πολλὴν ἐκ τούτου τὴν συμφωνίαν καὶ

τὴν ἀγάπην οἰκοδομῶν ἵνα ἕκαστος τοῦ πλησίον δεόμενος συνάγηται πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν - All do not speak with tongues do

they All do not interpret do they (1 Cor 1230) God did not grant all the great [gifts] to everybody but this to some and

that to others He did the same with the lesser [gifts] not endowing these to everybody He did this intending thereby

abundant harmony and love so that everybody standing in need of [his] neighbor might be brought close to [his] brother

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 40-51 Ταῦτα δὲ λέγει συνάγων αὐτοὺς

πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἵνα κἂν αὐτὸς μὴ ἔχῃ τὸ χάρισμα τοῦ ἑρμηνεύειν ἕτερον προσλαβὼν τὸν τοῦτο ἔχοντα ὠφέλιμον τὸ ἑαυτοῦ

διrsquo ἐκείνου ποιήσῃ Διὸ πανταχοῦ δείκνυσιν ἀτελὲς ὂν ἵνα κἂν οὕτως αὐτοὺς συνδήσῃ Ὡς ὅ γε νομίζων ἀρκεῖν αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ

οὐχ οὕτως αὐτὸ ἐγκωμιάζει ὡς καθαιρεῖ οὐκ ἀφιεὶς αὐτὸ λάμψαι καλῶς διὰ τῆς ἑρμηνείας Καλὸν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον

τὸ χάρισμα ἀλλrsquo ὅταν ἔχῃ τὸν σαφηνίζοντα τὰ λεγόμενα Ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ δάκτυλος ἀναγκαῖον ἀλλrsquo ὅταν αὐτὸν ἀποστήσῃς τῶν

λοιπῶν οὐχ ὁμοίως ἔσται χρήσιμος 131 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 37-38 Καὶ εἰ ἀνωφελὲς διὰ τί ἐδόθη

φησίν Ὥστε ἐκείνῳ χρήσιμον εἶναι τῷ λαβόντι - But if it is unprofitable why was it given says one So as to be useful to

him that hath received it 132 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p308 lines 15-16 Καὶ γὰρ εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστιν

αὐτοῖς μόνον τουτέστιν εἰς τὸ ἐκπλήττεσθαι ἁπλῶς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 36 Migne PG 61 p307 lines 42-59 Ἡ μὲν γὰρ προφητεία ἀμφοτέροις

[believers and unbelievers] ἐπιτήδειος ἡ δὲ γλῶττα οὐκέτι Διόπερ εἰπὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γλώττης Εἰς σημεῖόν ἐστι [the apostle]

προσέθηκεν Οὐ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τούτοις εἰς σημεῖον τουτέστιν εἰς ἔκπληξιν οὐκ εἰς κατήχησιν

τοσοῦτον Ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς προφητείας φησὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν εἰπὼν Ἡ δὲ προφητεία οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς

πιστεύουσιν Οὐδὲ γὰρ χρείαν ἔχει ὁ πιστὸς σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ἀλλὰ διδασκαλίας δεῖται μόνον καὶ κατηχήσεως Πῶς οὖν σὺ

λέγεις φησὶν ἀμφοτέροις χρήσιμον εἶναι τὴν προφητείαν αὐτοῦ λέγοντος Οὐ τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλὰ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν Ἐὰν

ἀκριβῶς ἐξετάσῃς εἴσῃ τὸ λεγόμενον Οὐδὲ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμος ἡ προφητεία τοῖς ἀπίστοις ἀλλrsquo Οὐκ ἔστιν εἰς

σημεῖον ὡς ἡ γλῶττα ἀνωφελὲς δηλονότι Οὐδὲ τοῖς ἀπίστοις τι χρήσιμον ἡ γλῶττα ἓν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἐστι τὸ ἔργον τὸ

ἐκπλῆξαι μόνον καὶ θορυβῆσαι 133 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 301 lines 9-10 Τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐπίδειξιν ἔχει

μόνον τὸ δὲ πολλὴν τὴν ὠφέλειαν

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 57-60 Ὃ δὲ λέγει τοῦτό ἐστιν Ἐὰν μή

τι εἴπω δυνάμενον ὑμῖν εὔληπτον γενέσθαι καὶ δυνάμενον εἶναι σαφὲς ἀλλrsquo ἐπιδείξομαι μόνον ὅτι γλωττῶν ἔχω χάρισμα

γλωττῶν ὧν ἀκούσαντες οὐδὲν κερδάναντες 134 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 264 line 59 - p 265 line 5 Καὶ οὓς μὲν ἔθετο

ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ πρῶτον ἀποστόλους δεύτερον προφήτας τρίτον διδασκάλους ἔπειτα δυνάμεις ἔπειτα χαρίσματα

ἰαμάτων ἀντιλήψεις κυβερνήσεις γένη γλωσσῶν Ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφθην εἰπὼν τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ποιεῖbull ἐπειδὴ μέγα ἐφρόνουν ἐπὶ

ταῖς γλώτταις ἔσχατον αὐτὸ τίθησι πανταχοῦ Τὸ γὰρ πρῶτον ἐνταῦθα καὶ δεύτερον οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἴρηκεν ἀλλὰ προτάττων τὸ

προτιμότερον καὶ τὸ καταδεέστερον δεικνύς

Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 32 Migne PG 61 p 266 line 21-27 Γένῃ γλωσσῶν Εἶδες ποῦ τέθεικε

τουτὶ τὸ χάρισμα καὶ πῶς πανταχοῦ τὴν ἐσχάτην αὐτῷ νέμει τάξιν Εἶτα ἐπειδὴ πάλιν ἐκ τοῦ καταλόγου τούτου πολλὴν

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

34

which according to Chrysostom speaking in tongues could be really beneficial per se This implies

some kind of the inner contradiction of the gift of speaking in tongues as it is presented in Chrysostom

writings

The most striking example is in the Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians Chrysostom first notices the

great significance of the gift of speaking in tongues and its useful function it enabled the apostles to go

abroad and preach the Gospel among the different peoples Moreover he clearly indicates that the

multilingualism was a result of the Babylonian confusion of tongues and the gift of tongues was a tool

to nullify this situation So why did the apostles receive it before the rest Because they were about to

go abroad everywhere As at the time of building of the tower the one tongue was divided into many so

then [at the apostles time] many tongues frequently met in one man and the same person spoke in the

Persian and Roman and Indian and many other tongues the Spirit was sounding within him And the

gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak diverse languages135

Immediately

after this statement Chrysostom switches from the Pentecost version of speaking in tongues to Pauls

one and assumingly he does not see any contradiction between two accounts He emphasizes that no

one understands (1 Cor 142) this speaking and that Paul depressed it implying that the profit of it

was not great136

Few lines below Chrysostom adds For those with tongues were not understood by

them who did not have the gift [of interpretation]137

Citing 1 Cor 149 So also you if you do not utter

by the tongue distinct speech how will it be known what is spoken For you will be speaking into the

air Chrysostom explains that is calling to nobody speaking unto no one Thus everywhere he [Paul]

shows its unprofitableness138

One may ask why Chrysostom never mentions the foreigners who might not receive the gifts of

the Spirit and could not be Christians at all but nevertheless still naturally understand speaking in their

languages Why does Chrysostom after he mentions the great use of the gift of tongues as a miraculous

ἔδειξε διαφορὰν καὶ τὸ νόσημα ἐκεῖνο διήγειρε τὸ τῶν ἐλάττονα ἐχόντων χαρίσματαbull λοιπὸν μετὰ πολλῆς αὐτοῖς ἐπιπηδᾷ

τῆς σφοδρότητος διὰ τὸ πολλὰς αὐτοῖς παρασχεῖν τὰς ἀποδείξεις τοῦ μὴ σφόδρα ἐλαττοῦσθαι αὐτούς 135 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 39-48 Τίνος οὖν ἕνεκεν πρὸ τῶν

ἄλλων ἔλαβον αὐτὸ οἱ ἀπόστολοι Ἐπειδὴ πανταχοῦ διέρχεσθαι ἔμελλον Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς πυργοποιίας ἡ μία

γλῶττα εἰς πολλὰς διετέμνετο οὕτω τότε αἱ πολλαὶ πολλάκις εἰς ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ᾔεσαν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ τῇ Περσῶν καὶ τῇ

Ῥωμαίων καὶ τῇ Ἰνδῶν καὶ ἑτέραις πολλαῖς διελέγετο γλώτταις τοῦ Πνεύματος ἐνηχοῦντος αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ χάρισμα ἐκαλεῖτο

χάρισμα γλωττῶν ἐπειδὴ πολλαῖς ἀθρόον ἐδύνατο λαλεῖν φωναῖς 136 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 296 lines 50-51 οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἀκούει καθεῖλε

δείξας οὐ πολὺ τὸ χρήσιμον ὄν 137 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 297 lines 7-8 Τῶν γὰρ γλώσσαις λαλούντων

οὐκ ἤκουον οἱ τὸ χάρισμα οὐκ ἔχοντες 138 Joannes Chrysostomus In epistulam 1 ad Corinthios 35 Migne PG 61 p 298 lines 35-37 Τουτέστιν οὐδενὶ

φθεγγόμενοι πρὸς οὐδένα λαλοῦντες Καὶ πανταχοῦ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς δείκνυσι

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

35

ability to speak in foreign languages that enabled the apostles to be understood all over the world

immediately says that nobody understood this speaking so the gift is not so useful as it seems to be I

think that Chrysostom probably could not mistake an utterance in the real foreign language for an

ecstatic speech which is just an imitation of another tongue He spent the significant part of his life in

Antioch which was par excellence a bilingual Greco-Syriac city and he certainly had some idea how

another real language (Syriac) looks and sounds like I would explain this by the fact that Chrysostoms

task was to provide a coherent exegesis Chrysostom had to face this fact that the linguistic phenomena

defined by the same term - γλώσσαις λαλεῖν - have such drastically different characteristics in Acts 2

and 1 Cor 14 He made every effort to show that different books of the New Testament could not

contradict each other

The analysis comes to the conclusions that the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν as xenolalia

(the miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages) had not been widespread before the 4th century (at

least according to the available Greek sources) Instead it was sometimes understood as an ecstatic

speech of various kinds Almost always there was no clear indication of intelligibility or unintelligibility

of such speech

Irenaeus is the only author who mentioned speaking in tongues as a contemporary practice

Eusebius of Caesarea both refers to Irenaeuss text as the evidence of speaking in tongues in post-

Apostolic time and distances from it He emphasizes that speaking in tongues still happened then in

Irenaeuss time what implies that it no longer took place in Eusebiuss time Chrysostom pays special

attention to the fact that speaking in tongues has ceased explaining this by Gods favor to the mature

believers This is an important distinction all the other patristic authors except Irenaeus approached the

scripture passages on γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in a scholarly or historical way while Irenaeus assumingly

described an actual practice However I do not think that this means that Irenaeus somehow has a better

perspective on the meaning of speaking in tongues First whatever was the practice Irenaeus witnessed

it was not necessarily a final stage of the interrupted tradition of the apostles speaking Second and

what seems to me most likely speaking in tongues in Irenaeuss times if it indeed took place could as

well be a performance constructed according to the scriptural passages in question so that the vision of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν is still provided through the mediation of the text However it is hardly possible to

provide decisive arguments for this hypothesis from the short account of Irenaeus

Eusebius might be the earliest author who suggested that apostles might need the knowledge of

foreign languages in order to preach all over the world Gregory Nazianzen and Cyril of Jerusalem were

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century

36

much more explicit in their statements that apostles spoke in the real human languages not learned

before and communicated with foreigners in their native tongues

By the end of the 4th c this idea was probably so well accepted that John Chrysostom in his

interpretation for example in Homily 35 on 1 Corinthians put in juxtaposition the Pentecost story from

Acts 21-12 with the positive implications of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since everybody from all over the world

could understand the apostles preaching and 1 Cor 141-40 with its thesis about uselessness of

γλώσσαις λαλεῖν since nobody understood this speech and could be edified This had quite confusing

and contradictory results

The change in the interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν appears to be one of the less known aspects

of the transformations that Christianity underwent in the 4th c in the multilingual milieu of the late

Roman Empire One should not understand this as if there was a fundamental difference between the

multilingualism in the eastern Roman Empire of the 4th century and that of the 2nd century Instead

there was a fundamental difference in the social portraits of Christian communities the political and

ideological roles of the Christianity in the Empire as well as in self-representation of Christianity in

narratives and in public discourses The tasks that Christianity faced in 4th century were incomparable

with those of the 2nd century Not only the increase of the preaching activity alone eg the need to

evangelize the barbarian tribes like the Goths that were making incursions into the area but also the

aspiration to represent Christianity as the universal religion bolstered up by the imperial government

The Christian thinkers of the 4th century felt need to delineate the place of Christianity in the

coordinates of the wider world and more clearly define its attitude the Other that happened to speak in

another language All these factors might be at least partially responsible for the change in the

interpretation of γλώσσαις λαλεῖν in the course of the 4th century