Language can both exclude and invite. By language I do not mean the use of certain words, but languages, such as English, Spanish, Korean, etc.
Another language feature that we are just beginning to explore is using multiple languages within the service, and we are going back to Korean (which I am pleased to say I still hear during some people’s after church conversations). I really enjoyed the worship at the Multi-Ethnic Church Conference where some songs would have a line in English and then repeat the line in another language. We are working toward adapting some of our songs in this way. We have also added a bi-lingual speaker to our call to worship rotation. Before she joined the team, she wanted to be comfortable praying aloud in English. We have now given her the permission to also pray in Korean, provided she translates what she says. She has not done it yet, as I imagine it takes quite a bit of mental effort to pray in multiple languages without the gift of tongues. Je suis content que je n’ai pas été invité à prier en anglais et en français. I think these uses of language are inclusionary, and uphold the command of 1 Cor. 14:5-19.
©2011 Paul Tillman
I once had an Assemblies of God student ask me a very interesting question on 1 Corinthians 14 in a class. In the class, we had discussed what it meant to read passages such as this one in context and thus to realize that Paul was giving instruction to a specific church within a particular socio-cultural matrix. What if, the student asked, it was generally understood in a particular charismatic church in a particular community today that it was a tongues-speaking church and that everyone present was edified by enjoying the blessing of tongues in others, even if it was not interpreted? Would the principle Paul is playing out with the Corinthians still be upheld?
Another question that often occurs to me when reading Paul is to what extent his arguments in specific letters involve rhetoric directly aimed at a specific congregation to move them in a particular direction, but that he would not use in the same way with a different congregation that needed nudged in another direction?
Where I am headed is that the principle of including and not alienating those present in a worship service does seem to reach across all times. But I wonder whether the specific, concrete instruction to “translate” foreign tongues works in exactly the same way.
I know that wasn’t the important point of your post, but some thoughts you sparked…
I appreciate your post, and realized that I was making a leap from the Corinthian church to ours. For one, we are not using the gift of tongues, but speaking in languages we already learned. However, I do feel a principle of everyone being able to understand and be edified applies. It is an interesting idea, that I can’t discount, that I may be edified by knowing God is moving someone to use the gift of tongues, even though I can’t understand the language, but I think that edification would be limited to believers who recognized the Spirit’s movement or non-Christians who happen to know the language being spoken. And wasn’t that one of Paul’s points, that some people will just be confused? No matter what, there may always be something that someone doesn’t understand in a worship service, perhaps because of a barrier in belief, language, culture, etc. (I’ve got a funny story about that), but I’m not going to set out to try and alienate or confuse, but instead invite and be clear.
Here’s the story. This was a friend’s first time ever at church, before she became a Christian. This church was a Black church where the congregation got very excited in the Spirit. A woman was “slain in the Spirit” and passed out. My friend asked the person who invited her what was wrong with that lady. “Oh, nothing,” he replied. “She just has the Holy Ghost.” Her response? “GHOST!” and she ran out of the church. So even when we are speaking the same language, we need to be clear 🙂
Well said, Paul!