Iii. A Theological Proposal
II. THE PAULINE DATA
It is well known that Paul specifically mentions the phenomenon of glossolalia (“speaking in tongues”) only in 1 Corinthians 12-14; it is also generally agreed, although not always in the same way, that Paul’s discussion of the phenomenon was primarily for the purpose of correcting a Corinthian abuse, not of instructing them theologically in an area where they needed further teaching. For this reason a certain tenuousness exists for us in the task of theologizing. What we get from Paul are his emphases in correcting the Corinthians rather than full-orbed instruction or reflection.
Nonetheless, several significant conclusions can be drawn from a careful analysis of this section of 1 Corinthians. I simply list them here; they will be elaborated in the next section:
1. Whatever else, glossolalia is Spirit-inspired utterance, as 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 and 14:2 make plain.
2. Whether Paul also understood it to be an actual earthly language is a moot point, but the overall evidence suggests not.
3. It is speech essentially unintelligible both to the speaker (14:14) and to other hearers (14:16), which is why it must be interpreted in the assembly.
4. The regulations for its community use in 14:27-28, plus the declaration in 14:32 that the “Spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets,” make it clear that the speaker is not in “ecstasy” or “out of control.”
5. It is speech directed basically toward God (14:2, 14-15, 28), whose content takes the form of prayer, song, blessing (= praise), and thanksgiving.
6. Although he does not forbid its use in the assembly, Paul clearly does not encourage it; rather he insists that they “seek earnestly” to speak what is intelligible to the others, thus to prophesy (14:1, 3-5, 6, 9, 12, 16, 19, 24-25, 28).
7. As a gift for private prayer, Paul held it in the highest regard (14:2, 4a, 15, 17-18). Even though unintelligible to the speaker, such prayer “in the Spirit” edifies the one thus speaking (14:4).
My immediate concern is to point out the significant correspondences between these conclusions (esp. 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7) and what Paul says about “praying in the Spirit” in Romans 8:26-27. In my recent study on the Spirit in Paul, I have argued at length that one can make the best exegetical and phenomenological sense of the Romans passage if we understand the Spirit’s making appeal for us “with inarticulate groanings” as referring primarily to glossolalia.63
What convinced me to change my mind on this matter64 was a combination of three realities: (1) The essential matters as to what Paul says about the Spirit’s praying through us in Romans 8:26-27 correspond precisely with his description of praying in tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:14-19, namely: (a) that the Spirit is understood to be praying in/through the believer (cf. items 1, 4, and 5 above); and (b) that the one so praying does not understand with his or her mind what the Spirit is saying (cf. items 2, 3, and 7). (2) The experience which Paul describes in Romans 8:26-27 as “the Spirit’s interceding with alaletos groanings” is expressed in such a way that he is obviously appealing to something that is commonplace among early believers (after all, in this case he is writing to a church that knows him only by reputation, not in person). But in fact there is no other evidence of any kind in the New Testament — or beyond — for such a phenomenon. Glossolalia, on the other hand, has all the earmarks of being commonplace.65 (3) In that case Paul’s use of the phrase stenagmos alalëtos (probably = “inarticulate groanings”) rather than “glossolalia” (if that is the phenomenon being described in this way) is purely contextual, having been dictated by what he has previously said in w. 22-23 about the present “groaning” of creation as it awaits the “not yet” of final redemption and of believers “joining with creation” in that “groaning.” Thus, despite his use of alalëtos)
66 Paul almost certainly does not intend to describe silent praying, but praying that is “too deep for words” in the sense of “the ordinary words of the speaker’s native language.” It is therefore “inarticulate” not in the sense that one does not “mouth words,”67 but in the sense that what is said is not understood by the mind of the speaker.
In any case, what Paul describes in Romans 8:26-27 is clearly a form of “praying in the Spirit,” the language he also uses for “speaking in tongues” in 1 Corinthians 14:15-16.68 Thus, in light of these correspondences, our attempt at theologizing this phenomenon will embrace the data from both passages and should therefore be understood as “toward a theology of praying in the Spirit” — which for Paul would most often have been “in tongues.” After all, he can say without proof, but also without fear of contradiction, that “I speak [pray] in tongues more than all of you” to a congregation that has (apparently) taken special pride in the public expression of this phenomenon (1 Cor 14:18).