Notes on the Cyrillian catena on I Corinthians 14:10

Quick thoughts on concepts, and critical words in the translation of the I Corinthians 14:10 catena attributed to Cyril of Alexandria.

This text outlines several interesting particulars: how ancient Greek words previously used in classical Greek rituals had become Christianized, and the office of the circuit preacher, which required the knowledge of many languages. These elements are examined in more detail below.

Several words in the translation of Cyril’s catena on I Corinthians have Greek antecedents to them that require careful examination, especially as it relates to the doctrine of tongues. The results demonstrate the Alexandrians had adapted these words from its original intent to their own meaning.

Read more

Cyril of Alexandria on Tongues: the Original Texts

The writings related to the tongues of Pentecost and Corinth attributed to Cyril of Alexandria. This is a digitized copy of the Greek text and the parallel Latin translation, when available. The text is mostly derived from Migne Patrologia Graeca and a portion from Cyrilli: Archiepiscopi Alexandrini In D. Joannis Evangelium, edited by Philippus Edvardius Pusey (London: Oxford. 1872).

The following commentaries attributed to Cyril of Alexandria are found to have references to either the tongues of Acts or Corinth: Zephaniah (Sophonias in Latin), Acts and I Corinthians.

Read more

Speaking in Tongues Today

A brief journey into finding out what is the contemporary practice of speaking in tongues and how influential this doctrine is throughout the world.

Cyril of Alexandria on Tongues: Acts

A medieval commentary of the Book of Acts from a fragment attributed to the fifth century Church Father, Cyril of Alexandria.

The following is an English translation of a text relating to tongues and Pentecost. It comes from a supplement to *Cyril’s* works as found in Migne Patrologia Graeca.

Read more

Cyril of Alexandria on Tongues: Zephaniah

The christian doctrine of tongues attributed to Cyril of Alexandria from the commentary on the Book of Zephaniah.

The following is an English translation by Charles Sullivan from Cyril’s Commentary on Zephaniah the Prophet. This translation only covers Zephaniah 3:8-11 where one can find a substantive definition of Pentecost. Not only does it describe what it is, but whether the miracle persisted, or was a one time experience. Analysis and commentary will follow in a later article. In order to assist the reader in building context to this particular translation, Zephaniah 3:8-11 has been provided at the bottom of the document.

S. Cyrilli Alexandrini Archiep. Commentarius in Sophoniam Prophetam.

——

39. It says that concerning Babylonia which had been conquered and concerning those being displaced in the ruin of arrogance, the nations will learn the vengeful force of God against it (Babylon). The ones who at some time laugh at the falling down and destroyed Israel and when the opposite happens they were to see the house being this brilliant and these ones going down again to the holy city, the opposition, who had utterly destroyed at one time those ones plundered, were then about to change the language1 and the rest in high praises to God. Indeed in the old days those shaking the heads and thinking and also saying that the Jewish people were conquered, certainly to prevail that it is of God perhaps somehow assisting with them according to the leader of the Babylonians. Therefore when they were about to notice the cycle of events turning into the opposite, then they will change tongues2 according to their generations, whether by tribe and race and into praises upon God. They could have chosen, I surmise, also to serve under one yoke and to bring offerings, and if they should be somewhere afar in the sphere of lands including those who dwell in the lands of the Ethiopians. And this indeed, let it be spoken in regards to the account up to this time.3.

Read more

A Critical Look at Tongues and Montanism

A deep look at the data and debates about Montanism and speaking in tongues.

The association between Montanism and the christian rite of speaking in tongues is a matter of debate. The argument depends on which way one traces the lineage of speaking in tongues. The first one is through ecclesiastical literature, which chronicles the passing of this rite through the centuries. Its trajectory is the perceived miraculous speaking or hearing in a foreign language. Montanism does not play a role in the ancient church definition. The second and more prevalent way is to trace the lineage back to pagan Greek antecedents. This path leads to speaking in tongues as glossolalia. Montanism is one of the critical steps in this second order. Pentecostals and Charismatics take this second option further and claim Montanism and their alleged speaking in tongues as their historical parallel.

This article is an in-depth investigation to find whether Montanism plays an essential role in the earlier history of the christian doctrine of speaking in tongues. The provision of source texts, analysis, and comments follow the typical structure of the Gift of Tongues Project. Such details may seem boorish for the regular reader, but the lack of source literature and analysis are two of the most significant problems that have plagued the modern christian doctrine of tongues debate.

Read more

Aquinas on Tongues: I Corinthians 14:27-33

A translation of Thomas Aquinas on I Corinthians 14:27-33 from the Latin into contemporary English.

Translated from the Latin text: Reportationes 088 R1C cp 14 Pg. 390 lc6

I Corinthians 14:27–33


The Apostle maps out here how they ought to conduct themselves in regards to the gift of tongues. In respect to this, he does it in two ways. With the first he shows in which they ought to utilize the gift of tongues. With the second when they ought to cease from [its] use. In that place it says, “But if there will be no [interpreter], etc.” he then says, with the first, that the manner in which the gift of tongues ought to be applied is to be such among you that “If any,” which is if someone should speak in a tongue, that is he is going to narrate visions or dreams, of such things, a speech probably cannot be done by many on account of the occupation of time in tongues and no place remains for the prophets and generates confusion but, “Let it be by two,” that is by two persons, and if necessary it ought to have been done according to “the most three,” that it should be enough at three.

Read more