Speaking In Tongues Multi Disciplinary Perspectives

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Book Reviews / Pneuma 29 (2007) 311-363

325

Mark J. Cartledge ed., Speaking in Tongues: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives (Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster, 2006). xxiv + 238 pp., $24.99, paper.

In contrast to the bright, shimmering lip gloss on the cover (a merely provocative choice?), this volume contains cutting-edge examinations of tongues, not the cosmetically enhanced lips that serve as their mouthpiece (although one could discern here an insight about the inherent sociocultural situatedness of tongues). As editor, Mark Cartledge has assembled an excellent cast of contributors across disciplinary boundaries: Max Turner (New Testament), Frank D. Macchia (theology), Neil Hudson (history), James K. A. Smith (philosophy), David Hilborn (linguistics), Margaret M. Poloma (sociology), and William K. Kay (psychology). In addition, Cartledge contributes a concluding chapter from a practical theological perspective, thus addressing the perennial concern of how the various contributions of multidisciplinary works cohere and the practical problem of how their insights might be appropriated in a speciﬁc context.

After an introduction by Cartledge, which locates the volume within a brief history of studies on tongues, the ﬁrst chapter opens with a New Testament examination by Max Turner. Turner focuses on the Acts of the Apostles and 1 Corinthians in order to discern as well as compare Lukan and Pauline understandings of speaking in tongues. Beginning with Luke, Turner concludes that while Luke understands the narrative of Pentecost to refer to xenolalia, the evidence does not support a Lukan conception of all tongues-speech being xenolalic. In distinction, Paul viewed tongues-speech “as various kinds of human and (pos- sibly) heavenly languages,” and what he criticized was uninterpreted tongues dominating the assembly (20).

Frank Macchia oﬀers a theological perspective on the relationship between Babel and the tongues of Pentecost in his essay, which can also be found in modiﬁed form in his ground- breaking Baptized in the Spirit: A Global Pentecostal T eology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zonder- van, 2006, pp. 214ﬀ.). For Macchia, a rather complex relationship ensues from examination of these two language events. While some have viewed Pentecost simply as a reversal of Babel, Macchia goes further by arguing for a promise/fulﬁllment motif so that while the tongues of Pentecost reverse the confusion and folly of Babel, they do not erase diversity, but rather function as “the ﬁrst ecumenical language of the church” (47).

Neil Hudson discusses the impact of tongues on early British Pentecostals. He describes the tensions within British and European Pentecostalism between, on the one hand, focus- ing on the identiﬁcation of tongues with Spirit baptism as a mark distinguishing Pentecos- tals from other Christians and, on the other, opening up wider dimensions of understanding such phenomena. In doing so, Hudson notes the important transition from viewing tongues as a sign to viewing it as the sign of Spirit baptism and the way this aﬀected the British Pentecostal scene.

Utilizing the philosophy of language, James K. A. Smith examines tongues as both a discourse that eludes conceptual description and also resists the status quo of cultural norms and institutions. By means of speech-act theory, Smith moves the discussion away from an attempt to decipher what tongues might mean and asks instead about its eﬀects. T us he describes one of the eﬀects of tongues-speech as “a kind of social resistance to the powers-that-be” (107). As such, it functions as a language of the dispossessed that calls into

PNEU 29,2_f10_310-363.indd 325PNEU 29,2_f10_310-363.indd 325

11/7/07 11:02:18 AM11/7/07 11:02:18 AM

1

326

Book Reviews / Pneuma 29 (2007) 311-363

question such powers and structures as global capitalism by means of its eschatological imagination.

In a similar vein, David Hilborn approaches glossolalia from a linguistic-pragmatic per- spective, also seeking to envision tongues as communication beyond propositional or fac- tual discourse. T rough analysis of speech-act theory, implicature, and relevance theory, Hilborn notes that tongues-speech may function to reinforce communal values and assump- tions; furthermore, it “authenticates and communicates the church’s unique calling from God, its special devotion to God, and its particular destiny in God” (145).

Margaret Poloma centers her examination of glossolalia on ethnographic research taken from members of Blood N Fire (BNF), an inner-city Atlanta community that stresses social outreach and speaking in tongues. Poloma describes BNF’s emphasis on glossolalia as wed- ded to their understanding of entering the “supernatural kingdom” and engaging in spiri- tual warfare. She characterizes glossolalia in the BNF context as “a form of mysticism that often takes the pray-er out of his or her ‘normal world’ into the liminal world of the king- dom of God as it struggles against the kingdom of darkness” (172). Its meaning thus remains rooted in a particular social context for both its communal sustenance and signiﬁcance.

William Kay brings a psychological perspective to tongues, chronicling the origins of both psychology and psychiatry as well as summarizing psychological research on glossola- lia from the beginning of the twentieth century to the present. Kay depicts the early biases present in such research against tongues-speech and points to historical trends in further research moving toward “wider theological contexts” (205).

Cartledge concludes the volume by investigating how the various insights and perspec- tives of the contributors might apply to the New Wine conferences he has attended in the UK. His chapter tackles the fragmentary nature of multidisciplinary studies in terms of the need to synthesize information as well as to appropriate selections of it within a speciﬁc context. Cartledge admirably balances these two concerns by applying various discussion points of the contributors to the practice of tongues-speech at New Wine. He also includes suggestions for reexamination of the practice by the New Wine leadership, eﬀectively serv- ing as the bridge between Pentecostal scholarship and a particular Pentecostal community (could this be the gift of interpreting the tongues of scholars to a congregation?). Speaking in Tongues provides an engaging panorama of views from respected scholars as well as a pos- sible model for their application in a speciﬁc communal context.

Reviewed by Rhys Kuzmič

PNEU 29,2_f10_310-363.indd 326PNEU 29,2_f10_310-363.indd 326

111/7/07 11:02:19 AM1/7/07 11:02:19 AM

2