tian Prudence in the collisions of the new Spirit with existing Social Institutions; whilst the word of Knowledge implied a more abstract and systematic Power, and presented Religion under a Theoretic view. The precepts and parables of Jesus might be regarded as his "Word of Wisdom," and some portions of the Gospel of St. John as his deeper "Word of spiritual Knowledge.

The gift of Tongues, and the interpretation of Tongues, are described as portions of the instrumental Power of the Early Church, and along with these are always mentioned, as in contradistinction, the Teacher and the Prophet. If we take the Epistles as our basis, which are of earlier date than the Acts of the Apostles, we must abandon the common opinion that the Gift of Tongues implied a miraculous power of speaking in Foreign Languages, with the view of facilitating among all nations a more rapid diffusion of the Gospel. In the Epistles, this "Gift" seems always to refer to the utterance of an elevated, and even ecstatic, state of mind, in which the language of Emotion transcends the style of ordinary communication, and to a mind cold and unsympathizing would border on the obscure. In the Acts of the Apostles, also, "speaking in Tongues" is always attributed to minds in the first glow of conversion,- under the freshest influences of Faith,- when pouring forth, not without excitement, the new feelings of spiritual Life with which their hearts were filled; and in

* Billroth.

such circumstances it is always described as taking the form of rapt prayers, singing the praises, and showing forth the mighty work of God in the believer's heart. Thus in the fourteenth chapter of this Epistle (at the 2d and 28th verses), he that speaketh with Tongues is said, not to speak unto men, but unto God, because he speaketh Mysteries in the spirit; whereas he that prophesieth speaketh unto men for edification, and exhortation, and consolation; and unless there is an Interpreter present who can reduce his inspired and ecstatic utterance to intelligible language, he is enjoined "to keep silence in the Church, and to speak only to himself and to God." This cannot be made to consist with the common interpretation of speaking in a foreign Language; and as tongues, or glosses, was a common expression for forms of speech strange and unintelligible, for peculiar dialects, it would seem to be used for "the new language of that holy fire which was kindled in the hearts of believers," for "the utterance of the new emotions with which the raised mind would be filled, in the new and more elevated language of a heart fresh glowing with Christian Sentiment."* There is undoubtedly a difficulty in harmonizing the account of the day of Pentecost, in the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, with this interpretation: but in the first place, the gift of Tongues in, the Epistles will not bear the meaning of speaking in Foreign Languages, and in the second, the passage in the Acts is involved in

* The "Gift of Tongues" often seems to signify the natural, inarticulate language of rapt emotion.

inextricable difficulties by the common interpretation. For example, "It cannot possibly be supposed that all the nations who .heard the disciples speaking with the new tongues of the Spirit, used different languages; for it is certain that in the cities of Cappadocia, Pontus, Lesser Asia, Pamphylia, Phrygia, Cyrene, and in the parts of Lybia and Egypt inhabited by Jewish and Grecian Colonies, the Greek would at that time be better understood than the ancient language of the country; and as this must have been known to the writer of the Acts, he could not have intended to specify so many different languages."* Again, it is remarkable, and fatal to the common interpretation, that the inhabitants of Judea are included among those who heard the Disciples speaking in the new tongues of the Spirit. Moreover, in the history of the first propagation of Christianity, no traces are found of a supernatural Power of speaking in foreign Languages. Indeed, the close intercourse then subsisting between all the provinces of the Roman Empire, and the universal prevalence of the Greek Language, superseded the necessity for such a miracle. And "as to the Greek Language, it is certain that the mode in which the Apostles express themselves in it, and the traces of their Mother-Tongue which appear in their use of it, prove that they had obtained their knowledge of it, according to the natural laws of lingual acquirement." We can only suppose, then, as the account in the Epistles is the older of the two, that some

* Neander, — “The Planting and Training of the Christian Church.”

thing of a symbolic and mythical character has mingled with the narrative in Acts; or, what appears to me highly probable, that all the foreign Jews pouring forth in their own dialects, as the most natural to an excited mind, with a rapt enthusiasm, the new experiences by which they were moved to the very depths of their natures, were afterwards viewed as an Emblem "that the new and divine Sentiment would reveal itself in all the Languages of Mankind, as Christianity is destined to bring under its sway all national peculiarities,” — and, in relation to God, to fill Mankind with one voice and one spirit.

As it may be well to support this view by some unsuspected authority, I shall quote a passage from Neander, in which he attempts to define the characteristic differences of the Prophet, the Teacher, and the Speaker in tongues :—

"It is evident what influence the power of inspired discourse, operating on the heart, must have had for the spread of the Gospel during this period. Persons who wished for once to inform themselves respecting what occurred in Christian assemblies, or to become acquainted with the Christian doctrine, of whose divine origin they were not yet convinced, sometimes came into the assemblies of the Church. On these occasions Christian men came forward who testified of the corruption of human nature, and of the universal need of redemption, with overpowering energy; and from their own religious and moral consciousness appealed to that of others, as if they could read it. The heathen

felt his conscience struck, his heart laid open, and was forced to acknowledge, what hitherto he had not been willing to believe, that the Power of God was with this Doctrine, and dwelt among these men. If the connected addresses of the Teacher tended to lead those farther into a knowledge of the Gospel who had already attained unto Faith, and to develop in their minds a clearer understanding of what they had received, the Prophet served rather to awaken those to Faith who were not yet believers, or to animate and strengthen those who had attained, and to quicken afresh the life of Faith. On the contrary, to one 'speaking in tongues,' the elevated consciousness of God predominated, whilst the consciousness of the external world vanished. What he uttered in this state, when carried away by his feelings and intuitions, was not a connected address like that of a Teacher, nor was it an exhortation suited to the circumstances of other persons, like that of the Prophets; but without being capable, in this condition, of taking notice of the mental states and necessities of others, he was occupied solely with the relations of his own heart to God. His soul was absorbed in devotion and adoration. Hence prayer, singing the praises, testifying the mighty workings of God, were suited to this state. Such a person prayed in the Spirit; the higher life of the mind and disposition predominated, but the intelligent development was wanting. — Had St. Paul held the 'speaking in tongues' to be something quite enthusiastic and morbid, he would never have allowed himself to designate by the name of a spiritual gift an imperfection