|
Objection 1: It would seem that the gift of tongues is more
excellent than the grace of prophecy. For, seemingly, better things
are proper to better persons, according to the Philosopher (Topic.
iii, 1). Now the gift of tongues is proper to the New Testament,
hence we sing in the sequence of Pentecost: "On this day Thou
gavest Christ's apostles an unwonted gift, a marvel to all time":
whereas prophecy is more pertinent to the Old Testament, according to
Heb. 1:1, "God Who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke
in times past to the fathers by the prophets." Therefore it would
seem that the gift of tongues is more excellent than the gift of
prophecy.
Objection 2: Further, that whereby we are directed to God is
seemingly more excellent than that whereby we are directed to men.
Now, by the gift of tongues, man is directed to God, whereas by
prophecy he is directed to man; for it is written (1 Cor.
14:2,3): "He that speaketh in a tongue, speaketh not unto
men, but unto God . . . but he that prophesieth, speaketh unto men
unto edification." Therefore it would seem that the gift of tongues
is more excellent than the gift of prophecy.
Objection 3: Further, the gift of tongues abides like a habit in
the person who has it, and "he can use it when he will"; wherefore
it is written (1 Cor. 14:18): "I thank my God I speak
with all your tongues." But it is not so with the gift of prophecy,
as stated above (Question 171, Article 2). Therefore the gift
of tongues would seem to be more excellent than the gift of prophecy.
Objection 4: Further, the "interpretation of speeches" would seem
to be contained under prophecy, because the Scriptures are expounded
by the same Spirit from Whom they originated. Now the interpretation
of speeches is placed after "divers kinds of tongues" (1 Cor.
12:10). Therefore it seems that the gift of tongues is more
excellent than the gift of prophecy, particularly as regards a part of
the latter.
On the contrary, The Apostle says (1 Cor. 14:5):
"Greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues."
I answer that, The gift of prophecy surpasses the gift of tongues,
in three ways. First, because the gift of tongues regards the
utterance of certain words, which signify an intelligible truth, and
this again is signified by the phantasms which appear in an imaginary
vision; wherefore Augustine compares (Gen. ad lit. xii, 8) the
gift of tongues to an imaginary vision. On the other hand, it has
been stated above (Question 173, Article 2) that the gift of
prophecy consists in the mind itself being enlightened so as to know an
intelligible truth. Wherefore, as the prophetic enlightenment is more
excellent than the imaginary vision, as stated above (Question
174, Article 2), so also is prophecy more excellent than the
gift of tongues considered in itself. Secondly, because the gift of
prophecy regards the knowledge of things, which is more excellent than
the knowledge of words, to which the gift of tongues pertains.
Thirdly, because the gift of prophecy is more profitable. The
Apostle proves this in three ways (1 Cor. 14); first, because
prophecy is more profitable to the edification of the Church, for
which purpose he that speaketh in tongues profiteth nothing, unless
interpretation follow (1 Cor. 14:4,5). Secondly, as
regards the speaker himself, for if he be enabled to speak in divers
tongues without understanding them, which pertains to the gift of
prophecy, his own mind would not be edified (1 Cor.
14:7-14). Thirdly, as to unbelievers for whose especial
benefit the gift of tongues seems to have been given; since perchance
they might think those who speak in tongues to be mad (1 Cor.
14:23), for instance the Jews deemed the apostles drunk when the
latter spoke in various tongues (Acts 2:13): whereas by
prophecies the unbeliever is convinced, because the secrets of his
heart are made manifest (Acts 2:25).
Reply to Objection 1: As stated above (Question 174, Article
3, ad 1), it belongs to the excellence of prophecy that a man is
not only enlightened by an intelligible light, but also that he should
perceive an imaginary vision: and so again it belongs to the perfection
of the Holy Ghost's operation, not only to fill the mind with the
prophetic light, and the imagination with the imaginary vision, as
happened in the Old Testament, but also to endow the tongue with
external erudition, in the utterance of various signs of speech. All
this is done in the New Testament, according to 1 Cor.
14:26, "Every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a
tongue, hath a revelation," i.e. a prophetic revelation.
Reply to Objection 2: By the gift of prophecy man is directed to
God in his mind, which is more excellent than being directed to Him
in his tongue. "He that speaketh in a tongue "is said to speak "not
unto men," i.e. to men's understanding or profit, but unto God's
understanding and praise. On the other hand, by prophecy a man is
directed both to God and to man; wherefore it is the more perfect
gift.
Reply to Objection 3: Prophetic revelation extends to the knowledge
of all things supernatural; wherefore from its very perfection it
results that in this imperfect state of life it cannot be had perfectly
by way of habit, but only imperfectly by way of passion. on the other
hand, the gift of tongues is confined to a certain particular
knowledge, namely of human words; wherefore it is not inconsistent
with the imperfection of this life, that it should be had perfectly and
by way of habit.
Reply to Objection 4: The interpretation of speeches is reducible
to the gift of prophecy, inasmuch as the mind is enlightened so as to
understand and explain any obscurities of speech arising either from a
difficulty in the things signified, or from the words uttered being
unknown, or from the figures of speech employed, according to Dan.
5:16, "I have heard of thee, that thou canst interpret obscure
things, and resolve difficult things." Hence the interpretation of
speeches is more excellent than the gift of tongues, as appears from
the saying of the Apostle (1 Cor. 14:5), "Greater is he
that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues; unless perhaps he
interpret." Yet the interpretation of speeches is placed after the
gift of tongues, because the interpretation of speeches extends even to
the interpretation of divers kinds of tongues.
|
|