|
|
Corinth must really have been a "happening" place. we sometimes have people complaining that St Theodore's is too noisy on a Sunday morning at 10 before the service begins or after it's over for them to be able to pray. Some people complain about the noise the kids make during the service. But by comparison to the church at Corinth our services are about as peaceful and quiet as you could imagine. |
|
|
From
what we see here in ch14, when you went to church at Corinth you had people
jumping up to speak in tongues, others would be trying to pass on a prophecy,
the women, who probably sat in a balcony around the edge of the meeting
area, or at least in a separate section of the room, would call out to their
husbands every now and then to ask them a question or to get them to ask
whoever was up the front. And the picture you get is a general hubbub of
noise and confusion. |
|
|
So
Paul says, hang on a second. This isn't how worship should be. Worship needs
to be uplifting. It needs to be orderly. It needs to speak to all who are
present, whether it's believers or unbelievers. So he gives a set of guidelines
for conducting Christian worship. |
| |
Tongues
vs prophecy (1-25) |
| |
Edification |
| |
The
first issue he turns to, or in fact returns to, is the issue of tongues.
Clearly the emphasis on the exercise of that particular gift was affecting
the way their worship was conducted in a fairly unhelpful way. |
| |
So
he says, pursue love, as the foundation of all you do, and then strive for
the spiritual gifts, but seek out prophecy before you seek tongues. |
| |
There's
nothing wrong with tongues as such, but that particular gift is a gift that
benefits the one who has it, rather than the one who hears it. People who
speak in tongues are speaking mysteries in the Spirit. What they say is
between them and God. |
| |
But
in congregational worship what we need is people who will speak to others
in the congregation. Those who prophesy do so for the sake of others, to
build them up, to encourage them, or console them. Those who stand up and
start spouting forth tongues are just building themselves up. There's perhaps
a bit of irony in play here. These people are building themselves up by
their experience of God, but maybe they're also puffing themselves up in
their display of so-called spirituality. And as far as the congregation
is concerned it's wasted because no-one knows what's being said. It's like
a musical instrument that's got a rag stuck in it. Like when I pick up my
guitar sometimes and accidentally forget to remove the pick from the strings.
And when I start to play it you couldn't tell what I was playing. The effort
is totally wasted. So too, if someone starts to speak in tongues, it's an
interesting phenomenon, but it doesn't actually mean anything to me. |
| |
Notice
though that there's nothing wrong with speaking in tongues. He says he wishes
that everyone could do it, because of the way it helps them experience their
relationship with God. But how much better if they could all prophesy. That
is, if every one of them was bringing God's word to bear on the lives of
the congregation; if they were all speaking God's word into the situations
that people found themselves in, so as to build up, encourage rebuke and
console. The only way that can happen with tongues is if there's someone
there to interpret. Notice, then, that immediately we see the limitation
of tongues as a useful gift for the congregation. The issue isn't the validity
or genuineness of the gift, it's the purpose for which it's given. Tongues
is a gift that's given to the believer for his or her own edification, not
for the edification of the church. |
| |
So
if you're going to speak in tongues ask for the ability to interpret what
you're saying. Try to engage your mind as well as your spirit so that both
can be productive and so that others can benefit. |
| |
Purpose |
| |
In
fact when you put it into the context of the Church, of a congregation gathered
together, you discover that it's even worse. The gift of tongues then becomes
not just an encouragement to the one who exercises it, but it also shows
up the outsider. First it shows up those in the church who are outsiders
because they don't have your gift of tongues. But second it shows up those
unbelievers who when they hear this hubbub of tongues going on conclude
that you're all nuts, out of your mind. |
| |
On
the other hand if an unbeliever enters and hears someone prophesying, speaking
the words of God, they can understand what's being said and respond appropriately,
with repentance and worship. And rather than thinking "you're all nuts",
they'll realise that God is at work amongst us. |
| |
So
here's the first lesson as far as worship is concerned. Make sure that what
happens in worship will build up the church and help those who come in as
visitors. |
| |
But
overarching that is the need for orderly worship. |
| |
Orderly
Worship (26-40) |
| |
He
assumes that when the church meets there will be a range of ministries or
gifts being exercised. I think we Anglicans find this a bit difficult to
understand. Despite the benefits of the Anglican liturgy it does have the
drawback that it can limit our ability to improvise or even inhibit us in
our willingness to be spontaneous and to offer the use of our gifts. |
| |
But
we need to do what we can to allow the Spirit to work in our midst. But
in doing that, we need to do it in a way that helps those who are here.
|
| |
So
he mentions 3 areas where worship can get out of hand. |
| |
Tongues
|
| |
First
he says "27If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there
be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. 28But
if there is no one to interpret, let them be silent in church and speak
to themselves and to God." He limits the use of tongues to 2 or 3 people
at the most and only then when there's an interpretation. Now presumably
this means that if someone speaks in tongues we need to wait and if there's
no interpretation then those with that gift should remain silent. Not even
mumbling under their breath, even if they continue to pray in tongues, silently.
|
| |
Prophecy |
| |
On
the other hand, when those with the gift of prophecy begin to offer their
ministry, again he limits it to 2 or 3, but this time they're all to speak,
then the others will weigh what's been said. Now I can't help but think
that what he's talking about here is what happens in our Bible studies.
One person comments on a passage or answers a question and the others in
the group weigh what's been said. Similarly when someone else gets a new
revelation the person speaking is to be silent and let the second person
speak. I guess the rules here for orderly worship are equally relevant to
orderly small groups and in fact in the early church the meetings would
most probably have been mostly in small house churches. |
| |
So
our small groups function in lots of ways like the early church groups.
So it's natural that we see some similarities. Maybe too, that's how we
resolve that issue about the liturgy limiting our ability to be spontaneous.
Maybe in the context of a larger church the main meeting is too large for
spontaneity as well as orderliness, so small groups are the place where
some of these gifts can be exercised more appropriately. |
| |
But
having said that we mustn't gloss over this instruction that the spirits
of prophets are subject to the prophets. This is an important corrective
to those people who will say, "Well, I have a word from the Lord and you'd
just better listen to it!" No, the person who has a word from the Lord needs
to first check that word with others who also have the gift of prophecy.
They might also need someone with a gift of discernment, or knowledge or
wisdom, to work out what to do with such a word. |
| |
Chatter |
| |
Finally,
he addresses the apparent issue of chatter that was going on during the
assembly. It isn't exactly clear what's going on here, but certainly there's
an issue of the disruption of worship by a group of women who are making
what some people might call an unholy row. |
| |
Now
first I need to say that this isn't meant to be a prohibition on women speaking.
[This is not why I'm leading the service today instead of Di.] In fact in
1 Cor 11, Paul makes it quite clear that it's OK for women to speak, to
offer their particular gifts, of prophecy or prayer, providing they have
their heads covered as a sign of their respect and humility. |
| |
No,
here the problem appears to be that women are calling out in the middle
of the service to ask their husband a question, or perhaps to get him to
ask the leader a question. Perhaps they're even trying to direct proceedings.
Not that any women I know would want to do that! Perhaps too, in a context
where the women were probably segregated, there was a tendency for them
to chat amongst themselves while the men did their thing down the front.
It could be that Paul, with a degree of irony, is suggesting that the women
should take more seriously the gathering of the congregation, by remaining
silent, just as those with the gift of tongues might need to, so that the
church as a whole, men and women together, might be built up. |
| |
Summary |
| |
Finally,
Paul summarises what he's been saying first with a warning or is it an ultimatum?
What I've said comes from God so if you don't recognise it, you're not recognised.
If you claim the gift of prophecy then you should realise that what I'm
saying is God's word. |
| |
Secondly
he says, "be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues; 40but
all things should be done decently and in order." There's no sense of prohibition
or limiting the work of the Spirit in the congregation. Rather if the Spirit
is to be enabled to work, then decency and order are needed to allow that
work to happen. |