Thomas Aquinas Commentary 1 Corinthians 14:13-17

"Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified." — 1 Corinthians 14:13-17 (ASV)

Having shown that the gift of prophecy excels the gift of tongues for reasons related to exhortation, the Apostle now demonstrates the same point for reasons related to prayer, for we perform both of these with the tongue. In this regard, he does two things: first, he proves that prophecy excels the gift of tongues with reasons; second, he does so with examples (verse 18). Regarding the first point, he does two things: first, he shows the necessity of prayer; second, he shows how in prayer the gift of prophecy is more powerful than the gift of tongues (verse 14).

Therefore, he first says that the gift of tongues has no value without the gift of prophecy, because interpretation is an act of prophecy, which is more excellent than speaking in a tongue. One who speaks hidden mysteries in an unknown or foreign tongue should pray to God for the power to interpret—that is, that the grace to interpret be given to him. As Paul says, Praying that God may open to us a door (Colossians 4:3). A gloss interprets “pray” differently, for “to pray” is said to have a twofold meaning: either to beseech God or to prevail upon Him. It is as if he says: let the one who speaks in a tongue pray—that is, let him prevail upon God—so that he may interpret. And so the gloss understands “to pray” in this way for the whole chapter. But this is not the Apostle's meaning; rather, it is “to beseech God.”

For if I pray in a tongue. Here he shows that in prayer, prophecy is more valuable than the gift of tongues in two ways: first, with a reason based on the one praying; second, with a reason based on the one hearing (verse 16). Regarding the first point, he does two things: first, he presents a reason showing the truth of his proposition; second, he addresses an objection (verse 15).

Regarding the first point, it should be noted that prayer is of two kinds. One is private, when a person prays by himself and for himself; the other is public, when a person prays before the people and for others. In both cases, one can use the gift of tongues and the gift of prophecy. Hence, he wants to show that in both cases the gift of prophecy is more valuable than the gift of tongues.

First, consider private prayer. If someone says their own prayer, such as a Psalm or the “Our Father,” but does not understand what they are saying, they pray with the tongue. It does not matter whether they are praying with words granted by the Holy Spirit or with someone else's words. But if another person prays and understands what they are saying, they are, in fact, both praying and prophesying. It is evident that one who prays and understands accomplishes more than one who prays only in a tongue—that is, one who does not understand what they are saying. For the one who understands is refreshed in both intellect and affections, but the mind of one who does not understand receives no fruit of refreshment. Therefore, since it is better to be refreshed in mind and affections than in affections only, it is obvious that in prayer the gift of prophecy is more valuable than the gift of tongues.

And this is what he says: I say that one should pray for the power to interpret, for if I pray in a tongue—that is, if I use the gift of tongues in praying, so that I utter what I do not understand—then my spirit prays. “My spirit” can mean the Holy Spirit given to me, who inclines and moves me to pray. Nevertheless, I gain merit in that prayer, because the very fact that I am moved by the Spirit is meritorious for me: We do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself makes us ask (Romans 8:26). Alternatively, “my spirit” could mean my reason, which prays by telling me that I should ask for good things, either in my own words or in the words of other saints. Or “my spirit” could mean the imagination, which prays in the sense that the words are only images of physical things in the imagination, without being understood by the intellect. Therefore, he adds, but my mind is unfruitful—that is, my intellect is unfruitful—because it does not understand. For this reason, prophecy or interpretation is better in prayer than the gift of tongues.

But is it true that whenever anyone prays without understanding what they are saying, they obtain no fruit? The answer is that the fruit of prayer is twofold: one fruit is the merit the person obtains; the other is the spiritual consolation and devotion produced by the prayer. Regarding the fruit of spiritual devotion, a person is deprived of it if they do not pay attention to what they are praying or do not understand it. But regarding the fruit of merit, a person is not necessarily deprived of it. For if this were not so, many prayers would be without merit, since a person can scarcely say the “Our Father” without their mind wandering to other things.

Therefore, it must be said that a person does not lose the basis for merit when their attention is sometimes diverted from what they are saying. Likewise, when a person is engaged in a meritorious work, they do not lose merit if they are not continually thinking at each step that they are doing it for God. The reason for this is that in all meritorious acts directed toward the right end, it is not required that the performer's intention be united to that end in every single action. Instead, the initial impulse that moves the intention remains throughout the entire work, even if the person is distracted in some particular detail. This initial impulse makes the entire work meritorious, unless it is interrupted by a contrary affection that turns one away from the original end and toward an opposing one.

But it should be noted that attention is threefold:

1. Attention to the words the person is saying. This is sometimes harmful, inasmuch as it can impede devotion.
2. Attention to the sense of the words. This is also harmful, but not very much.
3. Attention to the end of the prayer. This is better and, as it were, necessary.

Nevertheless, when the Apostle says that the mind is unfruitful, this should be understood as referring to the fruit of spiritual refreshment.

What am I to do? Someone might object: since prayer in a tongue is without fruit for the mind, even though the spirit prays, should one then avoid praying in the spirit? The Apostle answers this objection by saying that one should pray in both ways—in the spirit and in the mind—because a person should serve God with all that they have from God. And from God, a person has both spirit and mind; therefore, they should pray with both. As it is written, With all his heart he will praise God . Therefore, he says, I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also. And so he says that he will both pray and sing. Prayer is the beseeching of God, which is why he says, I will pray; it is also the praising of Him, which is why he says, I will sing. Concerning these two, James says: Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is any cheerful? Let him sing (James 5:13). And the Psalmist says, Sing praises to the Lord (Psalms 9:11). I will pray, therefore, in the spirit (that is, the imagination) and with the mind (that is, the will).

Otherwise if you bless. Here, second, he shows that the gift of prophecy is more valuable than the gift of tongues even in public prayer. This occurs when a priest prays in public, where he sometimes says things he does not understand and sometimes things he does understand. In this regard, he does three things: first, he presents a reason; second, he explains it; and third, he proves what he had presupposed.

He says, therefore: I have said that the gift of prophecy is more beneficial in private prayer, and it is also more beneficial in public prayer. This is because if you bless—that is, if you give a blessing in the spirit (in a tongue that is not understood, or with the imagination), moved by the Holy Spirit—what about the one who occupies the place of the uninstructed person (who knows only the language in which they were born)? It is as if to say: how will the uninstructed person say what they are supposed to say, which is “Amen”?

Therefore, he asks, how can he say Amen to your blessing? A gloss on this asks, that is, how shall he consent to the blessing given by you in the name of the Church? He that is blessed on the earth will be blessed in God. Amen (Isaiah 65:16). “Amen” means “let it be done” or “it is so.” It is as if to say: if he does not know what you are saying, how can he conform himself to your words? He could conform, even if he does not understand, but only in a general way. He cannot understand the specific good thing you are saying, but only that you are giving a blessing.

But why are blessings not given in the vernacular, so that they will be understood by the people and they can conform to them more fully? The answer is that this probably happened in the early Church. Later, however, the faithful were instructed and came to know what they hear in the common office, where blessings are given in Latin.

Then he proves why the person cannot say, “Amen,” when he says: For you may give thanks well enough to God, since you understand, but the other man, who hears and does not understand, is not edified. He is not edified because he does not understand in detail, even if he understands in a general way and is edified to some extent. Let no evil thought come out of your mouth, but only such as is good for edifying (Ephesians 4:29). Consequently, it is better not only to bless in a tongue but also to interpret and explain, although you who give thanks do well.