To be even handed, if they were corporately praising God in the Spirit during times of praise and worship, then this would have been out of order; but as this particular event may have been one of those very first times when Roman Catholics were officially allowed to praise God in the Spirit (tongues) for who knows how many centuries, then maybe they could be forgiven.
Up until 19th of November 2012 (I date my books), I had certainly come across his name on the occassion but that was about it. On that illustrious day I was in our main Christian bookshop when I came across a $10 special (and I record the price inside the jacket as well) with the hardback edition of Synan's An Eyewitness Remembers the Century of the Holy Spirit (2010); as this very cheap book contained a wealth of information on the Pentecostal movement, whenever I come across an article by Synon I will always take note of it.Is there anything you haven't read...that was written.?
And yet, I have been in services where we were praising/worshiping beautifully in English when someone, usually the leader, would start singing in the tongue of his/her spirit (I know you may disagree
). It was like a catching fire and soon many/most/all???? were joining in. It was surreal, as to how all those different people singing different words and different melodies would all spontaneously follow 'a blended flow' which was truly a blessing for our ears.... as well, I believe, as for our Father in heaven who was watching/listening to His children on earth. 
You're referring, I take it, to what is called "ecstatic tongues," a merely emotional release and not the kind of tongues that are Biblical.
That has nothing to do with the point you are addressing. As we all know, there are deeper voices and higher voices among the people speaking every language in the world. That isn't at all what I referred to.
I was raised Baptist and believed in my heart that all tongues were of the devil. I was brought up in the Marine Corp and it was not considered manly for men to touch one another. I was also cold and arrogant. I was also, having been brought up Baptist, of the Sardisean church age variety. My religion was in my head and whatever did not fit in the mental web was rejected. I am afraid that I was rude to my fellow Catholics. I knew one by the name of Bob in which he reached out with a hand of fellowship in which I heartedly refused. I have tried to look up Bob in the last decade to apologize but have never found his contact address.
My point of view changed with the likes of the early 1900's type Pentecostalism in which I spent the summer after high school with my grandmother and had a rather eventful run in with the Pentecostal Holiness church, as this area of Virginia was in a time capsule, I got an experience of early 1900's Pentecostal anointing.
I fell in with the Pentecostal Holiness church not because of the tongues, but because of the people, which were the finest I have ever met in my entire life. Pictured below is Dallas Linkous JR, which is probably the 'shoutingest' man I have ever met in my entire life. As a teenager I would put up hay with him and go with him to the revivals at night. Both him and his wife were tongue talking, shouting, happy type Pentecostals. The joy was there equally there at home as well as at work. Every one of the fruits of the spirit lamped within their lives like a great over heated pot belly stove. There was also a decency among the people like I have never seen. In the revivals the old folks would sit back weeping and if any caught contact with my amazed look they would declare, "The Holy Ghost! The Holy Ghost!" Pointing to all the souls laid out at the altar. My grandfather was good friends with Dallas. In the 1950's they would have revivals that would go for weeks and early in the AM. Granny said that grandfather could worship the Lord until 2 AM and not have any trouble at all rising at 6 AM for work.
I remember well as a young man Dallas coming behind me to pray with me at the alter, with tears running down his cheek and onto my neck. As a guy who did not like to be touched this was quite profound. At the end of that summer we had a good revival in which the Lord seemed there in a mighty way. On reading the book, "Run Baby Run," by Nikki Cruise, I felt a voice telling me to put the book down. I paused, and then continued again to read. The voice said again "Put the book down." I slept in my Grandmothers living room on an old fold away cot by the open living room door. The Katydids seemed to be singing very loud that night. There in my Grandmothers clean linens I heard the Spirit speak again, "Where is all the stress, worry and hatred?" In which, upon examining my heart, there was nothing there but pure beauty. I thought to myself, "Oh my! I got exactly what those people got!" I would spend the rest of the summer rejoicing with the people and in revival until I went back to Michigan later that September.
Yes, I think that we can leave the 'human' spirit alone for now. But I agree, even though the Scriptures absolutely forbid any audible and uninterpreted application of praying in the Spirit (tongues) during the congregational meeting, I will certainly admit that when we're within a meeting and especially when there are thousands present who are all singing in the Eschatological Spirit that this can certainly help us to better appreciate that the 'Kingdom of God which is not yet is now here'. But this does not make it right but Paul does say that we can pray/sing in the Spirit to ourselves and of course, when we are in a sizable meeting, during times of praise and worship, our "singing to ourselves" can almost be at the level of soft human speech.And yet, I have been in services where we were praising/worshiping beautifully in English when someone, usually the leader, would start singing in the tongue of his/her spirit (I know you may disagree
On those occassions where an unbeliever or an unlearned cessationist walks into a meeting where the children of God are all worshipping their Father in the Spirit, most will be undoubtedly be repulsed as the 'things of the Spirit' are essentially unknown to them. I've lost count of where I have heard (and observed) where either an unbeliever has walked out of a meeting once they have encountered people either praying or singing in the Spirit without interpretation or where they have sat frozen until the end of the meeting vowing never to return.In those cases I believe even 'ungifted/unlearned Christians' as well as any total 'unbelievers' who might have been there sensed the unity of Sspirit on these occasions. It was as if it was orchestrated by 'the spirits' of all below, for the 'supreme Spirit' above....GOD! I never heard a disparaging comment from anyone in any of those situations. But then, I suppose James McArthur wasn't at any of them either.
Even though I would be more inclined to say the opposite, you could still be right and of course Rome is certainly waiting to the side where they will one day be able to absorb the WCC into its fold, or where maybe both Rome and the WCC will be known under another name.
As I said in an earlier post, the type of 'tongues' that you are referring to where someone was hypothetically speaking in tongues as they did on the Day of Pentecost, if they were to speak in a specific human language where they were to fully reflect the syntax of the language and where they were also applying the appropriate amount of voice inflections along with stopping to breath, then they would undoubtedly be in a catatonic ecstatic state where they would be laying on their backs and probably floating in the air.
Contraire ol' boy . . . it has absolutely everything to do with what I was addressing. Now I certainly do not know the pecularities of the Aramaic language/s nor do I understand those languages from the other parts of the Empire either; but if one of these rustic Galileans was speaking in a manner where even the native speaker could not pick any difference, this would be a tough ask as our voice pitch is apparently governed by the construction of our nasal passage, which either occurs at birth or maybe within our first few years of life. So to the native speaker, even though the Galileans were enabled through the Holy Spirit to vocalise their words of praise in known human languages, as they would have had no physical control over how they conveyed their speech and along with the obvious disjointed nature of their speech, it could very easily have sounded as if they were intoxicated.
On this I certainly am right. While there are no Pentecostal church bodies that belong to the WCC or NCC to my knowledge, there are only about 35 churches that do. You can easily see, therefore, that there's nothing special about Pentecostals not belonging when only 35 or 37 churches belong out of a total of thousands of denominations.
But that's wrong. Numerous studies show that those who speak English choose their sounds and syllables in accord with the tempo and style of the English language, and the same for French or Swahili, as the case may be, when supposedly speaking an unknown language. But the fact that some people speak softly or have a deep voice or anything incidental like that is not the issue and not relevant to the point.
I will admittedly have to go back and resource my documents but it is hard to believe (actually impossible) to believe that it would ever be "a choice". A good example of this is with how people from one particular country can learn to speak English often better than those whose first language is English, where they are usually unable to shake off their particular ethnic accent. I've lost count of those times where I have asked someone, "Are you a Canadian or an American" only to be told that they have been living in Australia for between 20 and 40 years. Considering that I've met a number of Americans who would like to lose their US accent if they could, then obviously it is not about choosing to do so.
If tongues were ever meant to be in a human language then why would we need to have someone interpret the tongue and obviously there was no need for interpretations on the Day of Pentecost.
And you never will as tongues are never spoken in a human language . . . simplezzzz!
When you consider that most of the denominations that you are speaking of probably only contain a handful of congregations then your point is really moot. If you were to keep an eye on the many overtures that the WCC has made toward the Pentecostal denominations over the years, you would realise that if given the choice that they would glady accept even a single large Pentecostal denomination over the "thousands" that you have referred to.
