Systematic Theology, Wayne Grudem (1994) InterVarsityPress
1069
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPIRIT (2)
E. Tongues and Interpretation
It should be said at the outset that the Greek word glossa, translated “tongue,” is used not only to mean the physical tongue in a person’s mouth, but also to mean “language.” In the New Testament passages where speaking in tongues is discussed, the meaning “languages” is certainly in view. It is unfortunate, therefore, that English translations have continued to use the phrase “speaking in tongues,” which is an expression not otherwise used in ordinary English and which gives the impression of a strange experience, something completely foreign to ordinary human life. But if English translations were to use the expression “speaking in languages,” it would not seem nearly as strange, and would give the reader a sense much closer to what first century Greek speaking readers would have heard in the phrase when they read it in Acts or 1 Corinthians.38 * However, because current usage of the phrase “speaking in tongues” is so widely established, we will continue to use it in this discussion.
1.
Tongues in the History of Redemption. The phenomenon of speaking in tongues is unique to the new covenant age. Before Adam and Eve fell into sin, there was no need to speak in other languages, because they spoke the same language and were united in service of God and in fellowship with him. After the fall people spoke the same language but eventually became united in opposition to God, and “the wickedness of man was great in the earth” and “every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Gen. 6:5). This unified language used in rebellion against God culminated in the building of the tower of Babel at a time when “the whole earth had one language and few words” (Gen. 11:1). In order to stop this united rebellion against him, God at Babel “confused the language of all the earth” and scattered people abroad over the face of the earth (Gen. 11:9).
When God called Abraham to himself (Gen. 12:1), he promised to make of Abraham a “great nation” (Gen. 12:2), and the nation of Israel that resulted from this call had one language that God wanted them to use in service for him. Yet this language was not spoken by the rest of the nations of the world, and they remained outside the reach of God’s plan of redemption. So the situation was improved somewhat, for one language out of all the languages of the world was used in service of God, whereas in Genesis 11 God was not praised with any language.
Now if we pass over the age of the New Testament church and look at eternity future, we see that once again unity of language will be restored, but this time
38The niv margin does translate “or languages” or “other languages” in Acts 2:4, 11; 10:46; 19:6,
and throughout 1 Cor. 12-14. This is a preferable translation, for reasons mentioned above.
1070
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPIRIT (2)
everyone will once again speak the same language in service of God, and in praise to him (Rev. 7:9-12; cf. Zeph. 3:9; 1 Cor. 13:8; perhaps Isa. 19:18).
In the New Testament church, there is something of a foretaste of the unity of language that will exist in heaven, but it is given only at some times, and only in a partial way. At Pentecost, which was the point at which the gospel began to go to all nations, it was appropriate that the disciples gathered in Jerusalem “began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4).39 The result was that Jewish visitors to Jerusalem from various nations all heard in their own languages a proclamation of “the mighty works of God” (Acts 2:11). This was a remarkable symbol of the fact that the gospel message was about to go forth to all the nations of the world.40 Such a symbolic action would have been inappropriate in the Old Testament, for there the evangelistic message was one of inviting people from other nations to come and join themselves to the Jewish people and become Jews, and thereby worship God. But here the message is about to go to each nation in its own language, inviting people in every place to turn to Christ and be saved.41
Moreover, within the context of the worship service of the church, speaking in tongues plus interpretation gives further indication of a promise that one day the differences in languages that originated at Babel will be overcome. If this gift is operating in a church, no matter what language a word of prayer or praise is given in, once there is an interpretation, everyone can understand it. This is, of course, a two-step process that is “imperfect,” as are all gifts in this age (1 Cor. 13:9), but it is still an improvement on the situation from Babel to Pentecost when there was no provision to enable people to understand a message in a language they did not know.
Finally, prayer in tongues in a private setting is another form of prayer to God. Paul says, “If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful” (1 Cor. 14:14). In the overall context of the history of redemption, this also may be seen as one more partial solution to the results of the fall, whereby we were cut off from fellowship with God. Of course, this does not mean that people’s spirits can only have fellowship with God when they speak in tongues—for Paul affirms that he prays and sings both in tongues and in his own language (1 Cor. 14:15). However, Paul does see prayer in tongues as an additional means of fellowship directly with God in prayer and worship. Once again, this aspect of the gift of speaking in tongues was not operative, so far as we know, before the new covenant age.
2. What Is Speaking in Tongues? We may define this gift as follows: Speaking in tongues is prayer or praise spoken in syllables not understood by the speaker.
39This verse shows that the miracle was one of speaking, not of hearing. The disciples “began to speak in other tongues (or languages).”
40The speaking in tongues at Pentecost was unusual in that it was accompanied by “tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them” (Acts 2:3). Since fire in Scripture is often a symbol of God’s purifying judgment, the presence of fire here may be a symbol of the fact that God was purifying language for use in his service.
41It is true that the first hearers of this message were still only Jews in Jerusalem (Acts 2:5), not Gentiles, but the symbolism of the gospel being proclaimed in many languages did give an indication of the worldwide evangelistic effort that would soon follow.
1071
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPOUT (2)
a.
Words of Prayer or Praise Spoken to God: This definition indicates that speaking in tongues is primarily speech directed toward God (that is, prayer or praise). Therefore it is unlike the gift of prophecy, which frequently consists of messages directed from God toward people in the church. Paul says, “one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God” (1 Cor. 14:2), and if there is no interpreter present at the church service, Paul says that someone who has a gift of speaking in tongues should “keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God” (1 Cor. 14:28).
What kind of speech is this that is directed toward God? Paul says, “If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful” (1 Cor. 14:14; cf. w. 14-17, where Paul categorizes speech in tongues as praying and giving thanks, and v. 28). Therefore speaking in tongues apparently is prayer or praise directed to God, and it comes from the “spirit” of the person who is speaking. This is not inconsistent with the narrative in Acts 2, because the crowd said, “we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God” (Acts 2:11), a description that certainly could mean that the disciples were all glorifying God and proclaiming his mighty works in worship, and the crowd began to listen to this as it occurred in various languages. In fact, there is no indication that the disciples themselves were speaking to the crowd until Acts 2:14, when Peter then stands and addresses the crowd directly, presumably in Greek.42
b. Not Understood by the Speaker: Paul says that “one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit” (1 Cor. 14:2). Similarly, he says that if there is speaking in tongues without interpretation no meaning will be communicated: “I shall be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me” (1 Cor. 14:11). Moreover, the entire paragraph of 1 Corinthians 14:13—19 assumes that speech in tongues in the congregation, when it is not accompanied by interpretation, is not understood by those who hear:
Therefore, he who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? 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. Otherwise, if you bless with the spirit, how can any one in the position of an outsider say the “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? For you may give thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all; nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
42In Acts 10:46 the people at Cornelius’ household began “speaking in tongues and extolling God.” Again, this either means that the speech consisted of praise to God or was very closely connected with it—grammatically one cannot tell from the text itself.
I do not want to rule out the possibility that speaking in tongues could sometimes include speech directed to people, not to God, because it is just possible that Paul’s statement in 1 Cor. 14:2 is a generalization that is not intended to cover every instance, and, in any case, the main point of the verse is that only God can understand uninterpreted tongues, not that God is the only one to whom speech in tongues can be addressed. In fact, speech to men might be what is happening in Acts 2. Nevertheless, the evidence that we do have in 1 Cor. 14 indicates speech directed toward God, and it seems safe to say that that is generally what speaking in tongues will be.
1072
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPIRIT (2)
Now at Pentecost speech in tongues was in known languages that were understood by those who heard: “each one heard them speaking in his own language” (Acts 2:6). But once again the speech was not understood by the speakers, for what caused the amazement was that Galileans were speaking all these different languages (v. 7). It seems, therefore, that at times speaking in tongues may involve speech in actual human languages, sometimes even languages that are understood by some of those who hear. But at other times—and Paul assumes that this will ordinarily be the case—the speech will be in a language that “no one understands” (1 Cor. 14:2).
Some have objected that speaking in tongues must always consist of speech in known human languages, since that is what happened at Pentecost. But the fact that speaking in tongues occurred in known human languages once in Scripture does not require that it always happen with known languages, especially when another description of speaking in tongues (1 Cor. 14) indicates exactly the opposite. Paul does not say that foreign visitors to Corinth will understand the speaker, but he says that when someone speaks in tongues “no one” will understand and the outsider will not know what the person is saying (1 Cor. 14:2, 16).43 In fact, Paul explicitly says that quite the opposite of the phenomenon at Pentecost will happen in the ordinary conduct of church life: if “all speak in tongues” and “outsiders or unbelievers enter,” far from understanding the message, they will say “that you are mad” (1 Cor. 14:23). Moreover, we must realize that 1 Corinthians 14 is Paul’s general instruction based on a wide experience of tongues-speaking in many different churches, whereas Acts 2 simply describes one unique event at a significant turning point in the history of redemption (Acts 2 is historical narrative while 1 Cor. 14 is doctrinal instruction). Therefore it would seem appropriate to take 1 Corinthians 14 as the passage that most closely describes the ordinary experience of New Testament churches, and to take Paul’s instructions there as the standard by which God intends churches to regulate the use of this gift.44
Are tongues known human languages then? Sometimes this gift may result in speaking in a human language that the speaker has not learned, but ordinarily it seems that it will involve speech in a language that no one understands, whether that be a human language or not.
45
43Robertson and Plummer note that 1 Cor. 14:18, “I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all,” is “strong evidence that Tongues are not foreign languages” (A. Robertson and A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, ICC [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1914], p. 314). If they were known foreign languages that foreigners could understand, as at Pentecost, why would Paul speak more than all the Corinthians in private, where no one would understand, rather than in church where foreign visitors could understand?
44Note that at Pentecost this speaking in tongues had another characteristic that was not shared by any later speech in tongues: there were tongues of fire appearing over the heads of those who spoke (Acts 2:3). But this is not a paradigm for all later experiences of speaking in tongues, not even for those found later in Acts.
45Paul does say, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels” (1 Cor. 13:1), suggesting that he sees the possibility that speaking in tongues may include more than merely human speech. Whether he thinks this is only a hypothetical possibility or a real one is difficult to say, but we certainly cannot rule out the idea that angelic languages would be involved with this speech as well.
Some have objected that since glossa elsewhere in Greek (outside the New Testament) refers to known human languages, it must refer to known languages in the New Testament as well. But this objection is not convincing, since there was no other word in Greek better suited to refer to this phenomenon, even if it involved talking to God in languages that were not human languages or not.
1073
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (2)
c.
Prayer With the Spirit, Not With the Mind: Paul says: “If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? 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” (1 Cor. 14:14-15).
Paul is not here talking about the Holy Spirit praying through us. The contrast between “my spirit” and “my mind” in verse 14 indicates that it is Paul’s own human spirit that he is talking about, the nonmaterial aspect of his being. As he uses this gift, his spirit speaks directly to God, even though his mind does not have to formulate words and sentences and decide what to pray for.46 Paul sees this kind of prayer as an activity that occurs in the spiritual realm, whereby our spirits speak directly to God but our mind is somehow bypassed and does not understand what we are praying.
We may wonder why God would give the church a gift that operates in the unseen, spiritual realm and that is not understood by our minds. One reason may be to keep us humble, and to help prevent intellectual pride. Another reason may be to remind us that God is greater than our understanding and that he works in ways that transcend our understanding. Finally, it is characteristic of much that God does in the new covenant age that it is done in the unseen, spiritual realm: regeneration, genuine prayer, worship “in spirit and in truth,” the spiritual blessings that come through the Lord’s Supper, spiritual warfare, laying up treasures in heaven, setting our minds on things above, where Christ is—all these and many more elements of the Christian life involve activities that occur in the unseen, spiritual realm, activities that we do not see or fully understand. In that light, speaking in tongues is simply another activity that occurs in the unseen spiritual realm, an activity we believe is effective because Scripture tells us it is, not because we can comprehend it with our minds (cf. 1 Cor. 14:5).
d.
Not Ecstatic but Self-controlled: The New English Bible translated the phrase “speaking in tongues” as “ecstatic speech,” thus giving further support to the idea that those who speak in tongues lose awareness of their surroundings or lose self-control or are forced to speak against their will. Moreover, some of the extreme elements in the Pentecostal movement have allowed frenzied and fully developed languages of any sort, so long as some content or information was conveyed by the speech.
I am not here arguing that speaking in tongues in Acts 2 was a different phenomenon from the speaking in tongues that Paul discusses in 1 Cor. 14.1 am simply saying that the phrase “speaking in tongues” in Acts 2 and 1 Cor. 14 refers to speech in syllables not understood by the speaker but understood by God, to whom this speech is directed. In Acts 2 this happened to be speech in known human languages that had not been learned by the speakers, whereas in 1 Cor. 14 the speech may have been in unknown human languages, or in angelic languages, or in some specialized kind of language given by the Holy Spirit to various speakers individually. The expression is broad enough to include a wide variety of phenomena.
46 The phrase “pray in the Holy Spirit” in Jude 20 is not the same expression, since it is specifically the “Holy Spirit” who is designated. Jude is simply saying that Christians should pray in conformity to the character and leading of the Holy Spirit, and that may certainly include prayer in tongues, but it would include any other kind of prayer in an understandable language as well. Similarly, “Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication” (Eph. 6:18) is specifically a statement that claims to cover all prayer that is made at all times. It refers to prayer in conformity to the character of the Holy Spirit and sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit, but it should not be restricted to speaking in tongues. Once again, it may include speaking in ·tongues, but should include all other types of prayer as well (See the discussion of activities done “in the Holy Spirit” in chapter 30, pp. 651-52.)
1074
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPIRIT (2)
disorderly conduct at worship services, and this has, in the minds of some, perpetuated the notion that speaking in tongues is a kind of ecstatic speech.
But this is not the picture given in the New Testament. Even when the Holy Spirit came with overwhelming power at Pentecost, the disciples were able to stop speaking in tongues so that Peter could give his sermon to the assembled crowd. More explicitly, Paul says:
If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn; and let one interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silence in church and speak to himself and to God. (1 Cor. 14:27-28)
Here Paul requires that those who speak in tongues take turns, and he limits the number to three, indicating clearly that those who spoke in tongues were aware of what was going on around them, and were able to control themselves so as to speak only when it was their turn, and when no one else was speaking. If there was no one to interpret, they were easily able to keep silence and not speak. All of these factors indicate a high degree of self-control and give no support to the idea that Paul thought of tongues as ecstatic speech of some kind.
e.
Tongues Without Interpretation: If no one known to have the gift of interpretation is present in the assembly, the passage just quoted indicates that speaking in tongues should be in private. No speech in tongues without interpretation should be given in the church service.47
Paul speaks of praying in tongues and singing in tongues when 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” (1 Cor. 14:15). This gives further confirmation to the definition given above in which we viewed tongues as something primarily directed toward God in prayer and praise. It also gives legitimacy to the practice of singing in tongues, whether publicly or privately. Yet the same rules apply for singing as for speaking: if there is no interpreter, it should only be done in private.48
In 1 Corinthians 14:20-25 Paul says that if believers speak in tongues without
47 It is troubling that, in some churches today where speaking in tongues is allowed, those who do not give a message publicly (perhaps because it is not the appropriate time in the service or perhaps because they do not know if someone will interpret) will still sometimes speak in tongues not “silently” but so that four or five people nearby can hear their speech in tongues. This is simply disobedience to Paul’s directive, and is not acting in love toward others in the church. Paul says to “keep silence in church” if one is not giving a public message in tongues. (Many who have spoken in tongues today say that it can easily be done in an inaudible whisper, so that no one else will hear, and Paul’s directions will be obeyed.)
48 Many churches today, however, practice what is sometimes called “singing in the Spirit,” in which many or all the congregation will simultaneously sing in tongues, individually improvising their melodies around a certain dominant musical chord. While many people will testify that there is beauty and spiritual power in such occurrences, once again we must object that it is directly contrary to Paul’s instructions in 1 Cor. 14:27-28, where those who speak in tongues are to take turns, and there are to be at most three in a worship service, and interpretation is to follow. Though this practice may sound beautiful to those who are familiar with it, and though God may at times graciously use it as a means of winning an unbeliever, Paul explicitly says that the expected result generally will be that unbelievers will say “that you are mad” (1 Cor. 14:23). An alternative to this practice, and one that would both be consistent with Scripture and follow the path of love toward outsiders, would be for everyone to sing in this way, not in tongues, but in an understandable language (whether English or whatever language is commonly understood in the area where the church assembles).
1075
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPIRIT (2)
interpretation in church, they will be acting and thinking like “children” (1 Cor. 14:20). He first quotes a prophecy of judgment from Isaiah 28:11-12: “In the law it is written, ‘By men of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord’ ” (1 Cor. 14:21).
In the context of Isaiah 28, God is warning the rebellious people of Israel that the next words they heard from him would be words of foreigners that they could not understand—the Assyrian army would come on them as agents of God’s judgment. Now Paul is about to take this as a general principle—when God speaks to people in language they cannot understand, it is quite evidently a sign of God’s judgment.
Paul rightly applies that to the situation of speaking in tongues without interpretation in the church service. He calls it a sign (that is, a sign of judgment) on unbelievers:
Thus, tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers. If, therefore, the whole church assembles and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?
(1 Cor. 14:22-23)
Here Paul uses the word “sign” to mean “sign of God’s attitude” (whether positive or negative). Tongues that are not understood by outsiders are certainly a negative sign—a sign of judgment. Therefore Paul cautions the Corinthians not to give such a sign to outsiders who come in. He tells them if an outsider comes in and hears only unintelligible speech, he will certainly not be saved but will conclude that the Corinthians are mad, and the uninterpreted tongues will in his case function as a sign of God’s judgment.
By contrast, Paul says that prophecy is a sign of God’s attitude as well, but here a positive sign of God’s blessing. This is why he can say that prophecy is a sign “for believers” (v. 22). And this is why he concludes his section by saying, “If all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you” (w. 24—25). When this happens, believers will certainly realize that God is active among them to bring blessing, and prophecy will regularly function as a sign for believers of God’s positive attitude for them.49
Nevertheless, however much Paul warns against using tongues without interpretation in church, he certainly views it positively and encourages it in private. He says, “He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself but he who prophesies edifies the church” (1 Cor. 14:4). What is his conclusion? It is not (as some would argue) that Christians should decide not to use the gift or decide that it has no value when used privately. Rather he says, “What am I to do? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also” (v. 15). And he says, “I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all” (v. 18), and “Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy” (v. 5), and “Earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues” (v. 39). If our previous
49For further discussion of this passage, see Wayne Grudem, “1 Corinthians 14:20-25■ Prophecy and Tongues as Signs of God’s Attitude,” WTJ 41:2 (Spring 1979), pp. 381-96.
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLT SPIRIT (2)
1076
understanding of tongues as prayer or praise to God is correct, then we would certainly expect that edification would follow, even though the speaker’s mind does not understand what is being said, but his or her own human spirit is communicating directly with God. Just as prayer and worship in general edify us as we engage in them, so this kind of prayer and worship edifies us too, according to Paul.
f.
Tongues With Interpretation: Edification for the Church: Paul says, “He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified” (1 Cor. 14:5). Once a message in tongues is interpreted, all can understand. In that case, Paul says that the message in tongues is as valuable to the church as prophecy. We should note that he does not say they have the same functions (for other passages indicate that prophecy is communication from God toward human beings, while tongues is generally communication from human beings to God). But Paul clearly says they have equal value in edifying the church.
g.
Not All Speak in Tongues: Just as not all Christians are apostles, and not all are prophets or teachers, and not all possess gifts of healing, so not all speak with tongues. Paul clearly implies this when he asks a series of questions, all of which expect the answer “no,” and includes the question “Do all speak with tongues?” (1 Cor. 12:30). The implied answer is no.50 Some have argued that Paul here only means that not all speak with tongues publicly, but that perhaps he would have admitted that all can speak in tongues privately. But this distinction seems foreign to the context and unconvincing. He does not specify that not all speak with tongues publicly or in church, but simply says that not all speak with tongues. His next question is, “Do all interpret?” (v. 30). His previous two questions were, “Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing?” (w. 29-30). Would we wish to make the same arguments about these gifts—that not all interpret tongues publicly, but that all Christians are able to do it privately? Or that not all work miracles publicly, but that all are able to work miracles privately? Such a distinction seems unwarranted by the context in every case.
In actuality, the desire to say that every Christian can speak in tongues (even though Paul says that not all speak in tongues) is probably motivated in most cases by a prior doctrinal understanding that views baptism in the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to conversion,51 and sees speaking in tongues as an initial “sign” of receiving this baptism in the Holy Spirit.52 But there are serious questions that remain about this doctrinal position (as explained in chapter 39). It seems better to take 1 Corinthians 12:30 to mean just what it says: not all speak in tongues. The gift of tongues—just like every other gift—is not given by the Holy Spirit to every Christian who seeks it. He “apportions to each one individually as he wills” (1 Cor. 12:11).
However, there is nothing in Scripture that says that only a few will receive the
50The Greek particle me, which precedes this question, expects the answer “no” from the reader. The nasb captures this sense: “All do not speak with tongues, do they?”
51See chapter 39 for a discussion of baptism in the Holy Spirit.
52This is still the official doctrinal position of the Assemblies of God, for example.
1077
53 : GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (2)
gift of speaking in tongues, and, since it is a gift Paul views as edifying and useful in prayer and worship (on a personal level even if not in church), it would not be surprising if the Holy Spirit gave a very widespread distribution of this gift and many Christians in fact received it.53
53Mark 16:17 is sometimes used to claim that all Christians can speak in tongues: “And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues.” But in response to this verse it must be noted (1) that the verse probably was not originally part of Mark’s gospel, since many early and very reliable manuscripts do not include Mark 16:9-20, and its doubtful status means that it is a precarious basis upon which to build doctrine (see chapter 17, p. 365); (2) that even if it is not part of Scripture, it does of course bear witness to a very early tradition in the history of the church, but even in this case, it does not affirm that all believers will speak with tongues: the immediately following phrase says, “They will pick up serpents” (v. 18), something that no responsible interpreter would say should be true of every Christian; and (3) that no connection is made between speaking in tongues and baptism in the Holy Spirit in this passage.