Safeguarding and ‘Spiritual Gifts’

It may not be immediately apparent why there is any connection between the subject of safeguarding and the charismatic Gifts of the Holy Spirit (of the kind seen in 1 Corinthians 12 through 14). Ideally, there would not be; but we’re all aware (or should be aware) that whenever people are involved, good outcomes cannot be guaranteed. The presence, or claimed presence of the Holy Spirit, does not guarantee good outcomes, either.

The safeguarding that I am focusing on is what’s now known as ‘spiritual abuse’—coercive and controlling harmful behaviour in a religious context. It’s really only in the past 20 years or so that this has been identified and called out. It was officially adopted into Church of England safeguarding only in 2021.

In the early days of what became known as the Charismatic Movement (and continuing until very recently) there was no real awareness of spiritual abuse and the safeguards that would be appropriate. Indeed, in my perception, there was a marked reluctance in the Pentecostal and charismatic church throughout this period to call out spiritual abuses because of the perception (and/or the practitioners’ claim) that the Holy Spirit was involved. It’s clearly intimidating when it’s implied that someone is critiquing not people but God.

Pentecostal and charismatic believers seem astonishingly reluctant to challenge something that might be of God, even though Scripture provides a mandate for it (that we’ll come on to). Whether that reluctance is because it might undermine belief in spiritual gifts for today (a concern to protect God’s reputation), or because it undermines those with prophetic ministries (protecting their reputations), I’m not sure. Most likely, it’s a bit of both. Leaders may fear the consequence would be an unhelpful scepticism towards the gifts among the faithful.

Let me be specific: I am talking about the gifts of ‘prophecy’ and ‘words of knowledge’—and, since they involve similar kinds of claim, ‘discernment of spirits’ and ‘interpretation of tongues’. All these gifts in their own ways lay similar claim to supernatural origins—words, insights, truths, and even the revealing of secrets, given directly by God.

For present purposes, I will wrap them all into one under the rubric of ‘prophecy.’

I particularly have in mind personal prophecy to individuals, and especially the directive kind: “God is telling you to do this, or that” (however phrased).

These are therefore lofty claims, with the weight of God’s own authority claimed to be the source, even if the language used to deliver the words does not explicitly refer to “God says this . . .” or “God has shown me that . . .” or the like.

No wonder, then, that there is a reluctance to challenge them!

I’m not in this instance talking about the so-called office of being a prophet, or prophecy in the ‘foretelling’ future national or global events category, or prophesying ‘to the nations’, which some believe to be part of the present-day gift. I’ve written previously about that here: https://www.steveburnhope.com/blog/modern-day-prophets-and-prophecy?

I will focus on what to me are the relevant safeguarding criteria. Some of these are down to the character of the person exercising the gift, and their willingness to personally buy into the appropriate safeguards, while others are to do with a safeguarding framework that others need to construct and oversee.

Firstly, let’s frame things scripturally, focusing on the New Testament. Safeguarding is not an external, secular framework imposed on the church; the New Testament itself embeds safeguarding into its teaching on spiritual gifts, without calling it that. I will then suggest ten safeguarding criteria as the outworking of the biblical values and principles.

The way people approach prophecy will often come down to which verse(s) they see as controlling, or claim to be most foundational. For example, Paul’s invocation, “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not treat prophecies with contempt”—1 Thessalonians 5:19–20—quoted in isolation.

However, Paul continues, “but test them all; hold on to what is good, reject every kind of evil”— 1 Thessalonians 5:21–22. It’s rather too easy for someone to quote “the Bible says” plus verses 19–20, while failing to mention verses 21–22, which are equally or more important. The ‘but’ in that passage is doing a lot of important work.

Consider the clear implications. One, it is not ‘showing contempt’ to test prophecy; it’s a requirement. Two, ‘testing’ is not synonymous with quenching (just as ‘safeguarding’ is not synonymous with ‘not trusting’). Three, we are to hold on only to what is good in a prophecy (we’ll come on to what ‘good’ looks like). And four, there is the clear potential for prophecy not simply to be ‘not’ good—in a neutral sense—but actually to be rejected as identifiably ‘evil ’. Such a strong word clearly authorises a cautious approach towards prophecy claimed to be of God. Indeed, I would say that on the strength of these verses the scales should be tipped towards a robust approach, because of the safeguarding risks to which prophecy can give rise.

Other significant guidance offered in the New Testament seems to support this emphasis. 1 Corinthians 14:29: “Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said.” 1 John 4:1: “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God.”

Testing or weighing (same thing) is therefore essential. Non-negotiable. The obvious question is: by what criteria?

The first criterion is to view it through a ‘Jesus lens’, as implied in the continuation of the 1 John 4 passage in verses 2 through 6, and in 1 Corinthians 12:1–3, where Paul similarly introduces his account of the gifts in Jesus-centric terms. In other words, we should ask ourselves whether we can imagine Jesus saying that, or saying it in that way. What is being said or implied about the nature and character of God that we see in Jesus in that prophetic word?

The second criterion for testing or weighing is found in the very purpose of prophecy: what ‘good’ means in this context. 1 Corinthians 14:3 says, “one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort.” In other words, if the result of a prophecy is not strengthening, encouraging and comfort, we may—indeed, we should—call it out.

And the third criterion is where Paul comes against any ‘get-out clause’ that some might try to invoke to avoid such scrutiny. He rounds off his guidance with “If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.” In other words, don’t even think about being unaccountable.

It’s summed up by Paul again linking his injunction of “be eager to prophesy” with his safeguarding principle, “but everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way”, in the final verses of 1 Corinthians 14.

The definition of ‘fitting and orderly’ is best understood as the combination of the biblical values we’ve just been looking at, which in turn are reflected in the following proposed safeguarding principles for the delivery, evaluation and self-evaluation of prophecy.

1. Humility and Provisionality

Prophecy should be delivered so it’s easy to test and weigh, anticipating and welcoming accountability. To that end, therefore, it should be delivered in an “I might be wrong on this, but . . .” and a “what I feel God might be saying is . . .” kind of way. It doesn’t need to be delivered in an authoritarian kind of way. And we can also explicitly invite the person to weigh it for themselves: “Does that mean anything to you? No worries if not; perhaps ponder it.”

2. Never About the Prophet

The gift of a prophecy, rightly understood, is a gift from God to the recipient. It’s not from the one giving it. It should never be ‘all about them’. Prophecy that appears to be all about bolstering the credibility or fame of the person exercising the gift should be a red flag.

3. Not Measured by Being ‘Right’

In New Testament prophecy terms, the ‘test’ is not simply that it is ‘right’ or proves to come true (that may be indeterminable, certainly any time soon). The goal of prophecy is, as 1 Corinthians 14:3 makes clear, for people’s ‘strengthening, encouraging and comfort’. If those goals aren’t transparently achieved at the outset, there’s a root problem. There’s a reason that Paul sandwiches 1 Corinthians 13 (the goal of love) within chapters 12 and 14 (the role of the Gifts).

4. Not Christian Fortune-Telling

If something sounds like it is, I would say reject it. The prospect for evil (not my word, but Paul’s in 1 Thessalonians 5) is too great. Note that the potential for harm from ‘predictive’ prophecy can come from two directions: whether that’s aping Jesus’ words (concerning Lazarus) in John 11:4—“This illness will not end in death”—or the opposite. So, too, prophetic words like, “You’re going to get married!”

5. Always Public, Never Private

If ever a prophecy comes accompanied with “Don’t tell anyone, this is just between us”, do not agree to it. There should be no ‘secrets’. Everything in the Christian world should be in the light; any secrecy request should be a red flag. I say this not because it’s impossible to find biblical examples of where such things may have occurred, but as a safeguarding best practice for today that a proof text should not trump. Appropriate confidentiality over the details of someone’s personal circumstances is not the same as a veil of secrecy.

6. Visible Accountability

Prophecy should not be delivered privately, since if no one else hears it, how can there be biblical scrutiny in the ways that the New Testament teaches? This is all the more important when we’re talking about the main leader, who common sense (and experience) suggests is the least likely to be scrutinised.

7. No Inconsistency With Scripture

I don’t mean finding a proof text (a verse selected for a purpose and quoted out of its original context) to bolster the credibility of a word from the Lord as if that somehow makes it ‘biblical’. Scripture says many things—including at times some apparently contradictory things—but I have in mind a consistency with the general tenor of Scripture and the core values of the nature and character of God that we see in the person of Jesus. This kind of scriptural test should be part of others’ ‘weighing’.

8. Testing Is Not Just for Later

Testing is not something that we apply only if a problem becomes apparent down the road. It may be too late at that point to prevent harm (remember these principles are to do with safeguarding: preventing harm). We need to weigh things at the point of delivery, and act then as necessary.

9. ‘By Its Fruit’

The New Testament has much to say about good and bad fruit. Hence, a good question to ask will be, “What’s the fruit of these words, delivered in this way, in the recipient’s life?” Jesus specifically related good fruit to prophecy in Matthew 7:15–20: “Watch out for false prophets . . . By their fruit you will recognise them . . . Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit . . . Thus, by their fruit you will recognise them.” I do believe that we can ‘work backwards’: authentic prophecy should never result in bad fruit in a person’s life.

10. Empathy Is Not Prophecy

Before we assume we're hearing from God, we should first ask ourselves whether what we're sensing is actually prophetic, or simply the understandable concern, affection or empathy we feel for the other person. Much of what we’ve said here is about others’ testing what we say, but before that we should be testing ourselves. If we ask ourselves the right questions, we avoid the need for others to be asking us. It’s very easy for personal concern (especially for someone we know) to cause us to want to prophesy a certain way. Testing the ‘spirit’ of a prophecy in the sense of ‘where the prophecy is coming from’ is one legitimate application of 1 John 4:1 (which could, of course, also be a reflection of a bad attitude towards the person). Wisdom may say that praying a heartfelt prayer is a more appropriate expression of something we’re feeling.