“Controlling and Manipulative Prophecy”

Some years ago, prophesying got Pete into trouble at the church he was attending but was not aware of the cause of the trouble. Over a period of time, the church relieved Pete of all ministries he was involved in. He lost his Sunday school class, small group, Bible study, etc. Pete had no idea what why this was happening. Counsel from a close friend from another state was that Pete should leave the church because he was not allowed to be effective in ministry.

It seemed when the senior pastor spoke, the Pete’s prophecies did not dovetail with the pastor’s messages. When the associate or a guest minister spoke, prophecies dovetailed with the message. A couple times Pete gave only the beginning of a prophecy and asked for someone else to complete the prophecy. The prophecies were completed by others.

When Pete returned from vacation, there was a microphone put up in the front of the church. The new policy was that prophecies were to be spoken into the microphone.

Uncomfortable with the loss of ministry responsibilities and a sense of growing estrangement from much of the church leadership, Pete decided to start attending a different church. About a year later, Pete asked a close friend what was going on at that former church that caused the trouble. The friend said that for about six months Pete had been prophesying against every decision the board had made behind closed doors. What capped off the matter was that Pete had prophesied about the need for moral leadership just after there was a moral failure on the church board and the broad took no disciplinary action. It was felt the board member was sufficiently repentant.

The purpose in using a microphone was to catch Pete trying to use his “false prophecy” to control and manipulate the church.

Things Pete could have done better:

1. Carefully examine prophecies that could be interpreted negatively, consider delivering it privately to the pastor or board and not the entire congregation.
2. Have followed the advice of another church’s pastor to talk to the church board. (Pete made the excuse to himself because he was busy with legal problems being sued in two different jurisdictions.)
   

Things the church could have done better:

1. Have called Pete into a board meeting or meeting with the pastor and confront him directly.
2. Listen to see if Pete’s prophecies ring true when the associate speaks or a guest speaks. Examine whether good prophecy or controlling and manipulative prophecy can come from the same person.
3. To not focus so much time on trying to find out whom was leaking information to Pete and be straighter forward.
4. Seriously consider whether the prophecies were valid instead of immediately assuming they were attempts at controlling and manipulating.
5. Have prayed for discernment.
   

Things the church did right:

1. They did not forbid prophecy as so many Pentecostal churches do now.
2. They did not expose the entire matter to the congregation.
   

In the Bible, prophecy was sometimes used to bring correction. Churches should consider that to be a possibility. Churches should confront the person prophesying if leadership feels the prophecy is in error. Churches have a responsibility to help mature their people in the use of spiritual gifts. Above all, all parties should be willing to be straight forward and discuss the issue.

I welcome comments. I have something to learn here.