Grave consequences of testing the spirits spoken by the prophets

[JoeJPurnell]

I often hear priests and apologists urge us faithful to always test all spirits. 1 John 4 is often cited for this.

“Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God, and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world.”
1 John 4:1-3

But the teachings of the apostles tell us the exact opposite and with extremely grave consequences:

“Do not test or examine any prophet who is speaking in a spirit, ‘for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven.’ But not everyone who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet; only he is a prophet who has the ways of the Lord about him. By their ways will the false prophet and the prophet be known.”
Didache 11:7-8

Considering the graveness of the consequences, why the contradiction?

There’s only one solution I can imagine that might explain why both of these passages might be true and not contradictory. 1 John must be speaking to prophets only. If I might be so bold to paraphrase for the sake of clarity, suppose it says something along the lines of:
“Prophets, when a spirt visits you claiming to be from Heaven, test it. Make it acknowledge Jesus Christ incarnate of the most blessed virgin Mary. If the spirit refuses, it’s not from Heaven.”

Then the Didache is exhorting those of us who hear a prophet speak in the spirit - a spirit which, ostensibly, had already passed the prophet’s litmus test - not to test it further in public.

My question is, considering the grave consequences of the unforgiveable sin that comes with testing the spirits spoken through prophets, what can I say in fraternal correction to those who might obtusely insist that we still must always test all spirits, even if spoken by a prophet?

 

[MaryHelp777]

If the Prophet is from God,
Or the Revelation from God.

The Catholic Church now has a current form for dealing with that: every private Revelation must be approved by a spiritual director, and the local bishop, to be approved as from God, or as having nothing contrary to the faith.

 

[Louman127]

There is no contradiction between John and Didache. It is paradoxical. Both articulate the same truth in a different articulation. Just keep re-reading it while you are in a state of grace and ask the Holy Spirit to take over.

The unforgivable sin is in reference to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is to reject the salvation of God when death is incurred. So for example if one rejects something the Pope says when he is speaking ex-cathedra (declaring doctrine/dogma) that can be considered going against the Holy Spirit. If one dies in this state of heresy they can be damned. But if before they die they repent they can be saved. The Holy Spirit has been given to us therefore He guides. We commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit when we deny truth within our conscious and embrace something other than the truthful Spirit of God.

Testing the spirits is simply discernment of spirits to make sure you are not being deceived.

 

[JoeJPurnell]

If the Prophet is from God,
Or the Revelation from God.

The Catholic Church now has a current form for dealing with that: every private Revelation must be approved by a spiritual director, and the local bishop, to be approved as from God, or as having nothing contrary to the faith.

Are you saying a spiritual director must test the spirit spoken by a prophet?

 

[JoeJPurnell]

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is to reject the salvation of God when death is incurred.

“…if any prophet speaks in the Spirit, you shall not try or judge him; for … this sin cannot be forgiven.” Didache 11:7

It’s not whether we reached a conclusion of acceptance or rejection, it’s in the very act of judging that the sin is committed. Rejection is not necessary and acceptance doesn’t excuse the sin.

 

[MaryHelp777]

Are you saying a spiritual director must test the spirit spoken by a prophet?

The church says anyone with a charism, such as prophecy, must have a spiritual director to meet with regularly, to discern what is of God and what isn’t.

 

[JoeJPurnell]

The church says anyone with a charism, such as prophecy, must have a spiritual director to meet with regularly, to discern what is of God and what isn’t.

I think this falls into the category of the prophet’s own testing of the spirit mentioned in 1 John 4. But what the Didache mentions as the unforgivable sin, is for the rest of us who, after hearing the prophet speak in the spirit should not judge/try/test the spirit further then, correct?

 

[Louman127]

“…if any prophet speaks in the Spirit, you shall not try or judge him; for … this sin cannot be forgiven.” Didache 11:7

It’s not whether we reached a conclusion of acceptance or rejection, it’s in the very act of judging that the sin is committed. Rejection is not necessary and acceptance doesn’t excuse the sin.

I understand be there are other angles to look at. The word judgement for instance. Judgement of a person and their character and the state of their soul is where we often get into sinful behavior. When reading anything we must also include the principles of the Catholic faith. One can make reasonable judgements and it not be sinful. One can also judge a particular person and it be sinful. God calls us to discern and look for His voice amongst this darkness we live in. That requires we discern and pray and meditate on any information that enters the mind so we do not be fooled by the devil appearing as an angel of light. Because if someone is speaking in the Spirit (in the Holy Spirit) a person will know it is authentic if he or she is loyal to God and has the Holy Spirit themselves also.

So if one knows that a prophet is speaking with the Holy Spirit and they knowingly cast judgment against that person they are rejecting the Holy Spirits words not the humans words. It also says though that some who speak in the Spirit are not prophets but are false prophets. How could it be that someone could talk in the Spirit but be false? Because they are falsely speaking as an angel of light as lucifer always does and at face value may appear to be speaking in the Holy Spirit. Didache also says that you will know the false prophets because their ways will not be of God. But how would one be able to judge/discern that the person and their ways are of God or not if judgement is wrong?

More likely than not these are simple language barriers from translations over generations that make this seem contradictory. I haven’t read Didache yet but this quote explains it.

“Do not test or examine any prophet who is speaking in a spirit, ‘for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven.’ But not everyone who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet; only he is a prophet who has the ways of the Lord about him. By their ways will the false prophet and the prophet be known.”*
Didache 11:7-8

In Didache it says that the false prophets can be known. How can they be known if one does not analyze those prophets ways? Wouldn’t that entail a degree of judgement? You see essentially it takes judgement but to grasp it better in the mind replace judgement with discernment.

You can have two guys saying the same thing. One fasle and one authentic. But eventually the false prophet will be known and so will his lie and you will be able to make a reasonable judgement so as to not be led astray.

As I said I haven’t read it yet but to me it seems that this is showing the importance of submitting to the magesterium because not everyone is granted the ability to discern such difficult things. But there is also that punchline that even though you shouldn’t go around judging things such as the prophets you will also be able to pin point the false prophets which by default entails a certain degree of non-sinful judgement.

 

[JoeJPurnell]

In Didache it says that the false prophets can be known. How can they be known if one does not analyze those prophets ways? Wouldn’t that entail a degree of judgement? You see essentially it takes judgement but to grasp it better in the mind replace judgement with discernment.

We’re on the same page. The Didache offers no penalty against judging a true or false prophet as such based on their ways and it lists a few examples. But, if we judge the spirit that speaks through them that’s the unforgivable sin. I assume we are still bound by this teaching of Jesus as illustrated through this example in the Didache.

Can a prophet test the spirit that speaks through another prophet without committing the unforgivable sin? What about a local bishop living in the area the prophet speaks the spirit in? Are they immune to this sin if they judge/test/try the spoken spirit? And, if they are immune, how do we reconcile that with what Jesus himself said about the unforgivableness of the sin?

 

[Louman127]

We’re on the same page. The Didache offers no penalty against judging a true or false prophet as such based on their ways and it lists a few examples. But, if we judge the spirit that speaks through them that’s the unforgivable sin. I assume we are still bound by this teaching of Jesus as illustrated through this example in the Didache.

Can a prophet test the spirit that speaks through another prophet without committing the unforgivable sin? What about a local bishop living in the area the prophet speaks the spirit in? Are they immune to this sin if they judge/test/try the spoken spirit? And, if they are immune, how do we reconcile that with what Jesus himself said about the unforgivableness of the sin?

I believe to say that the judgement of a prophet as an unforgivable sin is taking the meaning out of context. Here’s the whole quote. I do not think it is saying that if you make a reasonable judgement that you will be damned. I believe its merely saying accept what is true and rebuke what is false and here is the formula the followers of Christ should utilize to discern. I believe that’s more of what Didache is saying here.

WHOEVER then cometh and teacheth you 1 all these things, spoken above, receive him; but if the teacher himself, 2being misled, teaches another teaching, so as to overthrow this, do not hear him; but 3if he teach so as to advance righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord. But as regards the 4apostles and prophets, according to 5the decree of the gospel, so do ye. And every apostle who cometh to you, let him be received as the Lord; but 6he shall not remain more than one day; if, however, there be need, then the next day; but if he remain three days, he is a false prophet. But when the apostle departs, let him take nothing except bread enough to last him till he reach his resting-place for the night; but if he ask for money, “7he is a false prophet. And every prophet 8who speaks in the Spirit, 9ye shall not try nor test; for eve- ry sin shall be forgiven, but 10this sin shall not be forgiven. But not every one who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet, 11but only if he have the ways of the Lord. So from their ways shall the false prophet and the prophet be recognised. And 12no prophet who, in the Spirit, orders a Love-Feast, eateth himself of it, unless, indeed, he is a false prophet; and every prophet who teacheth the truth, if he practise not that which he teacheth, is a false prophet. And 13every approved genuine prophet, who summons assemblies for the purpose of showing an earthly mystery, but who does not teach others to do all that he himself doeth, shall not be judged by you; for his judgment is in the hands of God; for so did the ancient prophets also. But whoever, in the Spirit, says: 14Give me money, or anything else, ye shall not listen to him; 15but if for others in need he bids you give, let no one judge him.

 

[Louman127]

Also I just re-read your post. And I think I know what you are getting at. To judge the “spirit” a prophet is currently speaking in, is sinful. Maybe I can sort these thoughts out a little bit…

It is warning against judging a persons spirit/soul themself. Because one is casting judgement on that particular soul and only God has that authority. For instance many people say because of what President Obama has done that he is for sure the anti-Christ. This can be sinful because there is no supernatural basis of it nor revelation of it and quite often it is based off of opinions and simple human logic. To that person who says that (with full knowledge) he is committing the mortal sin of gossip and defamation of character because he is calling obama the ultimate supernatural evil that is to come in Revelations. He may be a false prophet yes, but he should not be labeled as the supernatural anti-christ that is to come because that is judgement of his particular soul/spirit.

Something someone says or does can be objectively evil but we should not be labeling people themselves as evil because as long as that person is alive they can go from the worst sinner and supporter of satan to the best Saint of the age. So I think, primarily the way you have articulated your question, that we should not be casting judgement on a person’s particular soul/spirit because that is God’s business.

This may be confusing I know. Lol

 

[JoeJPurnell]

So I think, primarily the way you have articulated your question, that we should not be casting judgement on a person’s particular soul/spirit because that is God’s business.

I agree completely with the sentiment, but that’s not quite what I’m getting at. I’ll take your example. Suppose President Obama claimed to be a prophet of God. And he said something along the lines of, repent our nation is doomed, God is going to wipe it out in so many days. And if that’s too complex, imagine he told us exactly the same thing Jonah told Ninevah. Repent or the Lord is going to wipe you off the map.

The Didache says we cannot judge what he says while he is speaking in the spirit in his capacity as a prophet. We could judge his actions and then label him a false prophet based on those. Right or wrong we don’t risk committing a sin that’s unforgivable because the Holy Spirit’s work is not in question, the prophet’s actions are.

So I’m a bit uncomfortable, to say the least, when others preach that we ought to always test all spirits. It desensitizes us to this danger of judging God Himself unknowingly. I wonder if bishops or prophets are allowed to judge the spirit spoken by other prophets then or if they must only be confined, like all of us to only judging the prophet’s actions. Maybe I’ll start another thread asking that question.

 

[Louman127]

Hmmmm the way this is worded I’m trying to figure out. Hmmmm.

Do you mean are some people are granted the ability to see through a person so that they may have the ability to tell if that person is speaking with the Holy Spirit vs satans spirit?

 

[JoeJPurnell]

Do you mean are some people are granted the ability to see through a person so that they may have the ability to tell if that person is speaking with the Holy Spirit vs satans spirit?

No, the spirit that speaks through a true or false prophet can’t be a part of the judgement. But the apostles said in the Didache that if proven false a prophet should not be listened to.

But even if we prove a prophet false, we still must not judge the spirit that speaks through him. In my opinion, the parable of the weeds and the wheat in the Gospel of Matthew hint at this conundrum:

"He answered, ‘An enemy has done this.’ His slaves said to him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’ He replied, ‘No, if you pull up the weeds you might uproot the wheat along with them. Let them grow together until harvest; then at harvest time I will say to the harvesters, “First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles for burning; but gather the wheat into my barn.”’” - Matthew 13:28-30

You can’t pull up what you know to be weeds if their roots tangle with the wheat. We have to wait until the harvest for proper judgements of what can’t be seen to be given.

And how to judge a prophet as false is spelled out in the Didache there. 11:8-12. Below is the contemporary English translation (paracletepress.com/didache.html).

"… only he is a prophet who has the ways of the Lord about him. By their ways will the false prophet and the prophet be known.

Any prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it; if he does, he is indeed a false prophet.

And any prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do what he teaches, is a false prophet.

When a prophet, proved true, works for the mystery of the church in the world but does not teach others to do what he himself does, he will not be judged among you, for his judgment is already before God. The ancient prophets acted in this way, also.

But whoever says in the Spirit, ‘Give me money,’ or something else like this, you must not listen to him. But if he tells you to give for the sake of others who are in need, let no one judge him."

 

[Louman127]

I think that every situation is different and every situation needs discernment and every moment must be lived with every second being proactive in making sure not the smallest sin is committed and if a slip up happens immediately repenting and that if one has the Holy Spirit dwelling within them than God shows us every angle to think of in order to avoid committing sin but while still being able to be objective, righteous, and prudent of every thing around you. So basically lets say a Pope (not Pope Frances just any Pope) is living a sinful life but he says something profound such as a warning. Should he then not be taken seriously because he is a sinful man? Is it possible that because of the Papal office position that a sinful Pope could be touched one day by God to say a warning? Sure I would think that anything is possible with God just how it is also possible for the Holy Spirit to guard ex-Cathedra statements. So if we do the above living to avoid sin and know the faith and stay connected to God we will know what are the correct thoughts to allow in and what are the correct actions to take in every situation.

To be honest, to my knowledge according to the faith the only unforgivable sin is that of final impenitence. So I think anything that would stray from that would be errored.

If I am misunderstanding you or if any of this statement has not connected with your intentions then I may simply be incapable of grasping what you’re saying at this time. So if that’s the case then I’m probably not much help at this time, and I’m sorry and maybe after prayer, rest, and meditation I will be graced with the understanding and I can come back to this thread.

 

[JoeJPurnell]

To be honest, to my knowledge according to the faith the only unforgivable sin is that of final impenitence. So I think anything that would stray from that would be errored.

Final impenitence … I don’t think so. Final impenitence is not unforgivable, just unrepented. Jesus made it clear in the Gospels that the unforgivable sin is a specific offense. I think final impenitence could be for any sin at all. The unforgivable sin is for judging/trying/testing the words of a prophet that speaks in the spirit - as clarified in the Didache.

Here are Jesus’ words, for reference:

“Therefore, I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” Matthew 12:31-32

“Amen, I say to you, all sins and all blasphemies that people utter will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the holy Spirit will never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an everlasting sin. For they had said, “He has an unclean spirit.” Mark 3:28-30

“Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven. When they take you before synagogues and before rulers and authorities, do not worry about how or what your defense will be or about what you are to say. For the holy Spirit will teach you at that moment what you should say.” Luke 12:10-12

 

[Louman127]

When I say final impenitence I am saying unrepentant. Those who die in a state of unrepented mortal sin go to hell.

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is that. Because the Holy Spirit is always calling us back to Him. If we reject the call and refuse to repent we have rejected our conscious and rejected the Holy Spirit, hence blasphemy by doing the opposite of what the Holy Spirit is telling us to do and hence condemnation. At Baptism the Holy Spirit is given. We are not only given the Holy Spirit but He is integrated into us. We then are a tabernacle of the Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit). Where 1 person of the Trinity there the other 2 must be in virtue of their relationship. So when we refuse to repent we are ripping ourselves away from the Holy Spirit that has been integrated into us thus, committing blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and ripping away from the Body of Christ. You would no longer be one with God. This is the act you are referring to. The reason it is unforgivable is because after death we will be in eternity and once hell is incurred at that point the time for mercy is over. Judgement has occurred hence “he has an unclean spirit”. One cannot be in hell and repent because it is too late.

I’m telling you for sure that the way you are thinking of the unforgivable sin is incorrect. I have stated the correct way to understand the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I have stated the Catholic teaching. To stray from that would be against the Catholic faith. Do not to let self interpretation and language barriers in Scripture cause you to think something else.

The misunderstanding of the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is often how the devil will tempt people who are learning about the faith into despair in order for them to feel hopeless.

For instance, when I started learning in detail I received (from satan) an extremely complex and extremely blasphemous locution against God. Immediately I thought I had committed the unforgivable sin. Then I received information that it was not my thoughts that were going through my mind but satans work. Then I learned propperly what the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is which is how I described it.

I have stated the Catholic truth. I Hope I was a help for you. God Bless you.

 

[JoeJPurnell]

I’m telling you for sure that the way you are thinking of the unforgivable sin is incorrect. I have stated the correct way to understand the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I have stated the Catholic teaching. To stray from that would be against the Catholic faith. Do not to let self interpretation and language barriers in Scripture cause you to think something else.

It seems like you have ended the discussion. That’s too bad. I don’t know why you’re ignoring what the Didache says in this - it’s clear to me it’s part of the teaching tradition of the Church.

If we judge/test/try the Holy Spirit that speaks through a prophet we commit the unforgivable sin. Jesus had a reason to say it’s unforgivable and we need to respect that.

If a priest or apologist claims that we must always test all spirits that speak through others, he risks encouraging us to commit the unforgivable sin. You don’t see anything wrong with this?

 

[Louman127]

Actually I’m not ignoring what Didache says because that is what we have been discussing this whole time. So to say I am ignoring what Didache says is invalid. I am simply telling you the way the Catholic Church has interpreted the unforgivable sin. This is commonly known. But with all due respect it seems that you are taking things out of context in order to find a different meaning so, at that point there is really nothing more I can do. All I can say is what the Church believes in and why and it appears you are looking for a different answer and view point that the Church does not hold. We are to have God guide us. I will listen to a prophet but I will also listen God within me and will be loyal to the faith. As long as I remain loyal to God He will adivse me of what is false and what is true.

Perhaps this from EWTN will help.

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/UNFORGIV.HTM

 

[JoeJPurnell]

Let me see if I’ve got this straight. Jesus said there is such a thing as an unforgivable sin; said it is when we blaspheme the Holy Spirit that speaks through the prophets (apostles); reinforced it with “Amen I say to you”; did not speak symbolically in any way about it; was not at all ambiguous about it; the Church was formed; from the beginning She teaches it exactly as He stated it; the Holy Spirit inspired authors to write it down in the Gospels unambiguously; we affirm that the Gospels are truth, you say that I’ve taken it out of context and offer no evidence for how I’ve done so.

This is a forum for Catholic Answers and on this particular question, the stakes are too high for ambiguity. Let’s not be content to just go our separate ways on this. If you’re up for the challenge please enlighten me. Exactly how have I taken that there is an unforgivable sin that happens when we judge the spirit that speaks through a prophet out of context?