THE PULPIT AND THE PASTORATE
No work for God surpasses in dignity
and responsibility the Christian ministry. It
is at once the consummate flower of the divine planting,
the priceless dower of His church, and through it works
the power of God for salvation.
Though George Muller had begun his
‘candidacy for holy orders’ as an unconverted
man, seeking simply a human calling with a hope of
a lucrative living, he had heard God’s summons
to a divine vocation, and he was from time to time
preaching the Gospel, but not in any settled field.
While at Teignmouth, early in 1830,
preaching by invitation, he was asked to take the
place of the minister who was about to leave, but he
replied that he felt at that time called of God, not
to a stationary charge, but rather to a sort of itinerant
evangelism. During this time he preached at Shaldon
for Henry Craik, thus coming into closer contact with
this brother, to whom his heart became knit in bonds
of love and sympathy which grew stronger as the acquaintance
became more intimate.
Certain hearers at Teignmouth, and
among them some preachers, disliked his sermons, albeit
they were owned of God; and this caused him to reflect
upon the probable causes of this opposition, and whether
it was any indication of his duty. He felt that
they doubtless looked for outward graces of oratory
in a preacher, and hence were not attracted to a foreigner
whose speech had no rhetorical charms and who could
not even use English with fluency. But he felt
sure of a deeper cause for their dislike, especially
as he was compelled to notice that, the summer previous,
when he himself was less spiritually minded and had
less insight into the truth, the same parties who
now opposed him were pleased with him. His final
conclusion was that the Lord meant to work through
him at Teignmouth, but that Satan was acting, as usual,
the part of a hinderer, and stirring up brethren themselves
to oppose the truth. And as, notwithstanding
the opposers, the wish that he should minister at
the chapel was expressed so often and by so many, he
determined to remain for a time until he was openly
rejected as God’s witness, or had some clear
divine leading to another field of labour.
He announced this purpose, at the
same time plainly stating that, should they withhold
salary, it would not affect his decision, inasmuch
as he did not preach as a hireling of man, but as
the servant of God, and would willingly commit to
Him the provision for his temporal needs. At
the same time, however, he reminded them that it was
alike their duty and privilege to minister in carnal
things to those who served them in things spiritual,
and that while he did not desire a gift, he did desire
fruit that might abound to their account.
These experiences at Teignmouth were
typical: “Some believed the things which
were spoken, and some believed not;” some left
the chapel, while others stayed; and some were led
and fed, while others maintained a cold indifference,
if they did not exhibit an open hostility. But
the Lord stood by him and strengthened him, setting
His seal upon his testimony; and Jéhovah Jireh also
moved two brethren, unasked, to supply all the daily
wants of His servant. After a while the little
church of eighteen members unanimously called the
young preacher to the pastorate, and he consented
to abide with them for a season, without abandoning
his original intention of going from place to place
as the Lord might lead. A stipend, of fifty-five
pounds annually, was offered him, which somewhat increased
as the church membership grew; and so the university
student of Halle was settled in his first pulpit and
pastorate.
While at Sidmouth, preaching, in April,
1830, three believing sisters held in his presence
a conversation about ‘believers’ baptism,’
which proved the suggestion of another important step
in his life, which has a wider bearing than at first
is apparent.
They naturally asked his opinion on
the subject about which they were talking, and he
replied that, having been baptized as a child, he saw
no need of being baptized again. Being further
asked if he had ever yet prayerfully searched the
word of God as to its testimony in this matter, he
frankly confessed that he had not.
At once, with unmistakable plainness
of speech and with rare fidelity, one of these sisters
in Christ promptly said: "I entreat you, then,
never again to speak any more about it till you have
done so."
Such a reply George Muller was not
the man either to resent or to resist. He was
too honest and conscientious to dismiss without due
reflection any challenge to search the oracles of God
for their witness upon any given question. Moreover,
if, at that very time, his preaching was emphatic
in any direction, it was in the boldness with which
he insisted that all pulpit teaching and Christian
practice must be subjected to one great test,
namely, the touchstone of the word of God.
Already an Elijah in spirit, his great aim was to repair
the broken-down altar of the Lord, to expose and rebuke
all that hindered a thoroughly scriptural worship
and service, and, if possible, to restore apostolic
simplicity of doctrine and life.
As he thought and prayed about this
matter, he was forced to admit to himself that he
had never yet earnestly examined the Scriptures for
their teaching as to the position and relation of baptism
in the believer’s life, nor had he even prayed
for light upon it. He had nevertheless repeatedly
spoken against believers’ baptism, and so he
saw it to be possible that he might himself have been
opposing the teaching of the Word. He therefore
determined to study the subject until he should reach
a final, satisfactory, and scriptural conclusion; and
thenceforth, whether led to defend infant baptism or
believers’ baptism, to do it only on scriptural
grounds.
The mode of study which he followed
was characteristically simple, thorough, and business-like,
and was always pursued afterward. He first sought
from God the Spirit’s teaching that his eyes
might be opened to the Word’s witness, and his
mind illumined; then he set about a systematic examination
of the New Testament from beginning to end. So
far as possible he sought absolutely to rid himself
of all bias of previous opinion or practice, prepossession
or prejudice; he prayed and endeavoured to be free
from the influence of human tradition, popular custom,
and churchly sanction, or that more subtle hindrance,
personal pride in his own consistency. He was
humble enough to be willing to retract any erroneous
teaching and renounce any false position, and to espouse
that wise maxim: “Don’t be consistent,
but simply be true!" Whatever may have been
the case with others who claim to have examined the
same question for themselves, the result in his case
was that he came to the conclusion, and, as he believed,
from the word of God and the Spirit of God, that none
but believers are the proper subjects of baptism,
and that only immersion is its proper mode. Two
passages of Scripture were very marked in the prominence
which they had in compelling him to these conclusions,
namely: Acts vii-38, and Romans v-5.
The case of the Ethiopian eunuch strongly convinced
him that baptism is proper, only as the act of a believer
confessing Christ; and the passage in the Epistle
to the Romans equally satisfied him that only immersion
in water can express the typical burial with Christ
and resurrection with Him, there and elsewhere made
so prominent. He intended no assault upon brethren
who hold other views, when he thus plainly stated
in his journal the honest and unavoidable convictions
to which he came; but he was too loyal both to the
word of God and to his own conscience to withhold
his views when so carefully and prayerfully arrived
at through the searching of the Scriptures.
Conviction compelled action, for in
him there was no spirit of compromise; and he was
accordingly promptly baptized. Years after, in
reviewing his course, he records the solemn conviction
that “of all revealed truths, not one is more
clearly revealed in the Scriptures not
even the doctrine of justification by faith and
that the subject has only become obscured by men not
having been willing to take the Scriptures alone
to decide the point.”
He also bears witness incidentally
that not one true friend in the Lord had ever turned
his back upon him in consequence of his baptism, as
he supposed some would have done; and that almost
all such friends had, since then, been themselves
baptized. It is true that in one way he suffered
some pecuniary loss through this step taken in obedience
to conviction, but the Lord did not suffer him to
be ultimately the loser even in this respect, for
He bountifully made up to him any such sacrifice,
even in things that pertain to this life. He concludes
this review of his course by adding that through his
example many others were led both to examine the question
of baptism anew and to submit themselves to the ordinance.
Such experiences as these suggest
the honest question whether there is not imperative
need of subjecting all current religious customs and
practices to the one test of conformity to the scripture
pattern. Our Lord sharply rebuked the Pharisees
of His day for making “the commandment of God
of none effect by their tradition,” and, after
giving one instance, He added, “and many other
such like things do ye." It is very easy for doctrines
and practices to gain acceptance, which are the outgrowth
of ecclesiasticism, and neither have sanction in the
word of God, nor will bear the searching light of
its testimony. Cyprian has forewarned us that
even antiquity is not authority, but
may be only vetustas erroris the
old age of error. What radical reforms would be
made in modern worship, teaching and practice, in
the whole conduct of disciples and the administration
of the church of God, if the one final
criterion of all judgment were: What do the Scriptures
teach?’ And what revolutions in our own lives
as believers might take place, if we should first
put every notion of truth and custom of life to this
one test of scripture authority, and then with the
courage of conviction dare to do according to that
word counting no cost, but studying to show
ourselves approved of God! Is it possible that
there are any modern disciples who “reject the
commandment of God that they may keep their own tradition”?
Matthew x. Mark vi-13.
This step, taken by Mr. Muller as
to baptism, was only a precursor of many others, all
of which, as he believed, were according to that Word
which, as the lamp to the believer’s feet, is
to throw light upon his path.
During this same summer of 1830 the
further study of the Word satisfied him that, though
there is no direct command so to do, the scriptural
and apostolic practice was to break bread
every Lord’s day. (Acts xx 7, etc.)
Also, that the Spirit of God should have unhindered
liberty to work through any believer according to
the gifts He had bestowed, seemed to him plainly taught
in Romans xii.; 1 Cor. xii.; Ephes. iv., etc.
These conclusions likewise this servant of God sought
to translate at once into conduct, and such conformity
brought increasing spiritual prosperity.
Conscientious misgivings, about the
same time, ripened into settled convictions that he
could no longer, upon the same principle of obedience
to the word of God, consent to receive any stated
salary as a minister of Christ. For this
latter position, which so influenced his life, he
assigns the following grounds, which are here stated
as showing the basis of his life-long attitude:
1. A stated salary implies a
fixed sum, which cannot well be paid without a fixed
income through pew-rentals or some like source of
revenue. This seemed plainly at war with the teaching
of the Spirit of God in James i-6, since the poor
brother cannot afford as good sittings as the rich,
thus introducing into church assemblies invidious
distinctions and respect of persons, and so encouraging
the caste spirit.
2. A fixed pew-rental may at
times become, even to the willing disciple, a burden.
He who would gladly contribute to a pastor’s
support, if allowed to do so according to his ability
and at his own convenience, might be oppressed by
the demand to pay a stated sum at a stated time.
Circumstances so change that one who has the same cheerful
mind as before may be unable to give as formerly,
and thus be subjected to painful embarrassment and
humiliation if constrained to give a fixed sum.
3. The whole system tends to
the bondage of the servant of Christ. One must
be unusually faithful and intrepid if he feels no temptation
to keep back or in some degree modify his message
in order to please men, when he remembers that the
very parties, most open to rebuke and most liable
to offence, are perhaps the main contributors toward
his salary.
Whatever others may think of such
reasons as these, they were so satisfactory to his
mind that he frankly and promptly announced them to
his brethren; and thus, as early as the autumn of 1830,
when just completing his twenty-fifth year, he took
a position from which he never retreated, that he
would thenceforth receive no fixed salary for any
service rendered to God’s people. While calmly
assigning scriptural grounds for such a position he,
on the same grounds, urged voluntary offerings,
whether of money or other means of support, as the
proper acknowledgment of service rendered by God’s
minister, and as a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing
to God. A little later, seeing that, when such
voluntary gifts came direct from the givers personally,
there was a danger that some might feel self-complacent
over the largeness of the amount given by them, and
others equally humbled by the smallness of their offerings,
with consequent damage to both classes, of givers,
he took a step further: he had a box put up
in the chapel, over which was written, that whoever
had a desire to do something for his support might
put such an offering therein as ability and disposition
might direct. His intention was, that thus the
act might be wholly as in God’s sight, without
the risk of a sinful pride or false humility.
He further felt that, to be entirely
consistent, he should ask no help from man,
even in bearing necessary costs of travel in the Lord’s
service, nor even state his needs beforehand in such
a way as indirectly to appeal for aid. All of
these methods he conceived to be forms of trusting
in an arm of flesh, going to man for help instead of
going at once, always and only, to the Lord.
And he adds: "To come to this conclusion before
God required more grace than to give up my salary."
These successive steps are here recorded
explicitly and in their exact order because they lead
up directly to the ultimate goal of his life-work
and witness. Such decisions were vital links connecting
this remarkable man and his “Father’s
business,” upon which he was soon more fully
to enter; and they were all necessary to the fulness
of the world-wide witness which he was to bear to
a prayer-hearing God and the absolute safety of trusting
in Him and in Him alone.
On October 7, 1830, George Muller,
in finding a wife, found a good thing and obtained
new favour from the Lord. Miss Mary Groves, sister
of the self-denying dentist whose surrender of all
things for the mission field had so impressed him
years before, was married to this man of God, and
for forty blessed years proved an help meet for him.
It was almost, if not quite, an ideal union, for which
he continually thanked God; and, although her kingdom
was one which came not with observation,’ the
sceptre of her influence was far wider in its sway
than will ever be appreciated by those who were strangers
to her personal and domestic life. She was a
rare woman and her price was above rubies. The
heart of her husband safely trusted, in her, and the
great family of orphans who were to her as children
rise up even to this day to call her blessed.
Married life has often its period
of estrangement, even when temporary alienation yields
to a deeper love, as the parties become more truly
wedded by the assimilation of their inmost being to
one another. But to Mr. and Mrs. Muller there
never came any such experience of even temporary alienation.
From the first, love grew, and with it, mutual confidence
and trust. One of the earliest ties which bound
these two in one was the bond of a common self-denial.
Yielding literal obedience to Luke xi, they sold
what little they had and gave alms, henceforth laying
up no treasures on earth (Matthew v-34; xi.)
The step then taken accepting, for Christ’s
sake, voluntary poverty was never regretted,
but rather increasingly rejoiced in; how faithfully
it was followed in the same path of continued self-sacrifice
will sufficiently appear when it is remembered that,
nearly sixty-eight years afterward, George Muller
passed suddenly into the life beyond, a poor man;
his will, when admitted to probate, showing his entire
personal property, under oath, to be but one hundred
and sixty pounds! And even that would not have
been in his possession had there been no daily need
of requisite comforts for the body and of tools for
his work. Part of this amount was in money, shortly
before received and not yet laid out for his Master,
but held at His disposal. Nothing, even to the
clothes he wore, did he treat as his own. He was
a consistent steward.
This final farewell to all earthly
possessions, in 1830, left this newly married husband
and wife to look only to the Lord. Thenceforth
they were to put to ample daily test both their faith
in the Great Provider and the faithfulness of the
Great Promiser. It may not be improper here to
anticipate, what is yet to be more fully recorded,
that, from day to day and hour to hour, during more
than threescore years, George Muller was enabled to
set to his seal that God is true. If few men
have ever been permitted so to trace in the smallest
matters God’s care over His children, it is
partly because few have so completely abandoned themselves
to that care. He dared to trust Him, with whom
the hairs of our head are all numbered, and who touchingly
reminds us that He cares for what has been quaintly
called "the odd sparrow." Matthew records how two sparrows are sold for a farthing, and
Luke (xi how five are sold for two farthings;
and so it would appear that, when two farthings were
offered, an odd sparrow was thrown in, as of so little
value that it could be given away with the other four.
And yet even for that one sparrow, not worth taking
into account in the bargain, God cares. Not
one of them is forgotten before God, or falls to the
ground without Him. With what force then comes
the assurance: “Fear ye not therefore;
ye are of more value than many sparrows!”
So George Muller found it to be.
He was permitted henceforth to know as never before,
and as few others have ever learned, how truly God
may be approached as “Thou that hearest prayer.”
God can keep His trusting children not only from falling
but from stumbling; for, during all those after-years
that spanned the lifetime of two generations, there
was no drawing back. Those precious promises,
which in faith and hope were “laid hold”
of in 1830, were “held fast” until the
end. (Heb. v, .) And the divine faithfulness
proved a safe anchorage-ground in the most prolonged
and violent tempests. The anchor of hope, sure
and steadfast, and entering into that within the veil,
was never dragged from its secure hold on God.
In fifty thousand cases, Mr. Muller calculated that
he could trace distinct answers to definite prayers;
and in multitudes of instances in which God’s
care was not definitely traced, it was day by day
like an encompassing passing but invisible presence
or atmosphere of life and strength.
On August 9, 1831, Mrs. Muller gave
birth to a stillborn babe, and for six weeks remained
seriously ill. Her husband meanwhile laments that
his heart was so cold and carnal, and his prayers
often so hesitating and formal; and he detects, even
behind his zeal for God, most unspiritual frames.
He especially chides himself for not having more seriously
thought of the peril of child-bearing, so as to pray
more earnestly for his wife; and he saw clearly that
the prospect of parenthood had not been rejoiced in
as a blessing, but rather as implying a new burden
and hindrance in the Lord’s work.
While this man of God lays bare his
heart in his journal, the reader must feel that “as
in water face answereth to face, so the heart of man
to man.” How many a servant of God has no
more exalted idea of the divine privilege of a sanctified
parenthood! A wife and a child are most precious
gifts of God when received, in answer to prayer, from
His hand. Not only are they not hindrances, but
they are helps, most useful in fitting a servant of
Christ for certain parts of his work for which no
other preparation is so adequate. They serve to
teach him many most valuable lessons, and to round
out his character into a far more symmetrical beauty
and serviceableness. And when it is remembered
how a godly association in holiness and usefulness
may thus be supplied, and above all a godly succession
through many generations, it will be seen how wicked
is the spirit that treats holy wedlock and its fruits
in offspring, with lightness and contempt.
Nor let us forget that promise: “If two
of you agree on earth as touching any thing that they
shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father
which is in heaven.” (Matt. xvii.) The
Greek word for “agree” is symphonize,
and suggests a musical harmony where chords are tuned
to the same key and struck by a master hand.
Consider what a blessed preparation for such habitual
symphony in prayer is to be found in the union of a
husband and wife in the Lord! May it not be that
to this the Spirit refers when He bids husband and
wife dwell in unity, as “heirs together of the
grace of life,” and adds, "that your prayers
be not hindered"? (1 Peter ii.)
God used this severe lesson for permanent
blessing to George Muller. He showed him how
open was his heart to the subtle power of selfishness
and carnality, and how needful was this chastisement
to teach him the sacredness of marital life and parental
responsibility. Henceforth he judged himself,
that he might not be “judged of the Lord.”
(1 Cor. x.)
A crisis like his wife’s critical
illness created a demand for much extra expense, for
which no provision had been made, not through carelessness
and improvidence, but upon principle. Mr. Muller
held that to lay by in store is inconsistent with
full trust in God, who in such case would send us
to our hoardings before answering prayer for more
supplies. Experience in this emergency justified
his faith; for not only were all unforeseen wants
supplied, but even the delicacies and refreshments
needful for the sick and weak; and the two medical
attendants graciously declined all remuneration for
services which extended through six weeks. Thus
was there given of the Lord more than could have been
laid up against this season of trial, even had the
attempt been made.
The principle of committing future
wants to the Lord’s care, thus acted upon at
this time, he and his wife consistently followed so
long as they lived and worked together. Experience
confirmed them in the conviction that a life of
trust forbids laying up treasures against unforeseen
foreseen needs, since with God no emergency is unforeseen
and no want unprovided for; and He may be as implicitly
trusted for extraordinary needs as for our common
daily bread.
Yet another law, kindred to this and
thoroughly inwrought into Mr. Muller’s habit
of life, was never to contract debt, whether
for personal purposes or the Lord’s work.
This matter was settled on scriptural grounds once
for all (Romans xii, and he and his wife determined
if need be to suffer starvation rather than to buy
anything without paying for it when bought. Thus
they always knew how much they had to buy with, and
what they had left to give to others or use for others’
wants.
There was yet another law of life
early framed into Mr. Muller’s personal decalogue.
He regarded any money which was in his hands already
designated for, or appropriated to, a specific use,
as not his to use, even temporarily, for any other
ends. Thus, though he was often reduced to the
lowest point of temporal supplies, he took no account
of any such funds set apart for other outlays or due
for other purposes. Thousands of times he was
in straits where such diversion of funds for a time
seemed the only and the easy way out, but where this
would only have led him into new embarrassments.
This principle, intelligently adopted, was firmly
adhered to, that what properly belongs to a particular
branch of work, or has been already put aside for a
certain use, even though yet in hand, is not to be
reckoned on as available for any other need, however
pressing. Trust in God implies such knowledge
on His part of the exact circumstances that He will
not constrain us to any such misappropriation.
Mistakes, most serious and fatal, have come from lack
of conscience as well as of faith in such exigencies drawing
on one fund to meet the overdraught upon another,
hoping afterward to replace what is thus withdrawn.
A well-known college president had nearly involved
the institution of which he was the head, in bankruptcy,
and himself in worse moral ruin, all the result of
one error money given for endowing certain
chairs had been used for current expenses until public
confidence had been almost hopelessly impaired.
Thus a life of faith must be
no less a life of conscience. Faith and trust
in God, and truth and faithfulness toward man, walked
side by side in this life-journey in unbroken agreement.