MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— Exodus 4:14-17
MUTUAL AID IN RELIGIOUS WORK
I. That sometimes good men are called to undertake a work, against the performance of which they imagine themselves to have a natural impediment. Moses was called to go and achieve the freedom of Israel. But he says that he is a man slow of speech, and that as he is unlikely to succeed in such an undertaking, he asks that God will send another in his stead. Thus Moses was designated to a work, against the performance of which he imagined himself to have a natural infirmity, the lack of ready utterance
1. Men should be certain that their so-called impediment is a real hindrance in the service to which they are sent. Was Moses certain that his lack of speech would prove a real hindrance in the performance of his mission, especially when he considered the preparation he had already received, and the miracles he had been empowered to work? If so, he was mistaken. He looked more on the surface of things than into their depths. He probably regarded his own comfort more than the real bearing of his infirmity upon his mission. He wanted an excuse, and found one in his natural deficiency of language. He probably wanted to appear before Israel as some great one. He wanted to accomplished his mission without encountering difficulty. He looked more at secondary causes than at primary, more at himself than at God and his promised help. And men who do this will be sure to have infirmities, fancied or real. Thus we are not quite so sure that Moses was right in supposing that his lack of speech was a real hindrance to his mission. If he had been gifted in the direction of language, he might have been in danger of betraying his mission by indiscretion. It is a dangerous thing for a man that has moral power and a great mission to have the gift of language, he will almost be sure to talk too much about the honour of his calling, and the power he has to work miracles. Many such enterprises have been wrecked by so-called eloquence. True the public like a man that can talk; he is more likely to become a general favourite; he may win their pleasantry, but will he achieve their moral conviction? Many a minister would have been more successful in his work if he had been more slow of tongue. Thus, before we lament our natural impediment to service, and say that God has called the wrong man for the work, we must look into the reality of things, and see whether our infirmity is a real hindrance or not. In these days when people are called to work, they at once refer to their infirmity and unfitness for it, but their real infirmity is not so much their slowness of speech, as this unbelief and unwillingness to follow the Divine command. They have not the moral courage to encounter difficulty. They think more of Pharaoh and his army than of the Divine companionship that has promised to be with them.
2. But we admit that sometimes men are called to religious service against the performance of which they have a natural impediment. Sometimes men of little courage are sent on errands which require them to be brave; sometimes men of little faith are sent on errands which require them to have strong confidence in the Unseen; sometimes men of slow speech are sent to give the law of God to the assembled multitudes at Sinai. And why this apparent anomaly and invertion of things.
(1.) Is it not an injustice on the part of the Divine requirement. Can God fully expect men of small courage to go to Pharaoh and demand the freedom of a nation. It is just, because with the command He gives the moral energy necessary for its execution. He gives the timid man the stimulus of the vision. He gives him the inspiration of a miracle.
(2.) Its design is to educate man on the side of his weakness. The man lacks courage. The mission requires it. God awakens it. Hence the man who left home a coward, returns a hero. Moses hesitated to undertake the journey to Israel; he did not hesitate to take that still more formidable journey up the mountain of Nebo, into the arms of death. No; the discipline of the mission has been effectual. He has been educated thereby on the side of his weakness. Thus the calling of men to work for which they are antecedently unfitted, is purely educational in its design.
(3.) It is to render the mission all the more triumphant when accomplished. The strong man is familiar with victory, it has ceased to awaken him to enthusiasm as once it did. But for the weak to be the victorious is a new thing, it occasions a new experience, and renders the occasion worthy of more triumphant plaudits. It is the distinguishing glory of Christianity that it makes provision for the victory of the weak who have within their souls the grace of God.
II. That at such time good men require the aid of others whose talents compensate for their infirmity. Sometimes the Divine discipline requires that the weak shall go alone to the mission, for their greater spiritual good and honour, but in the case before us so arduous was the duty, so destitute were the times of religious light, and so vague were the ideas of men on moral service, that God responded to the implied wish of Moses, and gave him the direct help he needed. God does not entirely leave men of natural infirmity alone in their Christian service, but sends them external aid, most helpful and welcome.
1. This help was adapted to the infirmity of Moses. “Is not Aaron, the Levite, thy brother? I know that he can speak well.” Moses was a thinker. So there is a variety of gifts and talent in the Church. Some have the gift of wealth. Others have the gift of originality. Others have the gift of legislation. Others have the gift of great influence. One star differeth from another star in glory. How happy when the whole system of Christian work is revolving in harmony, giving light and hope to the universe. Thus the weak catch the light and impetus of the strong, and the lack of talent in one direction is made up by its supply in another. It is by this combination of Christian talent that all great enterprises will be carried to their successful issue. Let no Christian speaker refuse to aid a Christian thinker. The one is the complement of the other.
2. This help was arranged by the providence of God. “And also, behold He cometh forth to meet thee.”
(1.) As to the time of meeting.
(2.) As to the place of meeting.
(3.) As to the purpose of meeting. Thus the useful combination of talent in the enterprise of human emancipation from moral evil has the Divine sanction, its blending is arranged by the providence of God, and its entire out-working is superintended by Him. “I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.”
3. The help was founded upon and rendered welcome by family relationship. “Thy brother.” God did not bring a stranger to the aid of Moses. Moses could not well have communicated his history, his moral experiences to such an one, but he was glad to meet his brother, the sadness of his new mission was removed by the joyful interview, and together, animated by new impulses of hope, they would look over their work and enter into each other’s feelings respecting it. The talents of a family are variously distributed, and when all are consecrated to the Divine service, one may aid another in the great spiritual enterprise of his life.
III. That such co-operation renders religious work much more jubilant and successful.
1. It is happy. It is adapted to our weak conditions of faith. God is unseen and we are liable to think him distant from us in our work. His companionship seems unreal, and communion with Him is, at times, very difficult. Our unbelief robs us of the great repose and hope we ought to experience in His presence. But Aaron was seen by Moses. They could converse one with the other. They could walk together, not by faith, but by sight. And in converse with each other they might rise into higher communion with God. So mutual help in religious service is happy, it links soul to soul, and becomes the inspiration of richer communion with heaven.
2. It is sympathetic.
3. It is hopeful.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Exodus 4:14. The literal rendering of the clause is, “Is not Aaron thy brother, the Levite”? which we cannot but understand as implying, that in consequence of Moses’ unbelieving waywardness on this occasion, the distinguishing honour of the priesthood, and of being the official head of the house of Levi, the person in whom the dignity of that name should be especially centred, which would otherwise have been bestowed upon him, should now be conferred upon his brother Aaron, and perpetuated in his family. In this fact the expression of the Lord’s anger consisted. Otherwise, how was Aaron any more the Levite than Moses? We find accordingly the forfeited privilege of Moses thus secured to Aaron (1 Chronicles 23:13). This, we suppose would have been the honour of Moses, had he yielded a ready obedience to the divine mandate. The event teaches us that those who decline the labour and hazard connected with the call of God to a special service, may thereby forfeit and forego a blessing of which they little dream [Bush].
Thus Moses forfeited the dignity of being Jehovah’s sole instrument in that glorious work He was about to accomplish.
No wonder that the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses. Where God commandeth, there to ask a reason is presumption; but to oppose reason, is a kind of rebellion [Trapp].
Moreover, God condescended so far to the weakness of Moses, as to find him a coadjutor in his mission to the children of Israel and to the King of Egypt. Aaron could speak well. Moses was a thinker; Aaron was a speaker. Aaron was to be to Moses instead of a mouth, and Moses was to be to Aaron instead of God. Thus one man has to be the complement of another. No one man has all gifts and graces. The best and ablest of us cannot do without our brother. There is to be a division of labour in the great work of conquering the world for God. The thinker works; so does the speaker; so does the writer. We are a chain; not merely isolated links; we belong to one another, and only by fraternal and zealous co-operation can we secure the great results possible to faith and labour. Some men are fruitful of suggestion. They have wondrous powers of indication; but there their special power ends. Other men have great gifts of expression; they can put thoughts into the best words; they have the power of music; they can charm and persuade. Such men are not to undervalue one another; they are to co-operate as fellow-labourers in the Kingdom of God [City Temple].
Multiplied oppositions to God’s call may provoke Him to be angry with His servants.
When the Divine promise cannot persuade, God’s anger drives His servants from their excuses.
When one refuseth God’s work in redeeming His Church, He knoweth others to use for it.
God indulgeth the weakness of His servants to give associates, when they decline to go alone.
God’s knowledge of persons, relations, and conditions, puts them in a capacity to do His work.
God moveth the hearts of people sometimes to the same work when they are in remote places.
Some hearts are more ready to move about God’s work than others.
Providence moveth persons to meet, for carrying on His work, when they are at a distance.
God appointeth meetings of friends to enhance the welfare of His Church.
God useth the gladness of some to help on the deadness of others in His work.
THE TWO BROTHERS
I. As educated by different methods. Moses was educated in the palace of Egypt. In the desert. By the vision. By the miracles. Aaron was educated by his parents. Little is known of his early training. He was incidentally called into history. One good natural gift may be fortune and fame to a man. Moses was the greater man, yet Aaron, though of less moral energy, was useful to him. Smaller souls have their mission. Small souls are often gifted with speech. The education of these two brothers had led to different results. It is not the tendency of education to bring all men to one level of talent, but to draw out their distinctive gifts, for the common good of humanity.
II. As meeting after a long separation.
1. The meeting was providential.
2. The meeting had a moral and national significance.
3. The meeting was welcome to the brothers. What is more pleasing than the reunion of the members of a family after a long absence? What narratives each brother would record to the other. Especially would they talk about their new mission, and its likelihood of success. These brothers met in a wilderness. Joy and friendship is independent of locality. The brethren of the Christian Chuch will one day meet again, not in the wilderness, but in the paradise of God.
III. As uniting in a grand enterprise. These two brothers are going to accomplish the freedom of Israel! To the world, a folly; to faith, a victory. Brothers should always join in the enterprises of moral freedom. They should unitedly place themselves in a line with the providence of God.
IV. As entering upon an important future. What will be the issue of this meeting? Who can tell? It will have an influence upon both lives. All the casual meetings of life are important in their bearing upon present work and future destiny.
V. As reflecting commendation upon their family. Was it not a great honour to Amram and Jochebed that two of their sons should be called to be the deliverers of Israel? Sons honour their parents when they undertake an enterprise for the good of men. Brothers cannot be better united than in the cause of God.
The Divine anger:—
1. Often righteously provoked.
2. Often gentle in its reproof.
3. Truly benevolent in its disposition.
“I know that he can speak well.”
I. Then God takes knowledge of the varied talents of men.
II. Then God will hold men responsible for their talents.
III. Then the talents of men cannot be better employed than in the service of the Church.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON
(10)—Moses and Aaron!—The cobbler, writes Smith, could not paint the picture; but he could tell Apelles how to put in the shoe-latchet. Two neighbours—one blind and the other lame—were called to a place at a great distance. It was agreed that the blind man should carry his lame friend, who would help his human house with his eyes;
“The lame man with his crutches rude
Upon the blind man’s shoulders broad;
United thus achieved the pair
What each would have accomplished ne’er.”
—Gellert.
Moses and Aaron had each their defects. Moses and Aaron also had their qualifications. Moses was earnest. Aaron was eloquent. Moses had a bold heart. Aaron had a beautiful voice. Both aided each other. Mutual help.
(11)—Gifts!—Well does Salter put it when he points out that flowers, while they captivate us with their beauty, no less astonish us with their variety. Every country has its peculiar species. Some of these love the burning suns of India; some the barren deserts of Africa. America and New Holland are equally distinguished by the variety of its animals, as by the diverse flowers of singular and rare beauty. Then again there are some flowers which are the natives only of temperate climates, and a few are confined to the snowy regions of the north. All these are remarkable for their different qualities; since some have fragrance—others beauty—and others again the properties of medicine. So in the Christian Church. the gifts and graces of its members differ widely.
“And yet what godlike gifts neglected lie
Wasted and marred in the forgotten soul!
The finest workmanship of God is there.”
—Willis.
Guthrie aptly remarks that in Christians there are differences of character, which—springing from constitutional peculiarities or early education—grace will modify, but never altogether eradicate on this side the grave. But there are also differences which imply no defect; just as there are in countenances which are very unlike, and yet, be the complexion dark or fair, are very beautiful. We do not expect all good men to be alike, any more than we would have all the members of a family alike, or all the flowers alike. The Church of Christ—like the meadows below, or the star-spangled heavens above—owes its beauty to that variety in unity which marks the works of God and mars none of them.
“Every where about us they are glowing,
Some like stars, to tell us Spring is born;
Others, their blue eyes with tears o’erflowing,
Stand like Ruth amid the golden corn.”
—Longfellow.
(12)—Reward!—There is a beautiful tradition illustrating the blessedness of performing our duty at whatever cost to our inclination. A lovely vision of our Saviour had appeared to a monk. In silent rapture and bliss of ecstasy he was gazing upon it, when the hour arrived at which it was his duty to feed the poor of the convent. He lingered not in his cell to enjoy the vision, but left it to perform his humble duty. On his return, the legend runs that he found the vision still waiting for him to salute him with the words: “Hadst thou staid, I must have fled.” Ancient history (says Pilkington) stories of Dionysius that he caused a band of musicians to play before him on the promise of reward—and that he told them when they came for their reward that they had already had it in their hopes of it. Not so does God fulfil his promise. Moses had respect unto the recompense of the reward, and he now enjoys it.
“So do thy work; it shall succeed
In thine or in another’s day;
And if denied the victor’s meed,
Thou shalt not lack the toiler’s pay.”
—Whittier.
(13)—Mutual Help!—Conceive a chain whose uppermost link was surely fixed in the living rock as your only hope of escape; would you not venture your body’s weight upon its strength? But what would be the result if the links were not within one another; but only attached externally by some brittle thing? You would simply be exchanging a slippery place of danger for inevitable death. No; the links must be within each other, and this is done in the fires. They were brought to a white heat ere they could be welded in. Moses and Aaron had thus to be welded together in the furnace of affliction—ere attached to the Eternal Rock—they were safe holding for the imperuled host of Israel.
“Steadfast and sure it cannot fail,
It enters deep within the veil,
It fastens on a land unknown,
And moors me to my Father’s throne.”
Wesley.