Post by Lee on Feb 26, 2014 1:57:17 GMT
PRINCIPLES AND EXPLANATIONS
At our Thursday night meeting, Aug. 28th, one of the brethren commenting on 1 Cor. 9., laid stress on Paul’s declaration that the Lord had appointed that they who preached the gospel should live of the gospel. He thought too little notice had been taken of this, and that in fact the teaching of the chapter had been misunderstood. He combatted the objections offered by some to the maintenance of workers in the truth, and mentioned the name of brother Roberts.
Bro. Roberts, who was present, having recently received a letter which showed there was an impression abroad that he was maintained by the brethren, now thought it was time to speak. He said it was good to have a right understanding, and that silence would tend the other way. That very day, a gentleman in the course of business had asked him if he did not make a considerable amount by lecturing. His answer was that for 25 years, he had lectured without charge, and should continue to do so to the end of his life. He did not deny that it was lawful for a faithful man to be maintained in the efficient service of the truth. He agreed with the brother that had spoken that it was a lawful thing for a preacher of the word to be supported in the work. But there were disadvantages connected with it which led Paul to decline the privilege. “We have not used this power,” he said, “but suffer all things lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ” (1 Cor. 9:12). This was the consideration that had influenced bro. Roberts. The truth was an unpopular thing, and had to fight an uphill battle. There were no gifts of the spirit or such indications of divine endorsement as would outweigh the prejudice of paid labourship, as in the apostolic day. It was needful to make people feel that the service rendered to the truth was the result of conviction. If a man was ostensibly living by it, it took away from the force of this feeling, and therefore hindered the gospel. Bro. Roberts had spoken and lectured regularly among the Birmingham brethren for 21 years past: how much had he received from them for all this labour? Mr. Dale received £800 or £1,000 a year; how much brother Roberts? Not a penny. Instead of receiving, he had spent much money among them, meeting on these boards on a footing of perfect equality with them all, so far as rank, emolument, or pretension was concerned.—But it might be said, what about the books? Well, he had acted on the same principle, for the same reason, with regard to the books. For many years he published at practically cost price, and in reality under: for the collateral burdens of the work were greater than revenues accruing. The printer, who found the capital, took the benefit: and of this brother Roberts made no complaint. But in the providence of God, during recent years, another printer had come along who, in effect, offered to share with brother Roberts the fruits of his own literary labours. With no increase of price, but rather in many cases, reduction, some of the benefit that went wholly into a printer’s pocket, had come into brother Roberts’ hands. Could any enlightened brother grumble at “the earth” thus “helping the woman?” Such grumbling must be the result of misunderstanding or want of enlightenment. A man spending his strength on the Gentile press, or conducting a secular magazine, or fabricating books of fiction, or publishing common literature, of no lasting benefit or value, would not only be open to no criticism, but would be considered all the more reputable if he managed to grow rich by the process. Why should labour bestowed on higher subjects, and conferring higher benefits, be less free to accept its own results? Even if bro. Roberts kept those poor results to himself, there could be no ground for criticism: but in the presence of them all he called them to witness that his aim and practice had been, and, please God, would continue to be, to apply them to the general comfort and the service of the truth and all connected with it. He took the liberty of saying these things, after having been silent so long, because there seemed a tendency to misapprehension. He agreed with the bro. who preached the doctrine taught in 1 Cor. 9.: and he sympathised with those who feared a return to the craven hireling system. But so far as he was concerned, he wished them to understand that he would continue to be what he had been for 25 years, an unpaid and spending servant of the truth; and that at the same time, he had no scruples in accepting the business results of his own hard work—results, which he had not aimed at, but which had come to his hand in a line of things at least as estimable as those who in various other kinds of occupation, ministered to the wants of the natural man.
1884 The Christadelphian p471–472
At our Thursday night meeting, Aug. 28th, one of the brethren commenting on 1 Cor. 9., laid stress on Paul’s declaration that the Lord had appointed that they who preached the gospel should live of the gospel. He thought too little notice had been taken of this, and that in fact the teaching of the chapter had been misunderstood. He combatted the objections offered by some to the maintenance of workers in the truth, and mentioned the name of brother Roberts.
Bro. Roberts, who was present, having recently received a letter which showed there was an impression abroad that he was maintained by the brethren, now thought it was time to speak. He said it was good to have a right understanding, and that silence would tend the other way. That very day, a gentleman in the course of business had asked him if he did not make a considerable amount by lecturing. His answer was that for 25 years, he had lectured without charge, and should continue to do so to the end of his life. He did not deny that it was lawful for a faithful man to be maintained in the efficient service of the truth. He agreed with the brother that had spoken that it was a lawful thing for a preacher of the word to be supported in the work. But there were disadvantages connected with it which led Paul to decline the privilege. “We have not used this power,” he said, “but suffer all things lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ” (1 Cor. 9:12). This was the consideration that had influenced bro. Roberts. The truth was an unpopular thing, and had to fight an uphill battle. There were no gifts of the spirit or such indications of divine endorsement as would outweigh the prejudice of paid labourship, as in the apostolic day. It was needful to make people feel that the service rendered to the truth was the result of conviction. If a man was ostensibly living by it, it took away from the force of this feeling, and therefore hindered the gospel. Bro. Roberts had spoken and lectured regularly among the Birmingham brethren for 21 years past: how much had he received from them for all this labour? Mr. Dale received £800 or £1,000 a year; how much brother Roberts? Not a penny. Instead of receiving, he had spent much money among them, meeting on these boards on a footing of perfect equality with them all, so far as rank, emolument, or pretension was concerned.—But it might be said, what about the books? Well, he had acted on the same principle, for the same reason, with regard to the books. For many years he published at practically cost price, and in reality under: for the collateral burdens of the work were greater than revenues accruing. The printer, who found the capital, took the benefit: and of this brother Roberts made no complaint. But in the providence of God, during recent years, another printer had come along who, in effect, offered to share with brother Roberts the fruits of his own literary labours. With no increase of price, but rather in many cases, reduction, some of the benefit that went wholly into a printer’s pocket, had come into brother Roberts’ hands. Could any enlightened brother grumble at “the earth” thus “helping the woman?” Such grumbling must be the result of misunderstanding or want of enlightenment. A man spending his strength on the Gentile press, or conducting a secular magazine, or fabricating books of fiction, or publishing common literature, of no lasting benefit or value, would not only be open to no criticism, but would be considered all the more reputable if he managed to grow rich by the process. Why should labour bestowed on higher subjects, and conferring higher benefits, be less free to accept its own results? Even if bro. Roberts kept those poor results to himself, there could be no ground for criticism: but in the presence of them all he called them to witness that his aim and practice had been, and, please God, would continue to be, to apply them to the general comfort and the service of the truth and all connected with it. He took the liberty of saying these things, after having been silent so long, because there seemed a tendency to misapprehension. He agreed with the bro. who preached the doctrine taught in 1 Cor. 9.: and he sympathised with those who feared a return to the craven hireling system. But so far as he was concerned, he wished them to understand that he would continue to be what he had been for 25 years, an unpaid and spending servant of the truth; and that at the same time, he had no scruples in accepting the business results of his own hard work—results, which he had not aimed at, but which had come to his hand in a line of things at least as estimable as those who in various other kinds of occupation, ministered to the wants of the natural man.
1884 The Christadelphian p471–472