The Mülheim Declaration (1909)

Since a declaration against the so-called Pentecostal movement has been sent to us by the brothers gathered on Sept. 15 in Berlin, we feel compelled to clarify our position on it.

Above all, it is our need to emphasize that we know ourselves to be completely one with the dear brothers in love for Jesus, our common Head. We want to be diligent to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. Therefore the thought of working in any way toward a split or separation of the congregation of God is far from us. On the contrary, it is a deep need of ours to remain in brotherly fellowship with the whole people of God.

Regarding the declaration itself, we remark the following:

1.
We thank the Lord for the present movement of the Spirit. We regard it as the beginning of the divine answer to years of faith-filled prayers for a worldwide revival. We therefore recognize in it a gift from above, and not from below.

What is the basic characteristic and the driving force in this movement? It is love for Jesus and the desire that he come fully and completely into his rightful place in, on, and through us. We want nothing other than that he be glorified. The purpose of this movement is that the blood of Jesus, through complete redemption, prove its power, and that the Holy Spirit gain room and rule in order to prepare us for the coming of the Lord.

In detail, we would like to emphasize that of course in this movement too, not only the divine but also the psychological, or rather the human, and under certain circumstances even the demonic, can assert itself. This is a phenomenon we find in every revival.

As for the "physical manifestations of power" mentioned in that declaration, we are far from labeling them all, without distinction, as divine workings; but for that very reason they need not be of demonic origin either. Much depends on how the vessel conducts itself in the face of the workings of the Holy Spirit. Man is not a machine. Depending on his inner disposition, he can resist the Holy Spirit, or also try to help things along in a fleshly way, and thus an evil mixture of the divine and the human arises, which has often given offense — and rightly so.

On the other hand, we do not want to forget that Scripture itself also knows of striking physical phenomena. When the 120 in Jerusalem were filled with the Holy Spirit, striking phenomena could no doubt be observed in them, compare verse 33, "what you see and hear." Mere speaking in foreign languages could not have given the impression of drunkenness. Likewise Paul also says in 1 Corinthians 14:23 that speaking in tongues could make a repellent impression on the uninitiated. In none of this does Scripture in any way see the working of a foreign spirit.

Particular objection has been raised against the so-called false prophecies noted here and there. This is indeed a point on which, given our general inexperience in this area, we will still have much to learn. But Scripture will not leave us without counsel and clarification here either.

In this respect, the experiences of the apostle Paul on his last journey to Jerusalem are very instructive, compare Acts 20:21 to 21:14. He feels bound in the Spirit to go up to Jerusalem, even though the Holy Spirit testifies to him in every city that chains and afflictions await him there. In Tyre, however, some disciples tell him through the Spirit that he should not go up to Jerusalem (ch. 21:4), and in Caesarea Agabus prophesies to him that he will be bound in Jerusalem and handed over into the hands of the Gentiles (v. 10-11). What would Paul have had to do, given these apparently contradictory prophecies, if he had not reckoned with the possibility that prophets too can err? He would have had to label one or the other as false prophets and treat them accordingly. But we do not read that Paul considers the possibility that some lying spirit might have taken possession of them; rather he acts according to the instruction he gives us in Romans 12:7, 1 Thessalonians 5:20-21, and 1 Corinthians 14:29: he does not despise what the brothers tell him in good faith, but he tests their prophecies in order to discern what, for him, is the will of God.

A characteristic example that prophets can err, indeed can do bad things, we have in 1 Kings 13, where the unnamed old prophet first lied (v. 18) and yet then received a genuine, divine prophecy (v. 20ff.).

We further recall Nathan, 2 Samuel 7. At first, when David revealed to him his plan to build the Lord a house, he fully agreed with him, but afterward, in the night, he received a word from the Lord that said exactly the opposite.

From such occurrences we see that we must carefully distinguish between what God gives to a prophet again and again through his Spirit, and what the prophet himself may produce out of his own thoughts and possibly add to it. This is also pointed out to us by what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:32. According to this word, who is the one prophesying? Evidently the spirit of the prophet. God, then, does not cause prophecy in such a way that he turns a prophet into a mere machine, but he makes use of the prophet's spirit. What is meant by this "spirit of the prophet" becomes clear from verse 14. There Paul distinguishes, according to Luther's translation, between the mind and the spirit of a person. By "mind" he understands the conscious, and by "spirit" the unconscious spiritual life of the person. It is into this unconscious spiritual life (also called, in modern terms, the "subconscious") that God deposits the gift of speaking in tongues or of prophecy. These gifts are divine, entrusted treasures. When used correctly, they should never be applied otherwise than when the Holy Spirit from above gives direction and mandate for it.

Now, however, there exists a natural connection, through our personality, between our conscious and unconscious spiritual life. What we think or want in our conscious spiritual life is registered, without our noticing it, in the unconscious spiritual life. That is why the prophet himself can exert an influence on his own "spirit." This is exactly what Paul means when he says that the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

If we hold fast to this guideline, the following results from it: if the Holy Spirit from above can take hold of and fully govern the prophet, then a divine message is entrusted to him, which is deposited in his unconscious spiritual life and is then expressed by him in prophetic speech. Everything therefore depends on whether a person equipped with the gift of prophecy is dependent solely on the Spirit of God or not. This explains the incident mentioned earlier from Acts 21:4, when those brothers told Paul through the Spirit that he should not go up to Jerusalem. Evidently they had perceived something divinely correct, namely, that affliction and chains awaited him; but because they could not reconcile themselves to the thought that Paul was to be taken captive, they did not render their message in a purely divine way, but the wish, cherished in their conscious spiritual life, to keep the apostle became the father of the thought that Paul should not go to Jerusalem. In this way many distressing occurrences can be explained that have happened again and again in the area of incorrect prophecies. We are far from recognizing every prophecy uttered by someone baptized in the Spirit as divine from the outset; rather, we test them according to the biblical guidelines just discussed. From this it also follows that we cannot assign such weight to prophecies that we would make an entire work for the kingdom of God, as some seem to assume, dependent on such messages. On the contrary, wherever we found such a thing, we would call it an aberration. Furthermore, it should be considered that the content of prophecies as a rule contains edification, comfort, and exhortation for the congregation (1 Corinthians 14:3).

Summarizing this result, we see that the danger of human influence comes first, and demonic influence only comes second. On the basis of Scripture, then, we do not have the unqualified right to suspect a demon wherever a prophecy was given that turns out in some way to be mistaken. That possession may have shown itself now and then, we do not at all wish to deny. But where this has occurred, there was probably in every case a particular causal connection, and where this was removed, deliverance has always followed.
In any case, from our experience we may testify with humble thanks to God that in this Pentecostal movement we find ourselves on the line drawn in Mark 16:17ff.: "And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons, they will speak in new tongues, they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover."

2.
Regarding the false teaching about the "pure heart" that has been laid to our charge, we point out that in the declaration Pastor Paul's teaching on that point is incorrectly presented. It is said there that the believer does indeed "receive, in Christ, a spotlessly cleansed heart," but that it is Pastor Paul's false teaching "that the heart in itself can attain a state of sinlessness." In reality, however, Pastor Paul, as anyone who knows him well is well aware, has again and again strongly emphasized in word and writing that one is cleansed from sin only in Christ and not in oneself, and has explicitly guarded against the term "sinlessness" attributed to him, precisely because he wanted to reject the notion that anyone could be free from sin apart from Christ, or that one would no longer be capable of falling into sin.

In the declaration, reference was made to unsuccessful negotiations with Pastor Paul. However, in those very negotiations he made an effort to clearly emphasize that even one sanctified in Christ can again and again be carried away by sin if he does not remain in Christ. We have security only until the end under the constant covering of the blood. The brothers have in fact made themselves guilty of an error in their presentation, for whose correction we would be sincerely grateful to them. For Pastor Paul has taught nothing other than what the declaration itself says, that "the believer has, in Christ, a spotlessly cleansed heart."

Equally mistaken is the view on married life attributed to Pastor Paul, as can be immediately demonstrated from his relevant statements printed in Heiligung. He has only pointed out that in married life too one must not live according to the flesh, but must stand under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Nor are we aware that the cited false view is taught anywhere in our circles; we could not approve of it either, if it occurred anywhere.

3.
For the sake of truth we must further emphasize that many things laid to the charge of the Pentecostal movement do not, upon unbiased, careful examination, prove to be "reliable material" at all, but rest on false rumors or misunderstandings or one-sided, often also false, presentations. In particular, gross errors have arisen because people tried to test the spirits of the brothers and sisters equipped with gifts in a completely wrong way. As with spiritist mediums, people suspected and addressed a "spirit" in them, whereas what is involved here is a spiritual gift awakened by the Holy Spirit in the depths of their spiritual life. It is thus only too understandable that the brothers and sisters being tested fell from the simplicity of faith and became confused. The confusion caused by such an unbiblical procedure must not be attributed to the Pentecostal movement, but to human ignorance.

We hereby solemnly and publicly declare our confession that the spirit which animates us in speaking in tongues, prophesying, and the other spiritual gifts confesses, according to 1 John 4:2 and 1 Corinthians 12:3, that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, and that he is the Lord whom we serve with our whole heart and to whose honor alone we apply the gifts he has given us. It is this awareness that gives us, in the serious situation into which the declaration of our brothers has brought us, joyful confidence and the strength to bring him, our glorified Head, every sacrifice on the path on which we know ourselves led by him.

 

From: Giese, Ernst: Und flicken die Netze
Documents on the Revival History of the 20th Century
2nd ed. Metzingen: Ernst Franz, 1987, pp. 129-133