The fact of having a mission does not release a man from social obligations.
Direct communications with Jehovah, appointment to a great and glorious mission, with the power of working miracles, might have rendered many a man neglectful of ordinary obligations, might have seemed to place him above the necessity of asking anyone's permission to do as he pleased. But Moses read his duty differently. He had been received among the Midianites with great kindness, had been given a home and a wife, and probably enrolled formally as an adopted member of the tribe or nation. Though Reuel, the head of the tribe at the time of his coming, had ceased to hold that position, having probably died, the tribe had a new head, to whom he was bound, if not by all the obligations which had attached him to Reuel, yet by several very definite and tangible bonds. Jethro was his near relative and his tribal chief; he had perhaps sworn allegiance to him; he had certainly received from him protection, employment, sustenance (Exodus 3:1). To have quitted his service without permission, to have left his flock in the Sinaitic valleys, and proceeded straight to Egypt would have been easy, but would have been unkind, ungrateful, and contrary to the accepted standard of tribal morality at the time. Moses therefore went back to Midian from Sinai before proceeding to Egypt-made, that is, a considerable journey in the opposite direction to that which he was about to take—in order to obtain Jethro's consent to his going, thus acting the part of a faithful servant and a good subject. It would be well if all who believe themselves to have Divine missions, and to be highly gifted, would follow Moses' example, and not make their mission and high gifts an excuse for neglect of ordinary duties and obligations. Moses' example, and the words of One higher than Moses, should teach them that it becomes all men to "fulfil all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15). If those with high missions neglect even small social duties, they "give an occasion to the adversary to blaspheme."
Reticence sometimes a duty. We are not bound in all cases to tell even those in authority over us the reasons, much less all the reasons, which actuate us. Moses wanted Jethro's permission to quit his adopted tribe, and return to his native country and his people. He gave a reason which was not untrue, but which was far from being his sole, or even his main, reason. If he had said more, if he had revealed his mission, he would probably have raised a storm of opposition to his departure. He would have been called a fanatic, a visionary, a madman; and everything would have been said that was possible to deter him from carrying out his projects. If Moses felt, as he may have felt, that he was too weak to encounter such a storm of opposition, he was wise to be silent and so not arouse it.
The reasonable wishes of a subordinate should be granted cheerfully. Jethro's answer, "Go in peace," may well be taken as a pattern by those in authority. It is kindly, gracious, and ungrudging. The chieftain of a tribe might naturally have demurred to the withdrawal of a family of subjects, the master to the loss of a valuable servant, the head of a household to parting with near kinsfolk. But Jethro, deeming Moses' plea a sufficient one, is careful not to mar the grace of his concession by a single word of objection, reproach, or querulousness. Nor is "Go in peace" even a bare consent, but a consent embodying a blessing. It is equivalent to "Go, and the Lord go with thee!" Note also the absence of inquisitiveness. Jethro does not pester Moses with questions—does not ask, "Is the reason thou hast assigned thy true reason," or "thy sole reason?" or, "When wilt thou return?" or, "Why take thy wife and children?" or, "How wilt thou live in Egypt?" or, "Art thou not afraid to return thither?" He will not pain his near connection by doubt or distrust, or even undue curiosity. He will not travel beyond the record. His consent has been asked. He gives it freely, fully cheerfully.