A new era in missions

Foreword

AVING been permitted to see the manuscript H of my friend, President Wark, I am happy

to have the privilege of writing a word of introduction to so admirable a book.

Dr. Wark has had experience which qualifies him in an unusual degree for such a discussion as is contained in this volume. He has lived and preached in a mission land, he has taught the history of religion in an American university, he has been a world-traveller and enjoyed opportunities for intelligent observation of Christian work in many countries. This product of his pen, therefore, while scholarly, is saved from being academic or abstruse. It is based not merely on a study of available literature but on first-hand contact with field realities.

No teacher of missions, no writer upon this high theme, in these days can avoid questions which are fundamental to the very continued existence and power of Christianity itself. The author of this book has not sought to avoid them. Implicit throughout, the problems of the universality and finality of the Christian religion are directly brought to the front in the later chapters. The whole matter of world missions depends upon one’s Christology. Who is Jesus Christ? is the query which one ultimately must face.

If Jesus Christ is He whom we have believed Him to be, foreign missions are imperative; if He is not, they are absurd. This critical point Dr. Wark does

6 FOREWORD not ignore. Every man has his own emphasis and his own way of putting things; and doubtless some will not be in complete sympathy with every phrase or turn of the author. But with his point of view, his method of approach, and his general conclusions, it is easy to find oneself in hearty agreement. His book is comprehensive, fair, modern, reverent, and strong especially in its treatment of missionary aims. It seems to me thoroughly worth while, and I trust it may be widely read and studied. Its influence should be enlightening, wholesome, and tonic. HERBERT WELCH.

Pitisburgh, Pa.

Contents

1. THE VALIDITY OF THE MISSIONARY IDEA IN RE-

1. The Missionary Idea in Other Than the Reli- REGUS OPMELE oy cals de herent alah cr eelolt ae 30 2. The “ Open Door ” Policy in Religion ....... 34 3. The Missionary and Non-Missionary Religions. 36 4. The Bearing of Missions on Vital Religion.... 39 5. Bearing of Missions on International Relations. 43 A TICURISEGED cl (aly an leh oi cate ob sate ARa OR EIST wee NN kg 45 Me OUISSIONARY MOTIVES '..... .'so's'g Salo aaibare biels eines 47 LEA LEOGUCTION |) 5 41'S iein) crate eon eatoimny nies tenants eT Hf tiie: Task Defined > a's Gaiutawey cs minions 47 2. The Explanation of Its Enemies......... 48 3. A Powerful Motive Neededi.. 6. os cess 48 4. Various Missionary Motives............. 49 MV RLBLODICAL OUPVOY 2 a Til. cane aed vine stelunecs 51 1. The Missionary Motive in St. Paul....... 51 2. The Missionary Motive in the Early Church 52 3. Missionary Motives in the Middle Ages... 54

4. The Missionary Motive in the Later Catho- MIC NGISSIOTS 5 Se Scie wee yoy aeialete ls. ste 57 5. Motives in Early Protestantism.......... 60 3. Some Motives Not Generally Operative...... 62

Introduction

E live in a revolutionary age. Startling changes have come in our time along social, political, and religious lines. The historian of the future will likely refer to the years following the World War as revolutionary years. Christianity has been compelled to reckon with the new spirit and the new ideals of these post-war years. The Church has everywhere found these difficult years. |

Men may properly ask whether, in the midst of all the changes, there is anything unchanging in the Church’s creed or its obligations? Is the Church also the victim of the revolution? Is it compelled to shift from one position to another because of changing conditions throughout the world?

In no part of its work has the Church been so sorely disconcerted as in its foreign mission program. That there is the greatest confusion about this program, no one can doubt. There is not merely a deadly indifference about missions, but a confessed disillusionment on the part of many pastors and church leaders. Many doubt whether there is a missionary obligation. Many are inclined to accept the views now industriously promoted by leaders of the Orient to the effect that the whole program is indefensible. On all sides we are told that the situation has changed; that it is not clear whether or not the Church should embark on such an undertaking; that under the criticism of the hour we cannot defend our movement; that it is altogether a question whether we should proceed any farther with the enterprise. Now such an attitude accords well with the selfish spirit of the day and gives a sense of relief from serious obligation. However, many who are in confusion on the issue are seriously striving for light and still feel the Church has a definite missionary ébligation.

One of the purposes of this volume is to show that the changing social and political conditions either at home, or in the mission lands, do not alter or vacate the deep responsibility of the Church to preach Christ to all men and to urge their acceptance of Him as the Lord of all life. Surely the changing conditions do not change or abate our obligations to make Him known to the whole world. Moreover, it is the purpose to define our aims and to discover the abiding motives of missionary activity. As will appear, these motives are spiritual and are not affected by external conditions at home or elsewhere throughout the world. If serious difficulties were an excuse for missionary indifference, then the Church would never have travelled far in its conquest of the world. Its history shows that missionary advance has been secured in most centuries at fearful cost and in the face of heavy odds. Admittedly, conditions are difficult today in most lands. In some cases, advance seems impossible. But the great missionaries have always faced such conditions and have been spurred on to greater activities and more profound consecration and prayer by the difficulties they faced. Surely the Church of today will not be cowardly, in the face of vast problems and what seems like insurmountable difficulties.

It must appear upon examination that the missionary idea is a fundamental idea in Christianity; that

Christianity is irrevocably a missionary religion; that at its heart there is the undying urge to make all men acquainted with Christ; and that whenever it loses that inward urge to evangelism, its life and power has gone. It may appear that other than the true inward and spiritual motive has constrained us in our age. Perhaps we have thought far too much of outward con- | ditions. Possibly our appeal has. mostly been a_humanitarian appeal. There is the greatest necessity that we get back of the external factors to the deep, abiding incentive which arises in the hearts of all those who have come into personal fellowship with God in Christ. There is need of careful thinking if the Church is to regain a sense of obligation in missions. There has been much shallow thinking and writing on the subject. We have employed journalists with a gift for publicity but who have known little of the question in hand to formulate our literature. We have had more faith in nimble pens than in clear understanding of the issues. We are now at the place where journalistic skill alone will not suffice. The thinkers and scholars of the Church must now show us the way out of our difficulty. The abiding factors in the missionary urge must be discovered and presented so that every intelligent Christian can understand them.

From EDINBURGH TO JERUSALEM

One of the best ways of discovering how great are the changes which have come over the missionary world in recent years is to compare the findings of the Edinburgh Conference of 1910 with the findings of the Jerusalem Conference in 1928. Turning back to discover what the vital issues were in the Edinburgh gathering, we can select the following items: The burning issue of that Conference was, “ What is the Christian message we are to preach? ” and secondly, “ What is the method of approach to the various religionists? ” or “How can the message be adapted to Hindus, Buddhists, etc.? ” Further, this Conference was dimly conscious that the Gospel cattied was a Western form of Christianity, and it was beginning to doubt whether such a Gospel could be transplanted. However, the question of Western creeds, ecclesiasticism, and civilization was hardly acute in their minds. The problems centreing around these issues were only on the horizon. ‘That Conference saw the need of a vast army of missionaries. How to secure and train these missionaries occupied their thought. The question of money was paramount, for the program they envisaged called for a very large pocketbook. In only a remote fashion did that Conference visualize the intense racial prejudice, the rising tide of nationalism, the spread of Western industrialism, the issue of war or peace, or the issue of Imperialism by Western powers, which confront us today.

The Jerusalem Conference shows how clearly missionary advance is tied up with the vital questions of our age. The reports read and discussed at that Conference had to do with the growing industrialism of the Orient, the growing race tension in many lands, and the demand of the Orient for racial equality, the question of war and peace; what stand the missionary force of the world should take on the issue of national protection by soldiers and gunboats; the whole issue of Western economic exploitation of the weaker races of the world; the whole diplomatic procedure and policy of Western nations; the recognition of the nationalistic spirit in most of the lands where missionaries work and how far missionaries should accord with these national aspirations. All of these issues were ‘squarely faced at Jerusalem. They were scarcely before the minds of those who gathered in Edinburgh in 1910.

One is compelled to wonder whether the Jerusalem Conference should be called a missionary conference. In reading the report, one would hardly know whether it was | a “group “of people primarily interested in missions or a group of social reformers. They were intensely conscious of the evils which afflict the world. One does not find evidence of the intense missionary passion which prevailed at Edinburgh. Nor does one gather that this group possessed the confidence of the Conference of 1910. The findings and reports of the Jerusalem meeting will not meet with an enthusiastic reception in the churches. No little confusion will result from this attempt to relate missions to all our world problems. It is, however, this attempt to relate the enterprise to the whole world problem which gives the report uniqueness and importance.

THe New Forces WuichH MAKE NEw MEtTHODS AND PROGRAMMES IMPERATIVE

The report will be a disappointment as a succinct statement of our motives, aims, and policies in missions. But it is ample evidence of the vast changes which have overtaken the missionary world. The great question it raises is that raised by our recent Conferences—Can the missionary movement broaden out and take account of our whole world situation, the moral, political, economic, and diplomatic problems, and maintain itself as a missionary enterprise in any special sense?

It is not contended here that changed conditions in the world have nothing to do with missions. We have so far merely asserted that a changing world does not abrogate the missionary obligation of the Church. We have insisted that there are abiding factors in the missionary urge. No matter what happens in the politics of the world, the economic life of the world, or the social life of the world, the urge to evangelism abides. This is enduring and constant in the hearts of all who “commune with God through Jesus Christ. However, our methods, our programmes, and our policies will be vitally affected by the changed conditions under which missionaries work. It is, therefore, of signal importance that we try to understand the changes that have come, and to foresee, if possible, those yet to come.

Within the last quarter of a century we have witnessed a vast reversal of opinion and attitude among the peoples of the Orient as well as among the peoples of the Occident. The Orient has reversed itself with respect to the Occident, and the Occident has reversed itself with respect to the Orient.

The first and most sweeping change in the mind of the Orient is its complete reversal as to the values of Western civilization. There are missionaries still alive today who can recall the curious interest of the Oriental peoples in Western civilization. The opinion then prevailed that things Western were mostly all superior to things Eastern. There was a live interest in all Western inventions, discoveries, social institutions, forms of government, and literary products. The opinion prevailed that things Eastern were not only belated, but inferior. In those days missionaries found it convenient not only to assert the superiority of Western Civilization as a whole, but to claim that the superiority was due to Christianity. In this position they were not far from the truth, though perhaps this argurent was overworked. But today such an argument by a missionary is useless. The Oriental peoples will no longer hear of the superiority of Western civilization. The World War accounts for this conversion in part, but only in part. The War was a despicable sight, indeed. Most of the nominally Christian nations were engaged in it. Before it ended, nearly all of the non-Christian nations were engage in it. Orientals might blame the Western States for beginning the War, but they soon joined in it for reasons similar to the Western States. The Oriental races did not have conviction enough to stay out of it. Wherever any advantage was offered, they entered the lists also. However, the leaders of the Orient felt then that the War was a revelation as to the worthlessness of Western civilization. A still smaller number believed that it also revealed the failure of Christianity. Perhaps very few insist on the latter point now. The fact to be noted is that Westerners are everywhere put on the defensive today. Orientals certainly do not accept Western civilization as superior to Eastern civilization, and this makes the way of the missionary much more difficult than it once was. It is not necessary for me, at this point, to answer this contention, though I feel that in measure it can be answered. The present antipathy for Western civilization is quite largely prejudice. It is really better than many assert it to be. A reaction from this extreme point of view is nearly due. When the Orientals are further removed from the War, and when they take a broader and a less antagonistic attitude, they will also agree that Western civilization has many values.

It was inevitable that sooner or later the Orient ad would discover the iniquities of Western life and exploit them. This would have happened without the World War. We are much better informed about each other than we were a few years ago. The life of each nation is an open book. The War only focussed the attention of the world more suddenly on the weaknesses in Western civilization. They would have been discovered without the War.

There can be no doubt that this discovery of the cancerous spots in our social and political life has made a vast difference with the Christian movement. We are compelled to acknowledge these cancerous spots and be humbled by them. However, when seen in the right perspective, this does not abate our obligation to carry on mission work in other lands. It does make that work more difficult. As Christians we are not set to the task of defending Western civilization.

“ We are committed to the task of making Christ known to men in every land, regardless of the state of civilization. It follows, of course, that we must do all we can to transform our Western chviliznaae But it must not be forgotten that the evils which afflict our American life are common to other nations, Christian and non- Christian alike, and can only find complete abatement in America, when abatement comes elsewhere. Most of the evils that afflict society are international in scope and must be dealt with internationally. War, industrialism, imperialism, race-prejudice, and supernationalism, are all issues calling for international treatment.

Likewise there has been a vast reversal across the * Orient in respect to the racial superiority of the Westerners. In the early days of missions, the white man was regarded as a kind of superior individual. The peoples of the Orient seemed to accept this as a fact, though one wonders what their deeper inward tyowetie were even in those early days. The achievements of Western races seemed greater than the Eastern races. There was as yet little disposition to question this conclusion. So long as the missionary was regarded as belonging to a superior race, as well as a superior civilization, his way was easy. But gradually there came an awakening of a profound sort. The deep springs of racial feeling were unloosed. For the past twenty-five years there has been an insistent demand for racial equality. There was much in the diplomacy of Western nations to remind the Orientals of their inferiority. Immigration laws mostly rested on the assumption of inferiority and non-assimilation with white races. Perhaps the majority of Nordics still believe this heresy. As a result, race tension has developed all over the world, even among races which have very little to divide them. One of the vital questions of the age is that of relieving racial tension. The strain is so great in some quarters that another world war might be precipitated.

In theory, all Christians believe in the equality of the races before God. But our actions often belie our creed. Even missionaries have often sinned at this point. This would be no place to discuss the issue of the equality of races, or the questions related to the problems such as inter-racial marriages, the assimila- _ tion or non-assimilation of Oriental races with white races, or what a just immigration law would be. It is very certain this is a world issue of prodigious proportions. The missionary is now everywhere working with people with pronounced race consciousness, and which no longer accept the doctrine of white superiority. The meaning of this to the missionary is evident. The bearing of this issue on missionary policy is also evident.

_ Another factor of supreme importance. is the presi” ence of an intense national consciousness on the part of most peoples among whom we work. It will be apparent that the factors we have discussed, namely, white superiority and the superiority of Western civilization, are closely linked up with this factor of nationalism. The whole phenomenon of nationalism cannot be discussed here. It is our purpose here to point out the fact that the rise of nationalism in nearly all mission lands has greatly altered the task of missionaries. Nationalism is tied up with similarity of race, unity in culture, oneness of language and religious history. Different factors appear and control in different countries. The essence of nationalism is the sense of nationhood, and the intense emotional reaction— ‘“‘ This is my native land, and these are my people.” Whatever may be the component parts of the nationalistic spirit, the phenomenon itself is of supreme importance.

The situation in India or China today cannot be understood without a proper evaluation of this nationalistic emotion. Any attempt to disregard this spirit will be suicidal. The best policy is to recognize the presence of this spirit and to act accordingly. At heart we may dislike the intense patriotism of these peoples. It might be easy to show that it leads to foolish and destructive policies. But we must never lose $ight of the fact that this emotion of patriotism is very real and very powerful in these peoples. We are not without something of the same feeling toward our own country, and we cannot therefore deny the feeling to other peoples.

Nationalism is one of the necessary steps on the road to international interest and outlook. It is to be hoped that the fervid nationalism of European and American States is soon to be softened and tempered, and is to give place to a reasonable nationalism on the one hand and a true international consciousness on the other. We may entertain this hope for the Orient as well. It will be some years before this spirit reaches its peak in some of these lands and still more years before it will pass. In the meantime, it will greatly alter our ap- _ proach to these people in the preaching of Jesus Christ.

In order to succeed among strongly nationalistic peo- ; _ ples, we need to be divested of our own strong national © feelings, and only as we are able to rise above nationalism into a true international interest and outlook will we be able to serve these peoples.

Finally we have to note the rise of a self-conscious church i in, the mission fields, and to point out that this »

is one of the disturbing Tattors in the changed situation. It will immediately be apparent that this factor is tied up with those we have discussed, but especially to the nationalistic factor just mentioned. Many missionaries are worried over the churches which have grown up through their efforts, and which they have guided across many years. ‘These churches are their children. They feel toward them as a parent feels toward a child. Today the child is self-willed, wants freedom and independence, and does not willingly listen to the advice of the parent. The churches have come to maturity; they contain many potential and would-be leaders. There is no little ambition for place and honour among the leaders. They refuse to be led by a foreigner. They are of age. Today many of them are not only breaking away from the missionaries out of whose labours they have grown, but are breaking away from the denominations in whose laps they have been nurtured. They seek to find fellowship with other nationals, though of a different denomination. An ecclesiastical name or fold is not as much to them as the national spirit which burns in their bones. In many cases they are joining national church organizations. The spirit of the nation possesses them, and they reveal it in the management of their churches. Many of the pastors are said to preach patriotism more ardently than they preach the Gospel of Christ.

To much of this, legitimate objection might be taken, but it will be of little use. Nor will we be consistent in refusing them freedom of action. We will remind ourselves that we, too, are nationally minded. Patriotism is a considerable factor in our religion. In the early days of the Republic various denominations severed their connections with mother churches in Europe and established their own American denominations. They demanded complete freedom religiously as well as politically. Can we severely censure Christian Methodists, Baptists, or Presbyterians who take the same course in China, Japan, or India?

Whether their course is the best possible course is hardly an essential issue. For us here in America the main thing is to recognize and understand the mind of these Christian brethren in the Orient. We dare not try to override their ambition for freedom, nor to try to assume that their ambition is not real. We must recognize the fact we are confronted with and form our policies in view of it. The makers of missionary strategy for tomorrow will not overlook any of these factors. They are very real, and to disregard them will be to fail in all our efforts. However, these untoward factors, if such they be, are not good reasons for deserting the missionary enterprise. Much less do they abate our obligation to carry Jesus Christ into their midst.

There has been a very insistent demand that missionaries take a stand on these issues and on certain vital questions closely related. The issue of imperialism, with the accompanying exploitation of weaker races; the use of soldiers and gunboats to protect missionaries and their properties; the part played by members of the Christian States in the growing industrialism of the Orient; the attitude of the Christian States in reference to immigration; the question of unjust treaties as in China, and whether such treaties shall now be rewritten—these constitute vital questions in the Orient, and every missionary is forced to take a position on them.

This demand has largely been met by the Jerusalem Conference, which took a stand and made a pronouncement on all these questions. It remains to be seen whether this statement will clear the air or not. There will likely be much doubt left as to whether the Christian churches back of the small group in Jerusalem really mean to stand squarely on these and other questions.

One thing is certain, and that is that missionary work among the intelligentsia of the Orient will be greatly handicapped until the Christian people of the West take up a Christian ay on these issues.

It is certainly interesting to nites that while these momentous social and psychological changes are taking place in the Orient, our own attitude toward the Orient and Oriental achievements has undergone radical change also. The West has had to reverse itself

/ very radically on a number of issues. ‘First of all as to the capacities and character of Oriental races. The earliest white men to visit the Orient were inclined to rate these races very low indeed. We now know that such races as the Hindus, the Chinese, and the Japanese are as capable in general as white races. We know that each of these races has produced many great men. Of their present ability to rule themselves and to compete in commerce, in art, and literature, there is little room for doubt. But it is in relation to their cultural achievements especially that we of the West have been forced to change our minds. One hundred years ago most white men agreed with Lord Macaulay in believing that the cultural inheritance of Oriental peoples was practically worthless. In his celebrated report to his Government in Calcutta, in 1835, on an educational program for India, he said: “‘ I have never found one among them (the Oriental scholars) who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia.” (See Paton’s Life of Duff, p. 97.) In justice, it ought to be said that he was answering a few Western scholars who had found value in the literature of the East, and who were opposed to his recommendation. But, generally speaking, his statement expressed the conviction which was common among white men in the East. This disparaging estimate of Eastern culture has been held by most white people in the East down until recent years.

Even missionaries held it rather generally. There was little disposition to appreciate properly the literature, the art, the sculpture, the architecture, or the religions of the East. In late years all this is changing. Many Western people are now inclined to go over to the other extreme and offer an exaggerated estimate of their culture. Someone qualified for the task could render a fine piece of service by giving us a comparative study in cultural values. The point we here desire to make is that, in a true sense, we have reversed ourselves as to cultural values among Oriental peoples. The one point at which this reversal is extremely important is in the field of religions. Until rather recently most missionaries were inclined to disparage the ancient religious systems of the. East. For long years the majority held that these systems were inven- _ tions of the devil or the product of uninspired men. At best they were an imitation of the truth in Christianity and were calculated to deceive their devotees. It is difficult for those of us who have been in contact with these systems as they are today, and who have some knowledge of their sacred books, to understand how intelligent men could have been so prejudiced and mistaken. In recent years many have come in contact with these literatures through translations or through the original tongues, and their contents are becoming known. What we now know is that many of the religious ideas we are accustomed to are to be found in books were produced not by the inspiration of devils, but by the inspiration of God’s Holy Spirit, which has brooded over these nations as well as over the Hebrews and Christians. We now begin to see that God has nowhere left Himself without a witness. So we are reconciled to finding much valuable truth in these reliigious books of the Orient.

There is frank recognition of the value of these these sacred books. We begin to realize that these , j faiths to those who hold them. The Jerusalem Conference has the following statement which illustrates the attitude of Western leaders toward the ancient religions of the East: “‘ Thus, merely to give illustration, and making no attempt to estimate the spiritual value of other religions to their adherents, we recognize as part of the one truth, that sense of the majesty of God and the consequent reverence in worship which are conspicuous in Islam; the deep sympathy for the world’s sorrow and unselfish search for the way of escape which are at the heart of Buddhism; the desire for contact with Ultimate Reality conceived as spiritual, which is prominent in Hinduism; the belief in a moral order of the Universe and consequent insistence on moral conduct, which are inculcated in Confucianism; the disinterested pursuit of truth and of human welfare which are often found in those who stand for secular civilization, but do not accept Christ as their Lord and Saviour.” (See Message and Recommendations, p. 14.)