CHAPTER VI.

The difficulty of providing tables for the survey of educational work is as great as that of finding tables for medical work, and for the same reasons. There is the same separateness, the same diversity of immediate aim, the same alteration of character, the same uncertainty of policy.

Educational missions have been designed to convert the young whilst they were yet pliable, to influence the growing generation in order to prepare for a great advance of Christianity later, to Christianise society, to educate young Christians in a Christian atmosphere, to prepare leaders for the Christian Church, to elevate an ignorant and illiterate Christian Church. All these various objects have been set before us as the reasons for the establishment of schools, both separately, each in different circumstances, and unitedly, all at the same time, as though one school could fulfil all these different purposes without any confusion. At one and the same moment Christian children were to be educated in a Christian atmosphere, and non-Christian children in large numbers were admitted, and non-Christian teachers employed. At the same time non-Christian children were to be converted and not converted, but filled with Christian ideas.

All these aims and objects are confusedly set forth, each as its turn comes round, as the immediate aim of our educational missions; but the attempt to draw tables for a survey which shall embrace impartially all these objects is enough to satisfy the inquirer that they are not easily combined into one. We propose, therefore, in this bewildering maze of mixed purposes and ideas, to follow the line which seemed possible in the case of medical missions—to accept the idea that there is an educational need of the people which it is the business of the educational mission to meet so far as it can; and then to add a further inquiry concerning the direct evangelistic influence of the educational mission, and its relation to the evangelistic and medical work.

But in educational mission survey there is an added difficulty which arises from the fact that scholastic education is divided into many grades, and this division has no common standard in different countries, sometimes not even in the same country. We, then, who are seeking light not from one country only but from all, are compelled to simplify these grade distinctions as much as possible, and to accept the local definitions. This does not really invalidate comparisons between different areas so seriously as we might at the first glance be tempted to expect. There is in every country a grade which is primary; there is a secondary, or middle, or high school; there is a normal, or college, or arts course. The primary in one country may run into higher primary and be at its best far in advance of the primary in another country; and so far the two are incomparable; but, nevertheless, this primary grade is the lowest grade in each country, and if the inquiry is, what number of pupils are taught in this local first grade, then the comparison is admissible. Similarly of the second grade and the third. If the inquiry is understood to imply no more than it states, and no conclusion is drawn as to the relative stage or merits of the education in the two countries in relation to one another, it may justly be argued that the primary pupils in one country stand in relation to the illiterate and more highly educated pupils in their own country in a similar position to that in which the primary pupils in another country stand to the illiterate and more highly educated pupils in their own country; though the primary pupils in the one may be far more advanced than the primary pupils in the other. On this basis a possible comparison can be made.

But since colleges and normal schools generally serve a larger area than the station district, these are reserved for provincial survey, and the present tables deal with nothing above the secondary, or middle, or high school. In the station district area the matter of chief importance is the extent to which the need of the district for primary and secondary education is met, and the proportion in which the needs of the many and the few are met.

Of course where the surveyor has before him more elaborate tables prepared for some board, he can serve all purposes best by keeping those tables carefully and sending copies of them to those who may be interested. Our hasty division into primary and higher than primary is only designed to save trouble in those districts where no elaborate distinctions and definitions have been made. If it is desirable for purposes of comparison to reduce tables from different parts of the world to a common basis, so long as the tables supplied from any part do not containlessthan the tables here suggested, the comparison can easily be made, for what it is worth.

We begin then with the educational work done in the station district as designed to meet a distinct educational need. The first tables, therefore, correspond to the first evangelistic and medical tables and set forth the quantitative extent of the educational work in relation to the area and to the population.

_______________________________________________________________| | | Number of || | Number of | Secondary or | Remarks andDistrict.| Area.| Primary Schools.| Middle or | Conclusions.| | | High Schools.|_________|______|_________________|______________|_____________| | | || | | |_________|______|_________________|______________|_____________————-|———|————————-|———————|———————

_________________________________________________________________| | | Propor-| | Propor-|| | Number | tion | Number | tion || Popula-| of | to | of | to | Re-District.| tion. | Primary | Popula-| Higher | Popula-|marks.| | Teachers.| tion. | Teachers.| tion. |_________|________|__________|________|__________|________|______| | | | | |_________|________|__________|________|__________|________|_______

Here it will be noted that whereas in the area it is the number of schools which is considered, in relation to population it is the number of teachers, because in the area the point of importance is the accessibility of the schools; whilst in relation to the population it is the number of teachers which reveals to what extent the population is served.

Then similar reasons to those which led us to take into account the non-missionary medical assistance in the area force us to consider the non-missionary education. If we are to consider scholastic education as a need of the people at all, we must acknowledge that the presence of Government or private schools makes a great difference to the situation, and if an appeal for medical missions ought to be affected by the presence or absence of non-missionary medical assistance, equally ought an appeal for educational missions in any area to be affected by the presence or absence of non-missionary educational facilities.

It may be true that if the aim of educational missions were defined as the provision of educational facilities under Christian influence, the presence of non-Christian educational facilities, in proportion to their magnitude, might be a challenge to Christians to increase theirs. On this basis the mission would deliberately compete with Government schools where Government schools were strongest. But if the mission is designed to supply a liberal education for Christians, the presence of Government schools does not necessarily induce competition. We might well ponder the question put by a Christian convert in India, when discussing the use of educational missions by the missionary societies: "Hindus," he said, "are not deterred from sending their children to Christian schools by the fear that they will cease to be Hindus, and do the societies think so little of our religion that they are afraid that our children would cease to be Christians if they attended a Government school?" Whatever answer we give to that question, in either case the existence of non-Christian schools is a serious and important factor in the situation.

We therefore inquire into the non-missionary educational work done in the area. We are well aware that in many cases the surveyor will find it difficult to supply the required information, and may be driven to make an estimate; but the information ought to be provided for any true and just administration of educational mission funds, and estimates must be here regarded as at the best a poor substitute, though under existing circumstances perhaps a necessary one.

_____________________________________________________________________| | || | |Propor- | Higher | | Propor- ||Primary| |tion of | or |Teach-| tion of |Re-|Schools|Teachers|Teachers| Second-| ers. | Teachers|marks.| | |to Popu-| ary | | to Popu-|| | |lation. |Schools.| | lation. |——————————————————————————————————-Missionary| — | — | — | — | — | — | ———————————————————————————————————-Non- | | | | | | |Missionary| — | — | — | — | — | — | ———————————————————————————————————-

Then we need to consider the extent to which the educational efforts of the mission are used to meet the needs of the better educated and of the more ignorant. This will be revealed by the average attendance in the different classes of schools.

Then we must inquire into the proportion in which the education given in the schools is given to boys and to girls. This is peculiarly important in considering the influence of school education upon the rising generation of Christians, since well-taught girls make intelligent and helpful wives and mothers, and this tends enormously to the advancement of the Christian community. And the same truth applies to the non-Christian population.

Here we divided Christians from non-Christians, and thus the table serves a double purpose. It tells us the division of the scholars by sex and also by faith. It throws light upon the condition of the Christian community and upon the extent to which mission school education is given to Christians and non-Christians.

One other point must be considered in connection with mission schools because it throws great light upon the character of the schools and their purpose. It is the extent to which the educational mission receives Government support. If there is any doubt as to the dominant aim and purpose of a school, the fact that it receives Government aid reveals at once that in the eyes of the Government it stands for the general enlightenment of the population rather than for any direct evangelisation. The dominant aim of the Government is general enlightenment, and the Government gives no grant without some sort of control. If then a school receives a Government grant the dominant idea of general enlightenment will certainly exercise great influence over its direction. Consequently, if we know what proportion of the schools in any mission receive a Government grant, we have at least some guidance as to the extent to which the mission accepts the aim of general enlightenment. We have also some assurance that the schools reach the Government standard of efficiency in the teaching of secular subjects.

Hitherto we have dealt only with schools in which the pupils are probably for the most part children; but in some countries the mission makes a great effort to enlighten the illiterate adults, especially the illiterate adult Christians, and thus, as in China, missionaries propagate simplified systems of writing the language, or in other countries have reduced to writing, languages which possessed no script.

We have already set out the reason why this appeals especially to Protestant missionaries. The reading of the Bible is a keystone in their evangelistic system, and with them Christianity and reading go hand in hand. We must then make room in our survey for a movement so profound, so widespread, and so vitally important, and a movement of this character deserves and demands a separate table. It cannot be confounded with the establishment of ordinary primary schools. It is essential that we should inquire what education is given to the illiterate adults of the area; and we must inquire in what proportion this teaching is given to Christians and non-Christians, because this proportion is very significant. The teaching of reading to the illiterate is by some missionaries viewed as a means preparatory to the preaching of the gospel, a gift to be given as widely as possible, in the belief that the more who can read, the better will be the hearing given to the preachers of Christ; by others the teaching is given rather to illiterate inquirers and converts, and it is given to them as a definitely Christian gift for the edification of the individual and of the Church.

By the one this teaching would be classed with the general work of Christian educational missions for the whole community, the meeting of the general intellectual need of the district; by the other it would be classed as a part of the work done by the educational mission for the enlightenment of the Church, the meeting of a need of the Church. By the one it would be classed with the tables which deal with the relation of the educational to the evangelistic work; by the other with the tables which deal with the educational work viewed as meeting a special need. The table suggested is:—

————————————————————————————+———| Population. | | ————————————————————————————+———| Illiterate Population. | | ————————————————————————————+———| Number of Teachers of Illiterate Adults. | | ————————————————————————————+———| Number of Illiterate Adult Scholars. | ————————————————————————————+———| Christian. | | ————————————————————————————+———| Non-Christian | | ————————————————————————————+———| Proportion of Illiterate Population. | ————————————————————————————+———| Proportion of Teachers to Illiterate Population. | | ————————————————————————————+———| Remarks and Conclusions. | | ————————————————————————————+———|

This table leads us naturally to consider the educational work done in the station area from an evangelistic point of view. We must inquire then into the extent to which evangelistic missionaries assist in the schools, and educational missionaries assist in evangelistic work, and the evangelistic results so far as they can be traced of the work in schools.

We ask first the extent to which educationalists employ the services of evangelistic workers in their schools and institutions. As we pointed out in dealing with the relation between medical and evangelistic work, so here we would insist that this particular table is not by itself a good guide. There is a serious danger in an institution, whether medical or educational, of dividing the work in this way. We have already asserted our conviction that medical missionaries should be evangelistic, and educational missionaries evangelistic also. But when evangelistic workers distinctly so called are on the staff of hospitals or schools, there is a danger lest the medicals and the educationalists should consider themselves absolved from personal effort by the occasional presence of an evangelist. "Let him do the religious preaching, and let me do the secular teaching. Preaching is his job, teaching is mine." Thus a division is created which reacts seriously upon the work of both. The pupils learn to distinguish the one work from the other, as separate and distinct departments. They prefer the one, they are bored by the other. No man can serve two masters; and if the religious teaching is plainly in the hands of one teacher and the secular teaching plainly in the hands of the other, they will tend to think that they can hold to the one and despise the other. This we say is a danger, but it is not an unavoidable danger. Only we must not judge that an institution is doing good evangelistic work because evangelistic services are held in it. The table is as follows:—

—————————————————————————————————-Schools. | Number of Schools | Proportion of Schools | Remarks and| Regularly Visited | Visited by | Conclusions.| by Evangelists. | Evangelists. || | |—————————————————————————————————-| | |_________|___________________|_______________________|____________

Then there is a most important work which the educational evangelist does, or might do, outside the school. Perhaps we ought to explain this; for many supporters of missions are unfamiliar with the idea. They think of the work of educational missionaries as necessarily bound up with schools and institutions. A teacher without a school, or outside a school, seems to them rather like a gunner without a gun. If an educational missionary goes on an evangelistic tour it is, they think, as an evangelist that he goes, not as an educationalist. Yet, if we understood the work of an evangelistic educationalist, we should not think it strange to meet an educational missionary on tour, doing evangelistic educational work. Evangelistic work is educational to the core, and it leads to educational results. No evangelistic work amongst an illiterate, or a literate, people can be really complete, if it does not lead at once to the organisation of education amongst the converts and hearers. The illiterate must be taught to read the Gospels, and it demands an expert in the teaching of illiterates to direct their studies; the illiterate and the literate converts alike must be taught to transform that education which they all give daily to their children, whether in the home or in a school, into Christian education, and this too demands the attention of a skilled educationalist. This work is invaluable and most exciting and interesting work, and must produce results which, for the establishment of the Church, are almost incalculably important. As then for the medical missionaries, so for the educationalists we ask:—

——————+——————+———————-+——————-+——————Evangelistic| Number of | Number of | Number of |ConclusionsTours. |Evangelistic|Educationalists|Days Spent by|and Remarks.| Workers. | Assisting. | Evangelists || | | on Tour. |——————+——————+———————-+——————-+——————| | | |——————+——————+———————-+——————-+——————

When we turn to the immediate evangelistic results of the education given in the station district, we labour under difficulties even greater than those which we met when we tried to formulate tables to reveal the extent to which medical missions were effective as an evangelistic agency.

The difficulty lies in the fact that the educational missionaries who set before themselves as the aim of their work a far distant goal to be attained by the cumulative effect of Christian influence brought to bear upon generation after generation of children who do not themselves become Christians, naturally resent a table which seems to demand a present, immediate, result in the tabulation of baptisms, and we fear that the other tables will hardly reconcile them, because we are afraid that few educational missionaries have yet learned to understand what a vast and important and absorbingly interesting work the education of the converts outside the schools affords. Consequently we shiver when we think of the reception which these tables are likely to receive at the hands of some of our friends in foreign countries, and our ears tingle in anticipation.

Nevertheless, if we are to be told, and to act on the hearing, that Christian schools are founded because it is easier to convert the young than the old, and the twig can be bent while the tree resists till it breaks, we must inquire how far this saying is justified by experience. A survey which neglected the factors which throw light upon it would be a partial and unjust one.

Hence we ask first—

and secondly—

These two tables will give us some idea of the direct influence of the educational mission as an evangelistic force.

Some are anxious to know what support the educational and medical work call forth from the natives for whom these are set in hand. They want this information, we suppose, as a help towards an understanding of the influence exercised by these different forms of work. If the natives support them generously then they have obviously been impressed by them favourably. And perhaps the extent of native support may suggest the measure to which our work as medical and educational missionaries is approaching a successful end.

We therefore include a table identical for medical and educational workers:—

——————————————————————————————————- | Total | Total | Total Native | Volunteers | Expense | Foreign | Contribution | for | of Work in | Contribution. | Fees and | Training. | Station | | Donations. | | Area. | | | ——————————————————————————————————- Medical | —— | —— | —— | —— ——————|——————|———————-|———————|—————— Educational | —— | —— | —— | —— ——————————————————————————————————-

We have now surveyed the evangelistic, medical, and educational work in the station district, viewed separately. It remains to unify the results, that we may get, if possible, a definite conception of the whole. The effectiveness of the mission machinery largely depends upon the relation of these parts to one another. The mission ought not to be three separate things but one thing; for the impression produced upon the non-Christian population is the result of the combination of all the various forms in which the one missionary spirit expresses itself. The spirit which produces them all is one, and it is that one spirit which influences and converts the heathen.

Now we already know the proportion in which workers and funds are divided between the three branches (p. 68). We already know something of the work done by evangelists in hospitals (p. 83), and by doctors in evangelistic tours (p. 84); and of the extent to which the work in the hospitals opens up the way for evangelists (p. 85). We already know something of the work done by evangelists in schools (p. 99), and of the evangelistic influence of the educational work (p. 102, 103), and of the extent to which educationalists assist in evangelistic tours (p. 101).

If then we now add tables to show the help given by the medicals in the schools and the work done by the educationalists in the hospitals we shall be able to gain a fairly complete idea of the co-operation between the three branches.

But it is just at this point, the relation between the medical and educational work, that we shall probably find most difficulty. This relationship has not been carefully thought out in the past, and co-operation between medicals and educationalists is, we fancy, somewhat rare. Few men could tell us exactly what policy is followed, or ought to be followed. This is partly due to that confusion of purpose of which we spoke in the first chapter, a confusion which obscures and confounds our medical and educational missions. If both medical and educational missions had had one common dominant purpose, the relation between them would have been more easily seen; but since they were separated in thought, each having its own particular and separate objects to pursue, they naturally worked along parallel lines and consequently did not meet. If they had had one common dominant object they would have met. But generally speaking there is no clear understanding whether the medical mission has any definite relation to the educational mission, or the educational mission to the medical.

On the medical side, it is not clearly understood whether it is the first duty, or the last duty, of medicals to attend to the children whom we gather together in such large numbers, whether the medicals ought to inspect all the children, whether they ought to be at hand to treat children who are obviously sick, whether these considerations ought to influence the location of the hospital, or of the place of residence of the medical missionaries, or whether this work, if they really gave much time to it, should be considered as withdrawing them from theirproperwork. Consequently, the health of the children in mission schools has often suffered, and the work of the school been hindered. In one school something approaching to a revolution was produced by the constant care and attention of a doctor. Phthisis, which had been a continual source of trouble and weakness, was reduced considerably, and the whole work and tone of the school improved enormously. If medical missionaries and educational missionaries always realised that they were engaged in a common work, this experience would be almost universal.

In our tables we cannot possibly enter into any details. The work of medicals in schools cannot be exactly stated, it varies greatly in extent and character; but it would, we suppose, always include attention to the health of the children and consultation with the teachers, both about the welfare of the school as a whole and of the care of individual pupils. It might also include lectures in hygiene and kindred topics, sanitation of buildings, and other assistance too varied to specify.

The table can only include visits and inspection of pupils.

————————————————————————————————-Total | Number | Total | Number | RemarksNumber | Regularly | Number | Regularly | andof Schools. | Visited by | of | Inspected. | Conclusions.| Medicals. | Scholars. | |————————————————————————————————-| | | || | | |————————————————————————————————-

The relation of the educational mission to the medical has not been thought out any more carefully. There is in hospitals an opportunity of extraordinary importance, a field of great fruitfulness which is largely neglected. If the hospital is a missionary hospital, founded to heal the souls as well as the bodies of men, ought not the patients in them to be taught as well as medically treated? Have they any claim upon the care of educational missionaries? Have the educational missionaries any duty in hospitals? Very few, we think, have given much attention to these questions: no society, so far as we know, has followed any definite policy in regard to them. A single instance will reveal how important they may be. A doctor who was deeply interested in the teaching of Chinese illiterates took steps to have the illiterate convalescents in his hospital taught to read. The average time which these patients spent in the hospital was three weeks, and in that time they could learn to read the Gospels in simplified script fluently. They thus left the hospital not only healed in body, but with a new interest in life, and a considerable knowledge of Christian truth, and a power to advance in it, and a power also to instruct others. In a hospital for Chinese coolies in France this doctor taught one patient to read the Gospel. The patient was then removed to another hospital where he taught no less than forty of his fellow-patients to read. If such results can be obtained, it would be well to consider whether we are making full use of the opportunities afforded by the gathering of large numbers of patients into hospitals all over the world. Illiterates are not the only people who might profit by Christian teaching, classes for literates might be equally valuable. Large numbers might leave our hospitals with a considerable knowledge of Christian truth, and a new interest in life, with power to advance and to teach others, if they were systematically taught. In one missionary hospital regular courses were given on Christian Evidences, and courses on the education of children might well be given to parents in hospitals.

Here again a table cannot reveal the type and character of the work done: it can only tabulate visits. The work would include the teaching of illiterates to read, and instructing convalescents of higher education either in classes or individually.

——————————————————————————————————-Total | Number | Total | Number | RemarksNumber of | Regularly | Number of | of | andHospitals. | Visited by | Patients. | Scholars | Conclusions.| Educationalists. | | Taught. |——————————————————————————————————-| | | || | | |——————————————————————————————————-

We might now sum up this branch of our inquiry thus:—

——————————————————————————————————- | Foreign | Native |Assisting|Assisting|Assisting|Remarks | Mission | Assist | in |in |in | and | -aries. | ants. | Evangel-|Hosp- |Schools. |Conclusions. | | | istic |itals. | | | | | Tours. | | | ——————————————————————————————————- Evange-| | | | | | listic | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— ——————————————————————————————————- Medical| —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— ——————————————————————————————————- Educa | | | | | | -tional| —— | —— | —— | —— | —— | —— ——————————————————————————————————-

Then we shall surely have some idea of the extent to which the whole force works together towards one end.

In the Introduction we pointed out that the end for which the work surveyed is undertaken ought to govern the survey of the work. Now we are constantly told that the end for which the station is founded is the establishment of a Christian Church in the district so strongly that if the station with its foreign staff disappeared, the Church would remain and bring up each generation in the Christian Faith.

This proposal sets before us a real end for the mission station. It suggests a point at which the station will have done its work; the mission would then have no more place in those parts. The station has thus an end, not only in the sense that it has an object at which it aims, but a point at which it ceases. But this end is not simply a point in the far distant future; it is a condition, or state of the Church in the district, into which it must be growing. Then the growth of the native Church is more important than the growth of the mission, and all things should be directed primarily to that end, so that as the native Church waxed the mission should wane, and thus the end should be reached naturally and easily and not by a catastrophe. If that is the end, then the survey of the station and its district cannot fail to take the form of an inquiry how far progress in this direction has been made.

Since our ideas of missionary work are wrapped up with the establishment of mission stations and consequently with the purchase of land and buildings, since we rely almost wholly upon paid workers for the prosecution of the work, since we employ most expensive methods of propaganda, such as the establishment of great medical and educational institutions, since our societies at home are almost wholly absorbed in the effort to procure funds to pay for all these things, it is not surprising that money takes a supremely important position in our thought of all missionary work. Consequently, when we think of the growth of the native Church in power to carry on the work which we have begun we naturally think first of self-support.

Self-support is now one of the most common missionary catchwords. We hear it on every platform at home; we hear it in the mouths of large numbers of our converts abroad. There exist in the mission field large numbers of what are called "self-supporting churches". Our missionaries often set this self-support before their converts as a status of honour, and offer them encouragements of various kinds to induce them to become self-supporting as soon as possible. At home, if we ask concerning the progress of the native Church, they often answer us by telling us the numbers of these self-supporting churches.

What then is meant by a self-supporting Church? We might naturally suppose that a self-supporting Church was a Church which was independent of external support; we might suppose that it could maintain itself without any assistance from mission funds; we might suppose that, when a Church became self-supporting, the mission, so far as finance was concerned, could withdraw and move to some fresh place. That is sometimes the case, but very rarely. We know, for instance, a case where fourteen Christians in a small town provided their own chapel and its furnishing and upkeep, and all subsidiary expenses without any assistance. They had no paid ministers and therefore no salaries to pay. They were from the very beginning entirely self-supporting, and the missionary could, and did, leave them and go to others who needed him more. But in this case there was no mission compound, no elaborate system of mission education, and no mission fund from which the chapel could be built and a pastor provided, before the converts were ready to provide these things for themselves.

Most commonly the mission does all these things, and then self-support does not necessarily imply independence of foreign support. We have met native Christians who assured us in one breath that they were members of a self-supporting Church and that their Church did not receive its fair share of mission funds. Self-support does not necessarily mean independence of external pecuniary aid.

What then does the status of a self-supporting Church imply? Nothing certain, but just what the society, or the missionary, chooses. Take a case. In a newly opened outstation the converts subscribed $5 Mexican, a head, per annum. The missionary in charge of the district estimated that $500 per annum would pay the rent and upkeep of the chapel, and the salary of the pastor. Therefore he calculated that when the membership of the chapel reached 100, the congregation would be self-supporting. But if a school were founded and fees paid, then the day of self-support would be very far off.

Hence it is obvious that self-support is an arbitrary standard fixed on no certain grounds; and progress towards self-support is simply a progress towards a line which the foreigner prescribes. Just as each father among us here in England, according to his class and standard of living, fixes a standard for his son, saying, "When he earns so much he will be able to maintain himself," so the society, or the individual missionary, fixes the standard for converts. In this case, the foreigner insisted on the salary for the pastor, he created the building, its ornaments and expenses; and where this is done the day of self-support must be more or less delayed. More or less, for what one man considers abundant another thinks hardly decent, simply because each has learnt in a different school different ideas of what is necessary or desirable. Consequently one man makes the day of self-support easy of attainment, another loudly proclaims that his people are so poor that they cannot possibly be expected to provide for themselves.

Furthermore, we must observe that in the first case the converts arrived speedily at self-support because the foreign missionary never for a moment allowed them to be anything else, whilst in the second the missionary provided what he thought necessary until such time as the Church was sufficiently wealthy to pay for it. The one Church decided for itself what it needed, and what it needed it took the necessary steps to supply: the other accepted what was given to it and was asked to subscribe more and more to pay for it. But when the provision is first made largely from some more or less mysterious foreign source, the converts will never subscribe to a fund so organised as they will to a fund which they raise and administer themselves to supply what they themselves want, and cannot have unless they provide the necessary money to get it. Self-support then, as the word is most commonly used, means anything but genuine self-support, and does not represent the power of the people to supply their needs. It means only the subscription of money sufficient to pay for certain things which are more or less arbitrarily fixed by the missionary or his society.

Neither is it any sure evidence of the zeal and liberality of the Church which is called self-supporting. The existence of self-supporting churches is indeed sometimes used as an argument to show that the Church is growing in this Christian virtue. But this is largely deceptive. The existence of self-supporting churches does not necessarily prove Christian liberality. Take the case which we quoted above where the Christians subscribed $5 a head. It was said that when they numbered 100 members they would be self-supporting. But, if they still subscribed $5 a head, there would be no more liberality in the Church of 100, which was self-supporting, than in the Church of ten, which was not self-supporting. There might be more, if the ninety members added were very poor; there might be less if one wealthy man joined the Church. Since the status of a self-supporting Church is one of honour and privilege, the members might even be tempted to admit an unworthy member who was well off in the hope that his subscriptions might aid them to attain that glorious position without much self-denial or effort on their own part.

Moreover, the collection of money is a highly developed art. It is extraordinary what pressure men can bring to bear upon converts to induce them to subscribe, so that the contribution is in many cases little different from the payment of a tax. It is truly amazing to read how many forms of appeals and fees can be invented to collect money from more or less unwilling givers.[1] We cannot then accept the existence of self-supporting churches as an evidence of liberality, nor base our calculation on the sum subscribed for the upkeep of such churches.

[Footnote 1: This is a list of the means employed to raise money by one missionary in order to assist the people in his district to arrive at self-support:—

(1) Sunday collections. (2) Share of first fruits (crop seasons). (3) Monthly membership family assessment. (4) Special missionary or harvest thanksgiving (twice a year). (5) Pinch of rice at every meal as thanksgiving (women's share). (6) Box in houses for prayer meetings, etc. (7) Church box. (8) Dedication of special pepper or cocoa-nut trees for church repair. (9) Bible society collections. (10) Hospital collection. (11) Baptism offerings. (12) Marriage offerings. (13) Lord's Supper offerings. (14) Special gifts for church building or equipment.

It is not surprising that he adds that he is told that some of the new converts have gone back because they see the regularity and frequency of giving.]

Nevertheless, seeing that self-supporting churches are widely recognised, let us begin with these and seek to find out what information a table of inquiry might supply. We should ask first for the number of self-supporting churches in relation to (a) the number of communicants (or full members) in the district, and (b) the number of Christian Churches organised, but not self-supporting. By an organised Church we understand a body of Christians in any place who hold regular religious services, and may send delegates to any council which may exist for the whole station district.

——————————————————————————————————-Communicants.|Proportion of |Organised|Proportion of |Remarks|Communicants |Churches.|Organised |and|connected with | |Churches |Conclusions.|Self-supporting| |Self-supporting.||Churches. | | |——————————————————————————————————-| | | |_____________|_______________|_________|________________|____________

From this we should learn briefly, and as a starting-point, the proportion of the self-supporting churches, and that might help us to understand the progress made towards self-support as it is understood in the district, and enable us to compare it with that of other districts. But this by itself would not be of any great value in assisting us to understand what progress had been made towards the establishment of a Church which could stand alone, if the station with its foreign staff were withdrawn. No Church which does not advance can stand, and the mere attainment of this arbitrary standard does not necessarily prove capacity to advance or to stand. The effort to attain it sometimes leads the converts to concentrate their attention upon themselves. They set self-support before their eyes as an end to be attained for their own sake. It has consequently sometimes happened that native churches, established on this self-supporting basis, have become self-absorbed, self-seeking. They have so looked on their own things that they have tended to lose sight of the things of others. They have become, like many little Christian communities at home, so entangled in the effort to maintain their own dignity, their own services, their own progress in outward prosperity, that they have forgotten the real purpose of their existence, and, instead of becoming centres of light and attraction and active zeal for the spread of the gospel, have degenerated into self-contained units indulging a self-satisfied pride in the glorious position to which they have attained as self-supporting churches. The history of some churches on the West Coast of Africa and in South India suggests the need for such a warning, and urges us to pursue the inquiry further.

We should inquire, then, what number of inquirers, adherents, hearers, catechumens, etc., are seeking entrance into the Church in connection with the self-supporting churches as compared with the total number of such inquirers, adherents, etc., in the district and compared with the number of communicants in connection with those churches.

————————————————————————————-|——-| In District (excluding Self-supporting Churches). | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Inquirers and Adherents. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Inquirers to Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| In Self-supporting Churches. | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Inquirers and Adherents. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Inquirers to Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Remarks and Conclusions. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-|

Such a table should, we think, prove illuminating as revealing the influence and zeal of the members of the self-supporting churches.

A further light on this subject might be gained by comparing the number of unpaid workers connected with the self-supporting churches with the number of such workers in the whole district, excluding the self-supporting churches.

————————————————————————————-|——-| In District (excluding Self-supporting Churches). | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Unpaid Workers. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Unpaid Workers to Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| In Self-supporting Churches. | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Unpaid Workers. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Unpaid Workers to Communicants. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Remarks and Conclusions. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-|

This would supplement the previous table and tend to correct any mistakes to which it might give rise.

Thus far of the missions which recognise self-supporting churches. As for the mission districts in which no such distinctions have been made, all that I think we need to do is to recall the tables which we made when considering the native force (p. 54sqq.), and to supplement them with tables designed to reveal (1) the power of the Christians to conduct their own religious services independently of the foreigner; (2) their power to direct their own Church government; (3) their power to supply the material needs of their organisation according to the ideas which they have received and hold.

With regard to the first question, all that we need to know is what proportion of the Christians are in a position to carry on their own religious life independently of foreign help. In the Anglican Communion that involves the presence of a duly ordained priest: in some societies which deny the necessity of ordination, yet give a position not unlike that of the priest to their ordained men, it would involve the presence of a pastor. Others deny the necessity or advantage of any ordained ministers. Under these circumstances we cannot use accepted ecclesiastical terms; but by capacity for conducting their own religious services we must certainly at least mean capacity to perform all necessary religious rites, and that, for Anglicans at any rate, must include Baptism and Holy Communion. Suppose then that we accepted the "organised churches" as a basis and inquired what proportion of these organised churches could, and did, performallnecessary religious rites, we should indeed omit the floating and isolated members of the unorganised Christian community which in some districts might be very large, but we should nevertheless, we hope, get a definite and common basis which would really give us some light on this difficult but important problem, and if we added a question as to the proportion of the Christian constituency connected with these organised churches we should have some check upon a serious misunderstanding.

————————————————————————————-|——-| Number of Organised Churches. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Christian Constituency | | Connected with these. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Number of Churches Capable of Performingall| | Necessary Religious Rites without External Assistance. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of these to Number of Organised Churches. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Remarks and Conclusions. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-|

The second question is, How far the Church in the district can direct its own life and order its own government. The difficulty here arises from the very diverse forms of Church government which have been taught to the natives by their foreign teachers, some of them late and difficult representative systems, not easily grasped even by educated men. Is there then any general question which will suffice to throw light on this problem, where the people are in the midst of the process of learning an unfamiliar form of government?

Were very simple and almost universal ideas always followed, as for instance in episcopacy, which naturally adapts itself to the simplest and most common conceptions and experiences of men, in that the bishop is closely related in idea to the father of the family, or the head man of a village, or the governor of a province, or a chief of a tribe, or an autocratic emperor, or a constitutional monarch, according to the notions and experience of the people—so that a bishop is as easily understood by a nomad family, or a village community, as by a democratic nation, according to its stage of development, and if native bishops were universal, as they are not, the problem would be comparatively simple. Indeed then we need scarcely ask the question at all. Either patriarchal episcopacy, or monarchical episcopacy, or constitutional episcopacy all men can understand, whether the bishop is elected by his people, or appointed by his predecessor, or by his fellows, or both elected by his people and confirmed by his fellows—such things all men can understand and maintain, each the form suited to their own stage. But constitutional episcopacy when the people are at the patriarchal stage of development, or republicanism when the people are at the monarchical stage, they cannot understand, until they have learnt to understand it by long and slow experience. But many of the systems introduced by us are the latest and most advanced systems. How then can we discover to what extent the Christians have mastered them? We can find no question which solves this problem. We can only suggest the bare questions, what proportion of the people take a proper and active part in the system of Church government under which they live; and what proportion of the congregations take an active part as congregations in that system of Church government.

————————————————————————————-|——-| Number of Christians who take any part in Church | | Government by Vote or Voice. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Total Christian Constituency | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Number of Congregations who take a share as | | Congregations in Church Government. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Proportion of Christian Congregations. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Remarks and Conclusions. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-|

By the first question we understand the number of Christians who vote or speak or act in any way, either personally or by electing representatives, in the direction of the common action of the whole Christian community viewed as a unity; by the second question we understand the number of congregations which are represented at any council higher than the council of their own congregation.

We think these questions most unsatisfactory, but we can devise no others. We have no doubt that, if all the foreigners disappeared suddenly, the native Christians would either perish or would speedily adopt a form of Church government which they understood. The whole necessity for these questions arises from the fact that we have foisted upon them foreign systems and are uncertain to what extent they have really grasped them. The consequence is that when we think of a Church capable of standing alone we are in doubt. We do not feel certain that the converts could carry on their government; and some of us think a change in the form of Church government as serious a matter as the change from Paganism to Christianity: it is an excommunicating matter. Inevitably then in an inquiry such as ours we must try to discover how far the people are advanced in the understanding of the organisation which they have been taught. Until they are quite sound in this faith and fully trained in this system, whether it is a circuit or a presbytery or a democratic episcopacy, or a papacy, they cannot possibly stand alone. Who would dare to suggest such a revolutionary idea! Why, they might adopt a native governmental system—something which they understood at once, quite easily, and then where should we be? We know how to administer the system in which we were brought up: it is better that they should learn that.

Finally we make an inquiry concerning the power of the Christians to supply the material needs of their religious organisation. We want to know to what extent they are really dependent on foreign funds, and to what extent they can stand alone financially.

It is tempting to imagine that we can discover this by a mere calculation of the total expenditure on all work carried on in the district and comparing this either with the number of Christians and their relative wealth or poverty, or simply with the contribution which they actually make, concluding that the difference between their contribution, or their estimated power to give, and the cost of the work carried on in the area is the difference between their power to supply their needs and their real needs. But foreign funds are largely spent upon things which, however excellent they may be in themselves, are not reallynecessaryfor the religious life of the Christians, such as missionaries' salaries, high schools, colleges, medical institutions, and expensive buildings. Consequently to know the total expenditure in the area is not to know the necessary expenditure. The native Church might maintain its life and conquer the whole district without spending in actual money a tithe of that which we spend on providing the people with medicine and education and buildings and foreign missionaries.

Yet the question cannot be avoided. Missionaries all over the world carefully count every penny which the converts subscribe, and search diligently for some new method of doubling it, in order to lead their converts towards the goal of self-support. What that goal is we do not know. We cannot tell how far the Christians can supply their own needs, if we do not know what the needs really are. And that we do not know. In a certain very real sense Christians can always provide what is necessary for their religious life. They could all always be self-supporting, if we did not invent needs and insist upon them; and what we insist upon depends entirely upon the school in which we were brought up. The standard set, as we have already explained, is purely arbitrary.

Under these circumstances how can we express the position of the native Church with any approximation to truth? We can only suggest that these arbitrary standards should be accepted, and ask that they should be defined in every case. We should ask the missionaries, or the societies, to estimate the amount required to supply that minimum upon which they insist. If we did that, remembering always that the estimate made must be doubtful and arbitrary, and that the native contribution, whilst comparatively large funds are regularly supplied from a foreign source, will never represent the power of the Christian community to supply its own needs, we should at least have some standard by which we might estimate the position of the Christian Church in the country, and its progress. We suggest then that three items should be included in the table: (1) the total expense of carrying on all the work in the station district, whether the funds were provided from foreign or native sources; (2) the amount estimated to cover the necessary expenses of the native Christian Church; and (3) the amount subscribed by the native Christian community. We think these three items taken together would help us to understand the situation.

————————————————————————————-|——-| Total Expense of Church and Mission in the Area | | per Head of Christian Constituency. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Amount Estimated to Cover all Necessary Expenses of the | | Native Christian Constituency per Head. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Amount Subscribed for all Purposes by the Native | | Christian Constituency per Head. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-| Remarks and Conclusions. | | ————————————————————————————-|——-|

We have now, we hope, some light on the question how far we are really succeeding in attaining a purpose which we hear constantly proclaimed, as if it were indeed a governing object of our work, the creation of an independent native Church.

Back to Index Next