CALIFORNIA AS A MISSIONARY FIELD.
In the deeply interesting paper of Secretary Barrows, presented at the last Anniversary of the A. H. M. S., the expectation is expressed that California, and several other States, “will soon take upon themselves the whole burden of their own support and, not only so, will assist the mother society.” I venture to make this expectation my text for this month’s article in the Missionary, because it represents a view of California very prevalent among our Eastern friends, and to one who looks at us through the newspapers and from a distance of from 2,000 to 4,000 miles, apparently well founded. It is not impertinent, I think, for me to remark upon this expectation; I even feel it necessary that I should do so; because it suggests inevitably the query whether California—if the responsibility were thrown upon her—could not at once take care of all needed missionary work among the Chinese.
I think I may safely claim that but one of my brethren is better acquainted with the condition of our churches in California than I am, and to him I have submitted the statement I am about to make. I refer to our veteran Home Missionary Superintendent, Rev. Dr. Warren. His reply is in these words: “Have read your note carefully twice; every word is true.”
There is great and rapidly increasing wealth in California; wealth, if it were held consecrate to Christ, far more than sufficient to sustain all needed religious institutions; but it is safe to say that forty-nine fiftieths (and I wrote at first, not without careful thought, ninety-nine one-hundredths,) of it is in hands of men who will not consider appeals for missionary contributions and evince no interest in any church work. There are also some strong churches in California, in connection with all the leading denominations, and we, Congregationalists, have perhaps our share of them. These churches have wealthy men in their congregations, and a few of these men are professors of religion. But what I wish noted is that all such churches, so far as our own denomination is concerned, could be counted on the fingers of one hand. I name them: The First and Plymouth of San Francisco, the First in Oakland, and the First in Los Angeles.
Of course, when we speak of churches as strong or weak, we speak relatively. I have in mind what might be called the New England standard, and I say that only these four among all our churches would, if set down in Massachusetts or Connecticut, be accounted strong. The churches in Berkeley and in Sacramento would rank next to these, though in both of them the home work involves a constant struggle. There are certain other points, as Ferndale, Lockeford, Woodland, South San Juan, and especially Grass Valley, where single individuals of considerable wealth are connected more or less closely with our churches, but when I have spoken of these I have exhausted the list of those who could give largely, however well disposed.
We have (say) 120 Congregational churches in the State, with (say) 8,000 members. (The last statistics, now nearly a year old, give 114 churches and 7,308 members.) More than three-eighths of this aggregate membership are to be found in five churches, leaving to the remaining 115 churches an average membership of about 40. Among these remaining churches are 15 that have an aggregate membership now of about 2,500; so that we have 100 churches with an average membership not exceeding 25. These churches are scattered over a territory nearly three times as large as all New England. A line drawn diagonally across California in either direction would reach from the northeastern point of Maine to the centre of North Carolina! It is a State of boundless possibilities, inviting and now welcoming a tremendous immigration. Opportunities abound. The demands for Christian work, in order to improve these opportunities, are imperious and almost oppressive. What might be possible if California Christians were all ideal Christians, I do not know; but taking Christian people as they average the country over, taking churches as we find them in this world and at this particular stage in the development of Christianity, it is chimerical to suppose that for a long time to come the Home Missionary work that ought to be done in connection with our denomination in California will be sustained by contributions made upon the ground. Still more chimerical it would be to expect that this missionary work among the Chinese, to which we are summoned by every instinct of our faith and by a special call of Providence, but which here is called to encounter special prejudices and pull a laboring oar unceasingly against both wind and tide, could be maintained without assistance from abroad. The fact is that but for the generous assistance of the American Missionary Association there would not be enough left of our Chinese mission to stir any interest or induce any giving at all in California. It is because the Association started us, and because it, and it alone, enables us to give to the work such extent as it has, and develop it into such present usefulness and gather about it such promise of larger good; it is thus, and thus only, that we have gained our vantage-ground for successful appeal. As it is, the amount contributed in California for this cause must be to every one acquainted with all the facts a grateful surprise. It reached last year a total of $2,654.05. I trust the amount will be no smaller this year. But should the Association stand aside, it would in another year be reduced almost to nothing. When effort becomes hopeless, enthusiasm dies.