India's Problem, Krishna or Christ

by John P. Jones

A Foreign Missionary Society of well organized efficiency has, up to the present, been the best agency in the development and furtherance of the foreign work of every denomination. And the day does not seem near when this agency can be dispensed with.

This missionary society should be in close touch with the denomination or body of Christians which has organized and maintains it. It should be plastic to the touch and will of its constituency and should [pg 229] seek in every way to be at the same time a faithful exponent of the thought and ambition of the churches, and a leader and a source of new inspiration and light to them on missionary problems. This society should scrupulously avoid, on the one hand, the danger of too much independence and of a purpose to shape the missionary policy of the churches; and, on the other, the equally serious evil of dragging, or of declining to move a step without the direct intimation, command or leadership of the churches. There has been a time in the history of the American Board when the one evil constituted its danger; at the present time it would seem as if the other danger seriously threatened it.

It is of much importance that the foreign missionary benevolences of a church should be wisely administered as a whole. When different missionary societies of a denomination appeal, as they do at present, to our churches for funds to support the missionary cause in foreign lands, it is of great importance that moneys received by these different bodies should be appropriated wisely. They should be brought together both for unity of results and for economy of expenditure on the mission field. My observation convinces me that, for want of a wise union or correlation of our missionary agencies at home the various departments of the work (of the Congregationalists, for instance) on the mission field are very unequally supported, and an unwise distribution of the benevolences of the churches follows as a result. A previous, full consideration, by a competent general committee of finance, in America, should be had of the needs of the various departments [pg 230] of each mission and of the distribution of all the funds collected for that mission by the various societies; and they should be carefully distributed in accordance with the urgency of those needs respectively.

These missionary societies should aim to cultivate in the churches the spirit of missions as a Christian principle. Advocates of the missionary cause strongly feel that the interest of the Church in missionary work today is too little based upon the real and fundamental principle of missionary work as a necessity of the life of the Church itself, and too much dependent upon exciting narrative, tearful appeal and poetic romance. The cultivation of the missionary principle and the inculcation of the doctrine of the privilege and beauty of supporting missions, apart from any impassioned appeals or tragic events, is one of the desiderata of the Church today. It is a morbid condition of the mind of the Church which demands exciting narrative and hysterical appeal in order to arouse it to its duty in this matter; and it also tends to create a standard of missionary advocacy which is neither manly nor sufficiently careful to balance well the facts and data of missionary work as it is found upon the field. There is considerable danger of accepting, today, only that form of missionary appeal which is directed to the emotion and which abounds in mental excitement rather than that which furnishes food for sober thought. The consequence is that this advocacy is in danger of becoming a producer of more heat than light—of more emotion than intelligent conviction.

The recent movement towards leading certain [pg 231] churches to take up definite portions of the work in foreign lands and to support, each a missionary for itself, has in it much to commend it to our acceptance. It certainly has the merit of definiteness in purpose, work and prayer; and this brings added interest and a growing sense of responsibility to each church which takes up the work. If a man (or a church) finds his interest in missions waning as a principle of Christian activity the best thing for him, perhaps, is to come into touch with a missionary or a mission agent on the field. By supporting him or a department of work conducted by him, and by being kept frequently informed of the work which he is supporting, new fuel is constantly added to that missionary interest which thereby develops into zeal and enthusiasm. The method has apostolic sanction and partakes of the simplicity of primitive missionary endeavour.

But this method should not be too exclusively pursued. It should not interfere with a broader outlook upon missions and a general sympathy with, and support of, the common work. And all of the work should be done through the missionary society which alone can rightly coördinate and unify the whole work of the particular mission.

Faith Missions, so called, represent a genuine and a worthy spirit among many of God's people today. To them the somewhat lumbering business methods of the large missionary organizations savour too much of worldly prudence and seem subversive of the deepest Christian faith. They maintain that the old method is one that looks too much to men and too little to God for support. And they also claim that [pg 232] the missionary of such a society has little opportunity for the exercise of highest faith in God both for himself and his work. These new missions, therefore, have come into existence practically, if not really, as a protest against modern methods of conducting missionary work. They may do much good if they exercise some restraint upon missionary societies in this matter. Probably it is needed. Many believe that there is an excessive tendency among the directors of missionary societies, at the present day, to consider this great enterprise simply as a business enterprise, and that, in the committee rooms, faith has yielded too much to prudence, and the wings of missionary enterprise have been too much clipped by worldly considerations. How far their reasoning is true, I will not decide. Their claim is not without a basis of truth. The financial embarrassment brings to the Missionary Society today, much more than it used to, discouragement and a halt; with the result that the missions are more than ever before crippled by retrenchment and home churches are resting satisfied with smaller attainments and are forgetting the old watchwords of progress and advance.

“Faith Missions” are created by and meet the needs of a certain class of people in the church whose spiritual life is intense and who crave romance in faith and in life. The missionaries of these societies tire of the great organizations of the church and are usually men who are restless under any stiff method or extensive system in Christian work.

But very few such missionaries meet with permanent success. The glamour of the “faith life,” so called, does not abide with them. Few men have [pg 233] the staying, as well as the supporting, faith of a George Müller; and yet every missionary in this class should be a hero of faith—a man with that special gift and power from God which will maintain itself and go on working under the most adverse circumstances. And this is what the ordinary “faith missionary” does not possess in an exceptional degree.

As a matter of fact, “Faith Missions” are decidedly wasteful of means in the conduct of their work. If, in some ways, they practice more economy, in other matters of greatest importance, there is deplorable wastefulness. For, they are wanting both in continuity and in wise management and sane direction. As history has shown, they also easily degenerate into very prudential methods and sensational forms of advertisement which destroy the very faith which the missions were supposed to express and conserve. There is no less faith—rather is there more—exercised by members of well-organized missions who depend upon God's supply through the regular channel of a society. For they can give themselves entirely to their work of faith and love, confident that God will provide for their wants and the wants of their work; while the “faith missionary” has to devote much time in anxious thought and in skillful and dubious methods of appeal to secure the means of support.