A CHINESE MISSIONARY'S DEFENCE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11377, 21 March 1899, Page 3

A CHINESE MISSIONARY'S DEFENCE.

TO THE IiUITOII. ~. . ■ Bnt,_-lTndorlying the writings of the great majority of foiirnnlisls, as t-lio Ivolo ol "Civis''' last lust week, are two assumptions: tha Chinese nve religiously intolerant, and llio missionaries to China are mostly bigoted. Out of these grow what " Civis" declares he U perfectly convinced is tnio: " Missionaries in China aro a great factor for evil m the rcliilions between Chinese and foreigners. 1 shall try to show that the conclusion is false, ami that therefore the premise M u,>po S .ng Hie conclusion based upon them—also arc worthless. I know' that somo people will look at this heading of tliis letter, then at the aienaluro, and V™» "n with " Oh, he s a missionary he is prejudiced—his evidence is inadmissible '•' ; lint there are others who wibli for some light on the subject. Sly witnesses will be, with one exception, not missionaries. AVant of time prevents stronger proof by tho adduction of more evidence; but what is adduced will, I think, bo sufficient for most unprejudiced readers. , Both assumptions arc very common, ami neither is now. The latter one was, in 1P69, Urns presented by tho London limes:-— ••'Missionaries are hoping-to convert Hie Chinese by telling them that their ancestors (if thoy exist at all) aro not worth worshipping, and had better bo forgotten. Assumptions and conclusion have, in tho case of most people, arisen from written articles and books. The writers of sucli are, tot (aud in overwhelming preponderance numerically), globe-trotters; second, travellers; third, residents for some timo m China. .J.no first, and second classes are quito distinct. The globe-trotter sees with his ear?.—tho traveller with his fives: the traveller carries his " Murray "—" Murray carries the globetrotter. ' -Most of the resident writers are nnfi sionaries, here exempt because their testimony is regarded as biassed: the non-mission-ary resident writers are guile few in number. It"is tho globe-trotter—the man;who " does China Korea, ■Japan, Siam, and Malaysia in lei than four years-that writes 601 pages thereon. That is what Mi • Henry Norman did: but what of those who give only a tithe of that time? . .. We know what Norman says: 'I believe it to bo strictly within the limits of truth to =ay that foreign missionary cliort m Ulna has been productive of far more harm than a OOl \." This he accounts for by;. ' As travelfers in the Bast well know, Oriental peoples are especially susceptible upon two points, ol which'their "religion is the chief." Observe that Mr Norman says " travellers ; but it the word "Oriental" includes Cninese, as he intends it should, you must substitute '; globe-trotters." Residents m China testily the -very opposite of this—they say that Chinese" are the most tolerant of peoples, as witness Bishop Burdon after twenty years among them-r-" The Chinese views of life 'are materialistic, and it passes their comprehension that a man should make it, a matter ot conscience to fight either against or for a set of religious opinions. To talk of Confueiamsts and Buddhists waging a religious crusade against Christianity is to talk sheer nonsense Bishop Burdon is a missionary of the U JM. o. It is obviously difficult to get expert nonmissionary evidence here. But Professor Douglas, of King's College, London, in his " China,". implies .Chinese, tolerance in these words:—"From'what has been said, it will bo seen that no clearly" defined line of demarcation separates the three great sects of China. Each in its turn has borrowed from the other, until at the present day it may bo doubted whether there are to be found any pure Confucianiats, puro Buddhists, or pure Taoists in China. . . . Speaking generally, then, the religion of China ie a medley of the- three, great r.eets." He speaks also of Mohammedanism as gradually baing absorbed into the national pot poum of beliefs"; and says, further: ' The common people of China, when left alone by their superiors, hear the missionaries gladly. Here are two samples of what other globetrotters say. An 'American in 1889 published this statement:—" There is not a Chinese convert to Christianity of sound mind to-day within the entire extent of China.' An Jingliehinan (Major Knollys), in his "English Life in Ohiua."Sspeaks of having twice visited and carefully inspected the Hankow AA esleyan Medical Mission eight years after that institution had been closed. Ab duobun disce omnes. Tho former of these two is called by the, JNew York Suti "an unprejudiced observer. He, and such as he, get their information—quoting another—" from association with men 4hose lives are in constant conflict with tho teachings of Christianity, and who look upon the missionaries as a nuisance of which they would gladly' get rid." The globe-trotter specially' affects writing to the magazines, where he revels in his " evidence —the parroted hearsay, of .treaty-port clubmon. Another basis for the false conclusion exists income of,.our.'British Parliamentary Blue Books. The. official too often, has. been, through his, training and surroundings, antimissionary; so .when his chance comes ho shows it in this way:—Blue Book, No. a, 1869, is entitled'in flaring capitals— •' CORRESPONDENCE RESPECTING MISSIONARY DISTURBANCES AT CHEFOO 'AND TAIWAN (FORMOSA)." It contains 60 .pages, ot which only, one page concerns missionaries; the rest concerns not globe-trotters, in 'China realise the difficulty of the question, and many wisely refrain from passing judgment, Mr Curaon-iiow. Viceroy of India-after a somewhat full discussion, sums up carefully: _ The -ood done by the English missionaries, in the secular aspect,of their work, in the slow, but sure spread of education, in tho diffusion ot ungrudging charity, and in the oxample of pure lives, cannot be gainsaid. On the other hand, it is .impossible to ignore the. act that their mission is a.source of political unrest, and' frequently of international trouble . . it would be a service of international Value could some means be devised, not of arresting or diverting, but of controlling its operations, which are at present as random as the winds ° OMhTresidents, Consul Giles is. typical on the anti-missionary side. After eight years residence, he wrote : " The foreign community in China suffers no small inconvenience and incurs considerable danger from a-cause with which a large majority of its mombern has no Tympalhy whatever." The last three words should put Mr"Giles out of court, surely. It is important to. bear in mind that, if missionaries are biased in their own favour, the confessedly anti-missionary foreign resident must be biassed against them. . . It is not surprising, then, that journalists should so readily accept the false assumptions; but it is surprising that so little notice is taken of what is said on the other side Is there anything said on that side, except by missionaries? We shall see. . . Consul Parker has been as long in China as Mr Giles, but he takes the opposite view. Colonel Denby, U.S. Minister to China, said recently "I think that no one can controvert the pateiit fact that the Chinese are enormously benefited by the labours of the missionaries in their midst.. . • In my opinion, they do nothing but good. . . As lar as my knowledge'extends. I can and do say that the missionaries in China are self-sacrificing; that their lives are pure; that they are devoted to their work; that their influence is beneficial to the natives: . ". • that they do make converts, and such converts are mentally benefited . . Missionaries are tho pioneers of trade and commerce. . . Humanity has not devised any better, or even any as good, engine or means .for civilising people as proselytism to Christianity. The history of the world attests this fact. The' Tientsin correspondent ot Ine limes saVB "The good effected by missionaries is by no means ;to be measured by a list of conversions. They are the true pioneers of civilisation. It is to them we have to .look to carry the reputation of foreigners into the heart of the country; and it is on.their wisdom, justice, and power o sympathy that .the renascence of. China very largely depends. Of the travellers, Miss Gordon Gumming does not think it necessary to discuss why "Many persons look upon missionaries and their work as altogether a mistake—an annoying effort to brinsr about undesirable and unprofitable changes." She says simply "What a nitv it must seem to such thinkers that bt. Columba or St. Patrick ever took the trouble to come to Britain ; or, indeed, that a handful of low-born Jews should have presumed to nreach in Greece or Rome—to say nothing of their little troubles with the literati of JlYoims?husband, in his "Heart of a Continent" gives nine pages to the question, and is strongly favourable. So are also Mr Eugene Stock, Sir William Hunter, and others. General Wilson writes:—" The missionaries are truly the advance guard of civilisation ; and while they carry its highest and most abstract principles to those who are but little, fitted by habit or education to receive or understand them, they are surely and steadily raining the confidence and regard ot those among whom they are labouring. It may here be asked: If the Chinese as a people are remarkably tolerant, and the missionaries as a body doing their work wisely and well, how comes it that the outrages against foreigners are nearly always against missionaries? There are two mam reasons for this The non-missionaries comparatively rarely leave the treaty ports. And 30 years ago tho Chinese officials were led to understand that as the foreign governments cannot control the movements of the missionaries beyond the treaty ports, they cannot give them the measure of protection extended to residents at those ports. Proclamation after proclamation has been issued to dispel this idea, but it is easier to throw tar than to rub But why should there be outrages at all? A little bit of history answers this. Up to 1867 "11 wae peace in the Protestant Missions in China. Early in 136S the tentative treaty of 1858 came up for revision. Our MinisterSir Rutherford Alcock—pressed Princo Ivung to insert a clause extending to merchants the privilege enjoyed by missionaries of residence in the 'interior. Prince Kunz replied: ' The

„.,„„[ the trader is not purallol with that ot the miesionary,' whoso energies arc direr cd io tho propagation of their doctrines, and luinnt affect iho rovenuo of the country. Jlorcovo, one is a case of preaching Iho practice of virtue, Iho other of seeking « tei Sain " Sir Rutherford strove hard, but. Prinoß fan wa» unyielding Tho Chinese ofllcia mind, always intensely opposed to foreigner, was led to rtwon, «.!«'*« ° vilego will have to be conceded in .courso. of timo to all foreigners. .Wb must drive Iho mNionarica.biick to the treaty ports at once, n id thus remove the argument from procodral "The Chinese see M clearly as wo. that where tho missionary goes the merchant w eventually sure to follow. Then, pn-cl.eally, Z"\ 11 o anti-mimionnry outrages ami SiSi^^s--.-of outrag" against missionaries with whom hot er or Mm) and he exclaims "A ]>l«B"e would Some" uncomfortably near home, exCl°To nS rlyNot missionaries alone, but all forVg."™ are the- objeot-of.Chinese pfl.c.a s cX hatred: but for the reasons given the Nonary section is made the scapegoat, and 1 i ren It the difficulties between Lama nnu the: West 'wrongly attributed to then- present w& tfd n the' Buddhist part of tho pot pourr W?Mr Chester seentoy of the United State* Legation at lok n^ ctnonlv be idealised and beatified ,n pn*i or verso by one who knows nothing about it \k\ fivstcm in .practical wprkinsv it is, a etnJnoZ of Pcorrnption-a whited = P ,pulCMna what for tho deaf and dumb, the blind U,e insane, the leper, the orphan, the Fick/ Confucianism has many good. P°'"tf. *«l J nii.iionavi*i often use its Silver Rule .inc. he'par^les of Mencius; but to compare it with OlAiEtianity is to ■compare-.the moon with c sun. And a true Chrishan Ch.nese, who has tried both, substitutes "candlo for • : mpon.;'-lam,-,etc l - A^ Dunedin, March 16.