August, 1941
T H E K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S
299
Hinduismi A leading Hindu paper in Calcutta prints the following words from one of its nationalist writers: “Th? orthodox Hindu clings, in the name of religion and morality, to dead forms and mummied insti tutions from which the informing spirit has long departed.” From another source, Kellogg’s A Hand book of Comparative Religion, p. 154, we find a quotation from a non-Christian editor: ‘‘We Indians are yet far from true progress. Leave alone political mat ters, is there among us a pious and highly moral man?” Mohammedanism: A Mohammedan writer, in Essays In dian and Islamic, says: ‘‘Instead of unity, we have Islam torn into factions; instead of cul- • ture, we have' indifference to learn ing; instead of liberal-minded tolera tion, we have gross bigotry.” Buddhism: From one of the greatest scholars of Buddhism we quote: ‘‘Buddhists are dissatisfied with things as they are . . . In Japan, a leading Buddhist layman recently made the following statements: ‘The great tree of Buddhism is rotten at the core.’ And again, ‘Buddhism is hopelessly degenerate.’ "* And similarly among the Chinese a non- Christian Chinese writer** makes this unusual admission: ‘‘Buddhism, by scurrying from the World, is diametrically opposed to Christianity. How can a Buddhist hope thus, to attain to a higher heaven ? Buddhism abandons t h e world. Christianity would redeem it. A great contrast!” Confucianism: Regarding Confucianism, P r i n c i pal Grant of Queens University, Canada, points out: ‘‘The Chinese people, after rais ing temples to Confucius himself, and adopting the s y s t e m en thusiastically, have all but univer sally acknowledged its insufficiency . . . [This confession] shows that Confuciqs . . . left an awful void wholly unsupplied.” f Animism: Finally, let us turn to Animism, the primitive form of worship of all wild tribes. An eminent E u r o p e a n an thropologist is found saying: , ‘‘With animistic heathen, in all real religious questions there is uni versal uncertainty and great igno rance. Every heathen admits that he knows nothing certain about God or his relation to Him . . . But all the while he longs for certainty . . . ‘ Buddhism by K. Saunders (1930), p. 94. **Quoted in The Three Religions of Chins, by Soolhill, p. lit , Oxford Press. tThe Religions of the World by G. M. Grant, , pp. 81. 81.
A heathendom so bound has no in herent power of self-deliverance. But it sighs for redemption by some higher power.” t In view of all this testimony and much more that could be cited, we must say that the idea that the faiths being followed by these foreign peoples are “good enough for them” stands uncon firmed, to say the least. Further testimony in this direction has perhaps not come to attention because of the difficulty the non-Christian meets in expressing his own need. In his un developed state, his own lack is to him vague and indefinite. But while the ad herents of non-Christian. faiths can not well delineate their own need, it is nevertheless in many cases w r i t t e n deeply upon their very faces. Their in ability to elucidate their aspiration for something better should not stand in the way of our recognizing it. The dying wail of the average non- Christiàn betrays only hopelessness and despair. While there are occasionally notable exceptions, taken as a whole the pitiful death cry of the heathen, wherever he may be found, chills the heart and leaves the hearer with no doubt that the soul passes from its temple of clay devoid of peace and without having found any degree of spiritual assurance. Why not then give them something better instead of leav ing them with that which only an ex cuse-finder would term “good enough for them” ? Why Interfere with Other ' Religions ? The next general type of objection to missionary work is that which suggests that we who embrace Christianity should not interfere with persons who hold to other religions. We are told that these people have cherished their religious tra ditions for generations, and that what was sufficient for their fathers should be satisfactory for them. Why should we impose our religion upon them? This objection evidences ignorance of several important facts. In ,the first place, we would ask: What is meant by “their religions” ? The traveler in China and Japan is very familiar with Buddhist temples, and Buddhism pre dominates throughout large sections of the Far East; yet Buddha lived and died in India. The people referred to have changed “their religion” once. Why decry another change if this one is ever lastingly for the better? Such p e o p l e as the Malays and Javanese, recently visited by the writer, were found to . be Mohammedans; yet Mohammed lived and died in Arabia, thousands of miles away. The people of these regions changed their religions once. Did they then so dishonor their fathers that their fathers would not —— 1§ ■* t The Living Christ and Dying Heathenism by J. W ar:-.'" p~. S3. 86, 1?9.
Triumph at Last • The final triumph of the gospel is as sure as the promises of God. Duty is ours; results are God’s. We are not responsible for conversion, but we are for contact. We are to go every where and preach the gospel. All are to go to all. We are to bear our wit- -ness among all nations, and leave our God to bear His witness in confirma tion of our own. — A. T. PIERSON. gladly have them do it again for their own uplift? And how about our own forbears of long ago who forsook their Teutonic mythologies and druid wor ship? Will we rise up and call them cursed for forsaking crude ways which only the unthinking would term “good enough” for them to pass down to us? We would point out also that it is a further misconception to suggest that we are imposing “our religion” upon any one. Christianity, aside from being of divine origin, was of Eastern genesis. The Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of man, lived and died and rose'again in Asia. As far as missions to Asia are con-' cerned, we are only taking back to her that which she should have cherished all along and should have kept alive through the centuries as her finest heritage. In the strict sense, none o f .us who are not Jews, can caU Christianity “our religion.” Of the thousands of mission aries scattered over foreign fields, very few are Jews. All the rest of us must deny that Christianity is “our” religion in the historical sense. We are all alien converts to it. And finally we woulpl emphasize that we are not “imposing” a religion upon any one. Christianity is a matter call ing for individual choice. Its acceptance must be a voluntary act of the free will. “Whosoever will, let him take” is the divine injunction. To evangelize is to set the gospel before a people. It is not to coerce. It is not to compel. We would invite, we would invoke, we would implore; but further we cannot go. Affecting the “ Culture” of Primitive Civilizations Let us consider another point. The traveler and the student of ancient lore often suggest that it is a shame to de stroy or supplant the culture of primi tive civilizations. They protest against what appears to be a ruthless demolish ing of beautiful and irretrievable rem nants of hoary culture. But the type ot missions we believe in and advocate is not blameworthy in this respect. Some missionary enterprises, it mr.y be true, are largely occupied in promoting in stitutional work—a kind of social re form program—which has as its result [ Continued on Page 320]
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker