STATION DISTRICT SURVEY.
THE WORK TO BE DONE, AND THE FORCE TO DO IT.
Missionary work is presented to us here at home mainly at two points;
the one, work at a mission station, the other, the condition and needs
of a country or of a continent. In the one case we hear a great deal
about the missionary's life and work; in the other we hear about great
problems, religious, moral, social, and very little about the facts of
the work.
We propose to begin with the mission station and to set down the
information which we need, in order that we may take an intelligent
interest in the work at the station, viewed by itself, as progress is
made towards the immediate object of its existence; and then we propose
to look at it in relation to other stations in the province or country,
both comparatively to see how they differ, and as parts of a whole, to
see what is the position of the Church in the province or country, and
what place each station occupies in the work done in the larger whole.
When we look at the mission station viewed by itself, the first question
which we ask is: Has the station any defined area, district, or parish,
connected with it in which it is the business of the missionaries to
preach the Gospel and establish the Church? If the answer to that
question is, "Yes, it has," and that answer would very commonly be
given, then at once we get our feet on firm ground. We can start our
survey on a territorial basis; and with a common territorial basis we
can immediately compare the work of one station with that done at
another station. We have further a _terminus ad quem_, and in our survey
we can tell whether progress is in that direction and how rapid it is.
We can do this, because the definition of a parish or district implies
the recognition on the part of those who define the parish or district,
of the purpose, if not the duty, of preaching the Gospel and
establishing the Church in the area of that parish or district. The mere
definition of the area, therefore, implies a policy for the mission
which defines the area and for the station for which the area is
defined. For such a station, therefore, we design our first survey, the
object of the survey being to discover how far the work of the station
is succeeding in performing the task which it obviously undertook when
it accepted the definition of area.
1. We begin then by surveying the position of the work in the station
district extensively: we ask--What is the relation between the work done
and the work remaining to be done? We ask this question in two forms;
first, in terms of the cities, towns, and villages which lie in the
station area, and secondly, in terms of population. We ask the question
in this double form because we believe that by this means the surveyor
will obtain a clear view of the situation and will be able easily to see
what has been done in relation to the work yet to be done, and it is the
relation of those two that is most illuminating. If these tables were
constantly revised the progress of the work could be traced from year to
year easily and helpfully. Put side by side they illuminate each other,
and each affords a check upon the other. Progress in numbers in
proportion to population and progress in the number of places occupied
should often properly advance side by side. Progress in numbers in
proportion to population without any increase in the number of places
occupied may often occur; progress in the number of places occupied
without a corresponding increase of the Christian population in
proportion to the non-Christian population may also occur, and each must
give the missionary food for thought. The tables are simple, dealing
with bare numerical proportions:--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | Number of| Number of |
| | Date of | Occupied | Unoccupied| Work to
District.| Area.| Foundation| Cities, | Cities, | be Done.
| | of Station.| Towns, | Towns, |
| | | Villages.| Villages. |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | |
_________|_______|_____________|___________|____________|__________
By "occupied" we mean places where there are resident Christians, few or
many.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Total | Total | Total |Work to | Remarks
Population.| Christian | Non-Christian | be Done. | and
| Constituency. | Constituency. | |Conclusions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
___________|_______________|________________|__________|____________
By _Christian Constituency_ we mean the total number of people who call
themselves Christian in the area in question. They may not be baptised,
they may be mere inquirers or hearers; but if asked their religion they
would call themselves Christians rather than anything else.
The reasons why we adopt this extremely wide expression are: (1) Some
societies, whose members are undeniably Christian in morals and thought,
do not baptise adults; many societies do not baptise infants; yet these
unbaptised people are certainly not heathen; they certainly do not
belong to any other religious organisation than the Christian. Again,
some societies baptise very much more freely than others, and count as
members large numbers of people whom other societies would consider to
be in the position of inquirers or hearers. Consequently any just
comparison between different areas in which different societies are
working is impossible unless a very wide expression is employed, and a
very wide interpretation given to it.
(2) The Christian cause, both for good and evil, is largely influenced
by the existence of these unbaptised. They are called Christian, they
are considered to be such by their heathen neighbours, they suffer
persecution often with the other Christians when any outbreak occurs.
Their numbers and conduct exercise a wide influence in the society in
which they live, for or against the progress of the Christian faith.
(3) The attitude of these people to the Christian missionary is quite
different from that of the heathen. They acknowledge Christ as the one
Divine Teacher and Lord. The missionary cannot count them as belonging
to the heathen; he cannot approach them as the teacher of a new
religion. He must approach them as an exponent of the religion which
they already profess. However inadequate and confused their ideas about
Christian theology and practice may be, they expect to receive from a
Christian teacher instruction in their own religion, and that religion
is a religion common to him and to them. Consequently to omit them from
the Christian constituency is to do an injustice to them, and to
misrepresent the true facts of the case.
(4) In many areas two or more societies are at work and their conception
of the qualifications for the name of Christian differ. In a survey each
society is tempted to ignore the members of the other, and to reckon as
Christians only those who fulfil the conditions which are applied by the
one society. So certain Protestant societies ignore all Roman Catholics;
but that for the reasons already stated is most misleading, for when
persecution arises Protestants and Roman Catholics alike suffer for the
Name of Christ. Whatever the members of another society may be, they are
certainly not heathen; the heathen deny them. Consequently they cannot
properly be counted with the heathen by any surveyor who wishes to
present the facts.
For these reasons we have been compelled to adopt a very wide
expression, and the expression used by the China Continuation Committee
seemed to be sufficiently elastic to serve our purpose. Nevertheless, to
avoid error as far as possible, when we institute comparisons between
Christian and non-Christian population, we introduce side by side with
the total Christian Constituency the total Communicants (or Full
Members), which is a valuable check.
Take then an example. The figures here given are obviously not the
figures of a station area; they are figures for a province; but they
serve to illustrate the point. We cannot fill up the area table; we can
only supply figures for the population.
----------------------------------------
Population. : Total : Total Non-
: Christians. : Christians.
----------------------------------------
32,571,000 : 534,238 : 2,036,762
----------------------------------------
Now, here of the 534,238 Christians 500,655 are Roman Catholics, the
Protestants numbering 33,583. The Roman Catholics in this area began
work about 300 years earlier than the Protestants. Are we to eliminate
them?
Are all these 33,583 Protestants more worthy of the name of Christian
than some of the Roman Catholics? Or shall we eliminate some of the
33,583? If so, how many, and on what grounds? Is not the denial of the
Name to those who claim to be servants of Christ absurd? Are there not
enough non-Christians to be converted?
Suppose the Roman Catholic figures to be an estimate. Is it not plain
that in dealing with considerable areas estimates may be useful though
faulty? How little difference in the work to be done does an error in
that estimate make? Knock off or add on 50,000 and is the work to be
done seriously affected? It is true that in some calculations an error
of that magnitude might mislead us somewhat, but hardly enough to
vitiate our whole view of the situation, especially if we carefully
check our conclusions by the results of other tables given later.
At the first glance these figures produce the impression that very
little has been done. In the beginning, and that was many years ago,
there were over 32 million non-Christians; there are over 32 million
to-day. But let us look at proportions and see what a different
impression is produced.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Population. : Total : Total Non- : Proportion
: Christians. : Christians. : of Christians to
: : : Non-Christians.
-----------------------------------------------------------
32,571,000 : 534,238 : 32,036,762 : 1 to 60
-----------------------------------------------------------
One Christian to every sixty non-Christians gives us a totally different
impression. We begin to feel that if only the Christians awoke to their
duty they could influence the whole population profoundly. That is
precisely the effect produced upon the Christians by a missionary survey
undertaken with them, and understood by them; they begin to see the
immensity of the work to be done, they begin to see that it can be done.
There should properly then here be two tables parallel to the first two.
Thus:--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Number of | Number of | |
| Occupied | Unoccupied | Proportion of |Remarks
Area. | Cities, Towns, | Cities, Towns, | Occupied to |and
| Villages. | Villages. | Unoccupied. |Conclusions.
------|----------------|----------------|---------------|------------
| | | |
______|________________|________________|_______________|____________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total | Total | Total Non- | Proportion of | Remarks
Population. | Christian | Christian | Christian to | and
| Population. | Population. | Non-Christian. |Conclusions.
------------|-------------|-------------|----------------|------------
| | | |
____________|_____________|_____________|________________|____________
Observe what light is thrown upon a district by the mere juxtaposition
of those few facts. I think those two tables alone should suffice to
prove that a survey which regarded only a very few factors might be of
immense service, if those who used it kept clearly before them its
partial character and did not allow themselves to treat it as complete.
But, unfortunately, these first facts which we have desired are, like
other facts of importance, procured only with difficulty and toil. In
order to fill up the preceding tables the missionary surveyor must be
able to state what is the area and what the population in the station
district. But some could not supply that information. Its acquisition
might involve a journey of many months given up to careful examination
and inquiry. It is no small demand to make. In many cases a reasoned
estimate is indeed the only possible statement; but as we have already
argued careful estimates are invaluable, and where a census does not
exist they give us for the time something to work upon.
Where the physical survey can be undertaken it is most illuminating
work, illuminating both to the missionaries and to their native helpers,
who often gain an entirely new view of their work and its possibilities
from such personal examination. Testimony to the value of this
experience is growing daily in weight and volume.
This physical survey would naturally result in the production of a map
of the area in which the cities, towns, and villages in the station
district were marked with notes on their character from the missionary
point of view. In this map all places where Christians resided, where
there were Christian congregations, churches, preaching places, schools,
hospitals, dispensaries, etc., would be marked. It would be a pictorial
presentation of the facts so far as they were capable of expression in
map form.
But whether in map form or in statistical form, the area and the
population for which the mission is working must be expressed either by
exact figures or by estimates if we are to trace progress.
If these tables were kept over a number of years, the missionaries on
the spot and directors and inquirers at home would be able to see what
progress was being made towards fulfilling the obligation implied by the
definition of the station area or district, and what that obligation
involved.
II. When we know the work to be done we turn to the consideration of the
force available. This force consists of permanent and more or less
temporary members. Some will in all human probability remain in the
place till they die; they are of it, they belong to it; others will
probably depart elsewhere; they are not of the place; they speak of home
as far away; they are liable to removal; sickness which does not kill
them takes them away; the call of friends or business carries them back
to their own land; they are strangers all their days in the mission
district. Nevertheless, they are generally the moving, active force;
upon them progress seems to depend. It is strange, but it is true
generally: the permanent is the passive element, the impermanent is the
active. Here we simply state the fact to excuse or condemn the placing
of the missionary force first in our tables. First it is to-day.
We need then a table of the foreign missionary force. In its form it
will be a mere statement of proportions. The proportions are essential
in order to make comparison between one area and another possible; and
comparison is the sweet savour of survey. We cannot compare the work of
three men labouring among an unstated population with the work of two
other men working in an unstated population; the moment that the
proportions are worked out the cases can be compared. But some men
detest this purely quantitative comparison. They insist, and rightly,
that there is no true equality in the comparison. One man differs from
another man and his work differs from the work of the other man: over
large areas it is often the work of one man among many which really
saves the situation. It is quite true. In the last resort survey becomes
survey of personalities. But in a survey of the kind which we propose,
survey of personalities is impossible and most undesirable.
The survey proposed cannot deal with personalities, but that does not
invalidate the importance of the information asked for. Such forms
received from many different stations would certainly throw light on the
serious question of reinforcement. It is of course obvious that
reinforcements could not be allotted rightly on such slight evidence as
the proportion of missionaries to the population of a district. The
question is not whether reinforcements could be allotted on this factor
alone; but whether they could be allotted rightly in ignorance of it.
Taken in conjunction with the preceding and following tables, this table
would reveal something that we may call _need_ in a purely quantitative
expression, and comparative need should certainly influence the
allotment of reinforcements. Though the statement of need in this table
is indeed utterly insufficient by itself, it is nevertheless true that
no statement of comparative need which ignored the proportions here set
out would be satisfactory. This quantitative expression is not
sufficient; but no statement is sufficient without it, and, as often, so
here, it is the proportion rather than the actual figures which make
comparison possible:--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Total |Proportion |Proportion | Remarks
District.|Popula- | Foreign | to | of Women | and
| tion. |Missionaries.|Population.| to |Conclusions.
| | | |Population.|
---------|--------|-------------|-----------|-----------|------------
| | | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
We turn now to the permanent Christian force in the district. We want to
know what is the force. We ask, therefore, that the total Christian
constituency may be accepted as the first expression of the native
force. The progress of the Gospel is most seriously affected by the
whole number of those who in any sense call themselves Christians. They
are the force in the place which influences the heathen for or against
it. It is of the utmost importance that they should be reckoned first,
and treated first, as the force which above all others works slowly,
quietly, imperceptibly, but mightily. The whole body of those who
profess and call themselves Christians should be put in the very first
place.
Then the communicants (or full members) are commonly the body to which
all turn for voluntary zealous effort. The communicants are the strength
of the Church. We compare them next with the work to be done. Then the
paid workers. Then the voluntary unpaid workers, recognised as such.
The difficulty of calculating the unpaid voluntary workers is indeed
very great. We know of no definition which would serve to give any
uniformity to returns made by different missions. We recognise that
different missions would make the returns on different bases. We
earnestly desire a common definition, which all might accept. But under
existing circumstances it seems impossible to find one. Nevertheless,
without some statement of the number of voluntary workers, we are, as we
shall see, in grave danger of misjudging the situation and wronging our
missionaries and the native Christians. For the time then we suggest
that it would be far better to accept the returns given to us by the
missionaries on their own basis, asking them to append a note to the
return explaining how they calculated their voluntary force. We should
then have the following table:--
_The Native Force_.
_(a) The Christian Constituency_.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
District. |Population. |Christian |Proportion to |Remarks and
| |Constituency |Non-Christian |Conclusions.
| | |Population. |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_(b) The Communicants or Full Members_.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
District. | Population. | Communicants. | Proportion to | Remarks and
| | | Non-Christian | Conclusions
| | | Population. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_(c) The Paid Workers._
---------------------------------------------------------------------
District. | Population. | Paid Workers. | Proportion to | Remarks and
| | | Non-Christian | Conclusions
| | | Population. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_(d) The Unpaid Workers._
-----------------------------------------------------------------
District. | Population. | Unpaid | Proportion to | Remarks and
| | Workers. | Non-Christian | Conclusions.
| | | Population. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here again it is the proportions which are illuminating and enable
comparisons of different areas to be made. The bare figures of the
number of Christians and communicants and workers by themselves would
tell us very little; only when we have them related to a common factor
do we get any real light.
Let us now sum up our inquiry thus far.
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Work to be Done: Non-Christian Population. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Untouched, Unoccupied Villages. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Foreign Force Compared with Work to be Done. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Native Force Compared with Work to be Done. |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Christian Constituency. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Communicants. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Paid Workers. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
Unpaid Voluntary Workers. | |
+-------------------------------------------------------+-----+
If these tables were kept over a series of years, the progress of the
force in relation to the work to be done would be most interestingly
revealed.
But in estimating the Christian force in the district we need to know
more than its number; we need to know so much of its character as
statistical tables can show.
One Christian to every 129 heathen may mean much or little. It might
mean that the day when the Christian force would be the controlling
force in the area was close at hand. That would depend largely upon the
capacity of the Christians, their education, their zeal. The tables
which we now suggest are designed to reveal, so far as tables can
reveal, the truth in these matters.
We begin then with the proportion of communicants in the Christian
constituency. If we take the last table and, instead of considering the
proportion of the communicants to the non-Christian population, consider
the proportion of communicants to the Christian constituency, we gain a
very different view. We gain then an idea of the character of the
Christians. Instead of an idea of the size of the force at work we
receive an impression of the quality of the force. Even one who lays
little stress on the value and necessity of sacraments would not deny
that he would expect more from a Church of 1000 in which 500 were
communicants than he would from a Church of 1000 of which only 100 were
communicants. He might deny that his expectation was based upon any
faith in the virtue of sacraments, but he would acknowledge the fact
that in our experience the Church which possesses large numbers of
communicants is generally stronger than the Church which possesses a
small number. The comparison of the number of communicants in relation
to the number of the total Christian constituency does properly produce
an impression of the strength of the Christian body.
If we can fill up the table
---------------------------------------------------------------------
District.| Total. | Communicants | Proportion of | Remarks and
| Christian | or Full | Communicants | Conclusions
| Constituency.| Members. | to Christian |
| | | Constituency. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
we gain an impression of the strength of the Church. But it is important
to observe that it is only in relation to the earlier tables, which set
out the force in relation to the work to be done, that this impression
of strength is of immediate importance to us. We are dealing with a
missionary survey, a survey concerned with the propagation of the
Gospel. The mere strength of the Church, unrelated to any work in which
the strength is to be employed, is a very different matter. We might
take pleasure in the sight of it. We might congratulate ourselves and
the missionaries on the beauty of the strength revealed, but not until
it is related to work to be done does strength appear in its true glory.
We find in nearly all missionary statistics the number of communicants
and converts set forth, and we often wonder what for. It cannot be that
we may glory in our conquests and say: See how many converts and
communicants we have made! But, unrelated to any task to be done, that
is all that appears. Therefore we have instituted this comparison here,
in close relation to the earlier tables, that we may know what is the
force on the spot at work in the area defined.
Next, the proportion of Paid Workers in proportion to the number of the
Christian constituency and the communicants is a most illuminating
factor. By itself it is a difficult factor to appreciate rightly.
Suppose we find, as we do sometimes find, that one out of every ten
communicants is a paid worker. That may imply that the proportion of
rice Christians is very high, or it may imply a high standard of zeal,
very many of the converts being able and willing to devote themselves to
Christian work and at the same time too poor to be able to support
themselves without pay. This proportion, therefore, should be carefully
checked by a table which shows the proportion of unpaid workers and
another which shows the standard of wealth. But commonly we are given
the number of paid workers, and given neither the number of unpaid
voluntary workers, nor the standard of wealth, and therefore the danger
of reading amiss the number of paid workers is great. We have already
explained the difficulty of obtaining exact figures, or even estimates,
of the number of voluntary unpaid workers, but a mere glance at the
proportion of paid workers to communicants should be enough to persuade
any man who desires to judge our work fairly of the necessity for such a
table as we now suggest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
District.| Paid | Proportion | Proportion of | Remarks and
| Workers. | of Paid Workers | Paid Workers | Conclusions
| | to Christian | to |
| | Constituency. | Communicants. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
District.| Unpaid |Proportion |Proportion of | Remarks and
| Workers. |of Unpaid Workers|Unpaid Workers | Conclusions
| |to Christian |to |
| |Constituency. |Communicants. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | Proportion of Christian |
| | Constituency. According |
| | to Local Standard. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
District.| Christian | Well | Poor | In | Remarks and
| Constituency. | to do. | | Poverty | Conclusions
| | | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
There is indeed a way of judging the zeal of native Christians for the
propagation of the Gospel very popular among missionaries, the way of
tabulating and comparing the amount which they subscribe for missionary
work. Obviously this method is the form most natural to us, but it is
one of the worst conceivable. When a Christian congregation lives
surrounded by heathen, for it to learn to satisfy the divine spirit of
missions by putting money into a box, is most dangerous. The zeal of
Christians for the spread of the Gospel ought always to be expressed
first in active personal service. We should prefer to omit any question
as to the amount subscribed for missionary work far off. We believe it
to be a most delusive and deluding test. It deceives the giver, it
deceives the inquirer. We should prefer to inquire the number of hearers
or inquirers brought to the Church by the undirected effort of the
Church members, or the number of Church members who go out to teach or
preach in their neighbourhood, or perhaps best of all, the number of
little Christian congregations which as a body are actively engaged in
evangelising their neighbours. But we admit missionary contributions as
an additional question
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Christian |Inquirers |Congregations| Amount | Remarks and
Constituency.|brought in |Evangelising | Subscribed | Conclusions
|by Native |their | for Missionary |
|Christians.|Neighbours. | Purposes. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That a Church must be instructed and instruct its children all are
agreed: where men differ is with respect to the manner of the teaching.
On the one side are those who would safeguard the faith by committing
the teaching of it to a small body of carefully trained men, the clergy,
whilst the majority of the Christians, the laity, remain unlearned and
accept what is taught by the trained official teachers: on the other
side are those who would boldly commit the faith to all, opening to all
the door of learning. The one party would preserve the faith in the
hands of a select few, the other would put the Bible into every man's
hands. It is an old controversy; but we suppose nearly all those for
whom we write are of the second party, men who would gladly see every
Christian able to read the Bible and to base his religious life upon it.
We stand for the open Bible; we believe that the Christian Church in
every country will progress and develop strongly if it is based on a
widespread knowledge of Holy Writ, and we are prepared to believe that a
capacity to read the Bible is a sure sign of health in any Christian
Church. The test of literacy commonly adopted in our missions is the
capacity to read the Holy Gospels: we accept that gladly and
confidently.
Furthermore, the influence of the Christian Church in the country will
largely depend upon the extent to which the Christians are better able
to read and understand literary expression than their heathen
neighbours.
We want then to know the literacy of the Christian community as compared
with the literacy of the non-Christian population from which it springs,
and, if possible, a little more than that--what proportion of the
Christians have had a sufficient education to enable them not only to
satisfy the very slight demands of a literary test, but to have some
wider knowledge with which to improve their own position and to
enlighten others.
The table which results is as follows:--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Chris-|Propor- |Total |Propor- |Proportion | Remarks and
tian |tion of |Christian |tion of |of Christians | Conclusions.
Popula- |Liter- |Consti- |Liter- |of Higher |
tion. |ates. |tuency. |ates. |Education. |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In this table we touch one of the points on which exact figures are
often inaccessible and an estimate must be made. An estimate which is
recognised as an estimate is not misleading, and, if it is carefully
made and based on evidence understood, is generally most useful, only
estimates carelessly made and mistaken for precise and accurate
statements of fact are misleading.
These tables would, we suggest, suffice to give us a fairly clear idea
of the strength of the force at work, especially if they are taken in
conjunction with the tables which we suggest under the heading of the
Native Church in Chapter VIII. where we deal particularly with
organisation.
We ought now to be able to form some idea of the work to be done and of
the force to do it. We know in quantitative terms the work to be done,
we know the relative force of missionaries, we know the relative
strength of the native Christian constituency, its communicants, its
workers, its education, its wealth, in relation to the work to be done.
We have now to consider how the force is directed, along what lines it
is applied, and how its efforts are co-ordinated.