It was at this time that the translation of the Bible into the Classic
Chinese Version, or "Delegates' Version" as it was afterwards called, was
going on. A long and heated controversy had arisen as to the proper terms
in the Chinese language to be used in translation of the words "God" and
"Spirit." Missionaries in different parts of the empire took most opposite
views and held them with the greatest tenacity. The Missionary Boards and
Bible Societies in Great Britain and America were deeply interested
spectators. The American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions and
the American Bible Society became participators. On what they considered
satisfactory evidence they declared in favor of certain Chinese words and
characters to be used in preaching the Gospel and in translating the
Scriptures. They advised their missionaries and Bible distributors of
their decision.
The missionaries at Amoy, Messrs. John and Alexander Stronach, London
Mission, and Messrs. Doty and Talmage, had very strong convictions on this
subject. Their views agreed. Rev. John Stronach was one of the Committee
who prepared the "Delegates' Version." The views of the brethren at Amoy
were diametrically opposed to the decisions of the American Board and
American Bible Society. In a long letter of eighty four pages, addressed
to Drs. Anderson and De Witt, Oct. 31, 1851, Mr. Talmage sets forth their
side of the question. No man can read that document, weighty with learning
and charged with moral earnestness, but must feel the profoundest respect
for the writer, however he may dissent from his arguments. He concludes as
follows:
"Such are our views concerning the use of the words 'Shin' and 'Ling' as
translations of the words 'God' and 'Spirit.' While we hold ourselves open
to conviction, if it can be proved that we are wrong, we at present hold
these views firmly. We may not have succeeded in convincing the Prudential
Committee that our views are correct, yet we trust we have convinced them
that we have given due attention to the subject. We now ask, Can the
Prudential Committee expect of us, while we hold such views, to conform to
their decision? Would they respect us if we did? We could not respect
ourselves. If we could thus trifle with conscientious views on subjects of
such importance, we certainly should regard ourselves as being unworthy to
be called missionaries of the A. B. C. F. M. or any other Protestant
association, and we think the Prudential Committee would also lose
confidence in us. We now feel called upon to state our views in reference
to the propriety of the various missionary societies and Bible societies
and other institutions deciding for us what terms we shall use and what
terms we shall not use in preaching the Gospel to the heathen. We shall
state our views with the utmost kindness and with all due deference to
those from whom we differ. We cannot doubt that the Prudential Committee
are willing also and desire us to state our views with the utmost
frankness. If our views are incorrect, we desire that others use the same
freedom in pointing out our errors. Our views are these:--The societies
in the United States and England are not called upon, at least at the
present time, to decide this question for us. Those societies which have
made such decision have acted prematurely. In deciding this question
authoritatively, they are assuming a responsibility which we think they are
not called upon to assume. This responsibility belongs properly to the
missionaries, and they, we say it with all due respect, are much better
qualified to bear this responsibility; for they are better qualified to
judge of the evidence and discover the truth in the case. If they are not,
then they are not qualified to be missionaries. But whether better
qualified or not, they are accountable to a higher power than that of any
society under whose patronage they may labor. Whatever be the decision of
such society, they are still bound, in preaching the Gospel, to conform to
their conscientious views of truth. The only way to produce agreement
among Protestant missionaries is not by authoritative decisions or even by
compromise, but by producing evidence sufficient to convince the judgment.
We must have evidence. In selecting men for China or any other heathen
field, missionary societies should first examine whether they have mental
ability to acquire the language of the people to whom they are going. If
they are deficient in this respect they should not be sent, and if
missionaries on the ground are found deficient in this respect they should
be recalled."
The "term question" has not been settled to this day.
Jan. 22, 1852. To Dr. Anderson.
"I made another effort to extend our influence by going out towards evening
into the streets and selecting eligible situations from which to preach to
those who would assemble. In this manner I often had opportunity to
publish the glad tidings more widely than we can do in our houses of
worship. I found much encouragement in this work. If we had the physical
strength we might thus preach day after day, from morning to night, and
find multitudes ready to listen."