if Hr J wt.yiuiu ii 4 ' JAN jc SAMUEL B. CAPEN UV a . t Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2019 with funding from Columbia University Libraries https://archive.org/details/disloyaltyitsremOOcape Disloyalty and its Remedy By Samuel B. Capen, D. President of the American Board * All Address delivered at the Annual Meeting, Grinnell, Iowa, October 12th, 1904 * Published by the Board Boston I DISLOYALTY AND ITS REEDY It has been my thought that these annual addresses should, as far as possible, grow out of the experiences of the year. I have there¬ fore been led to select this subject of “ Disloy¬ alty and its Remedy” as the one upon which the greatest emphasis should now be placed. May I, by way of introduction, call atten¬ tion to the gratifying fact, that in the year that has just closed, the ordinary receipts from the living have been greater than in any preceding year ? It is believed by our officers that there were never so many pastors and laymen doing personal and aggressive work for foreign missions as now. Our co-operat¬ ing committees are more numerous and more efficient than ever before. The district sec¬ retaries have been campaigning with great vigor in their respective departments, and in the home office our treasurer has a far larger list of men to whom we can look for support than in years past. The growth has not been spasmodic but steady, running back over sev¬ eral years. Making the comparison with JL898, the regular gifts from the living to the American Board direct have increased about 35 per cent., to the Woman’s Boards nearly 25 4 per cent. Those from the Sunday Schools and Christian Endeavor Societies, on the other hand, for some unexplained reason, have fall¬ en off 5 per cent. Yet, notwithstanding these encouraging facts, I am impelled to discuss the question proposed. A few weeks ago a gentlemen reduced the amount he was giving to support his church from $75 to $60 because, as he said, it was a “hard year,” but he still keeps eight driving , horses! Why did he not sell one of these be¬ fore he reduced his gift to his own church? Eet me quote a few sentences from some recent letters:— “I am pastor of a congre¬ gation which cares very little for missions and nothing for foreign missions.” Another writes, “ There is not one man out of a score of the average Christians in this part of the country who has any particular interest in foreign missions, unless he is educated to it. The apathy, even on the part of active Chris¬ tian men, is sometimes most disheartening. It is due in large measure to the tremendous pressure for philanthropic work in such a great city,” etc. More recently I have re¬ ceived a letter from the pastor of a wealthy church, one of the largest in our denom¬ ination. They have a fine stone edifice, a modern Sunday School room perfectly equipped, a fine parsonage ; but for years have had practically no plan, worthy the name, for giving to missions. The subject has hardly been presented. A deacon recently told his. pastor that “ they did not hire him to preach missionary sermons” ! Within a few months, 5 a Sunday School superintendent derided, in a newspaper article, the attempt to raise money for foreign missions. When Rev. J. P. Jones, D. d., was last in this country, he told me of a cliurch that he visited, where the Sunday School superintendent did not believe in for¬ eign missions, and the church as a whole but slightly. Still, they voted five per cent, out of their gifts for the American Board. At the end of the year, however, the pastor took that five per cent, for his pastoral fund, and the Board received nothing. I give these inci¬ dents as illustrations, in order to show the sad condition in too many of our churches, east and west, and this, notwithstanding the won¬ derful success of the last century in missions both at home and abroad. Is it not down¬ right disloyalty to Jesus Christ? “The Kingdom is the World.” If we ask for the definite reasons for such disloyalty, I think they may be found, first , in the fact that so many have failed as yet to accept the great teaching of the Master , ivith regard to the Kingdom of God on earth. The most superficial reader of the Bible must recognize that his purpose was to found a uni¬ versal empire. In parable and precept, in one form or another, this was ever uppermost. Even in the last hours, when he stood before Pilate, he spoke of the great spiritual king¬ dom which he came to establish. Such a truth ran counter to the whole thought of that day. The Jew prided himself on being a child of 6 Abraham and called the outsiders “dogs”; and Jesus used the current thought of his day, when, in testing the Syro-Phoenician woman, he said: “It is not meet to take the chil¬ dren’s bread and cast it unto the dogs.” The Jews in Jerusalem were willing to listen to Paul, until he told them that the Lord had sent him far hence to the Gentiles, and then “they lifted up their voice and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth for it is not fit that he should live.” The Greeks had the • same exclusive idea, and the whole world out¬ side of themselves they called “barbarians.” Jesus destroyed all this by teaching the brotherhood of the whole race and the univer¬ sality of his religion ! It was difficult for the apostles and the early church to comprehend this revolutionary teaching. It was almost as hard to conquer this exclusiveness as it is the spirit of caste in India to-day. Simon Peter needed a wonderful vision upon the house-top at Joppa before he understood that his narrow conception of what was common or unclean was not God’s. Little by little, these early leaders began to understand the breadth of the word that the Master had spoken to Nico- demus, “God so loved the world;” not the Jew, but the “world.” If at any time their early training began to assert itself, they re¬ called their last marching orders, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation.” And if they chanced again to wonder at the strangeness of it all, at what almost seemed, from the human stand¬ point, absurd, they then remembered that 7 they had been taught to pray, in the silent hour, “ Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as in heaven.” Why do I recall to your thoughts these old familiar passages and the truth which they represent ? For the simple reason that there are in our Congregational churches to-day so many who call themselves Christians, and who yet tell you with unblushing faces, that they do not believe in foreign missions. These people admit their interest in city mis¬ sions, in home missions, or possibly in work for the Anglo-Saxon race, but that is all. They would feel insulted if you told them that they were as narrow in their thinking as those who lived nineteen centuries ago, and yet that is the exact truth. They stand exact¬ ly where the old Jews did in Christ’s time, be¬ lieving that the true religion was only for the Hebrew race, and that the interests of those outside was no affair of theirs. Is not such a position one of absolute disloyalty to the ex¬ press command of Christ? As though God would forestall all these modern objections, we read in the thirteenth chapter of Acts, “ The Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them ; ” and they started on their for¬ eign missionary tour. Well might the Antioch church, which had barely started on its work, wonder at the command to send away these two great leaders ; but, in the end, it did not suffer because of its self-sacrifice ; and Europe and, through it, the world began to be leavened with the truth. Again, you recall 8 how Philip was conducting revival meetings in Samaria, when the spirit of God sent him on the road to Gaza, to preach the gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch. This single man of a foreign nation was worth more to the King¬ dom of God just then than all the work Philip could do in Samaria. Objections. In this spirit of disloyalty to the whole teaching and life of Jesus Christ, about the meanest objection to which we have to listen is, that we ought not to interfere with the re¬ ligions of other nations. Suppose this mod¬ ern idea had been adopted a few centuries ago, then Christianity would never have en¬ tered Europe, and we might, like our ances¬ tors, be still in heathen darkness. It has been well asked, whether, if Paul had been led east to Asia, instead of west to Europe, and China to-day had our Christian civiliza¬ tion, while we in America were in ignorance, would it be right for China to leave us to our¬ selves ? A short time ago, Booker T. Wash¬ ington, in a remarkable address at Boston, quoted Caesar’s description of the ancient Britons in the primitive state in which he found them. Next, he submitted Eiving- stone’s description of the African tribes nine¬ teen hundred years later, and traced the sim¬ ilarity. Then he put this proposition: “If one had asked Caesar, when he first discov¬ ered your forefathers in the condition that has been described, if in two thousand years 9 they could be transformed into the con¬ dition in which they are now found in Ameri¬ ca, the answer doubtless would have been an emphatic ‘No.’ If one had asked Living¬ stone, when he first saw my forefathers in Africa, if in the fifty years that have elapsed since then, or even in the two hundred and fifty years that have passed since the first African was brought to this country, a Negro young man would be the class orator at Har¬ vard University, the answer doubtless would have been a ‘No’ as emphatic as Caesar’s.” Shame on the man who, with the history of the past before him, and enjoying a Christian civilization which has come to him by inheri¬ tance, and without effort on his part, now denies it to others! There is also the Ignorant Objectors. We hear men say sometimes that the religions of China and India are older than ours, and seem to fit the wants of these people — why waste time and money in efforts to change them? A pastor of a large New Bngland church said to me, that this was the thought of many of his leading men. If you go along the highway in China at the present time, you will find, by the roadside, stone towers, shaped somewhat like large chimneys; and it is the custom of parents, when they are weary of their children, or when these are sickly, to throw them into these towers and leave them, wailing and suffering, to die of starvation! Dr. Anient, when he was last here, told me of another awful custom. When children die in the night, they are put IO out upon the doorsteps, either with nothing over them, or possibly wrapped up in a straw matting. In the early hours, they are gath¬ ered up, just as in our cities the health de¬ partments gather up ashes and offal, and are taken outside the city and burned. In India, parents put out the eyes of their children, to make them better beggars, knowing that in that condition they appeal more to the sym¬ pathy of others. And yet there are men who do not wish us to plant the Kingdom of God in India and China, and to teach fathers and mothers to love their children and to bring them up to lead better lives! God have mercy on the man who says we ought not to try to save these far-away people. They know not what they say. Then there are the Shortsighted Objectors, who are disloyal to Jesus Christ. If we had lived in Antioch, we should have heard the men of that day speak of the folly of Paul and Barnabas when they set sail. They are “throwing themselves away,” was doubtless heard on every side. Business friends of the father of Frank D. Gamewell, who has been called the engineer missionary of the siege of Peking, said that he would be throwing his life away to go as a foreign missionary. Hu¬ manly speaking, if Mr. Gamewell, with his special training, had not been at Peking, and had not with true military genius grasped the situation and at once fortified for defense, not a diplomat, missionary, or native Christian among those gathered there would have lived, and we should have seen enacted one of the II greatest tragedies of history. In a similar way, John G. Patou’s pastor urged him not to leave his city missionary work in Glasgow. Can any one tell the loss to the world, if Dr. Paton had taken this advice, and had never entered upon his work in the New Hebrides, a work which has been one of the brightest chapters in missionary history, and which has shown so wonderfully the power of God? Let those who, in their disloyalty to Christ, put up their pious groans about the awful expense of foreign missions, remember that the little group of men who thirty years ago commenced the preaching of the gospel in Japan, have done a hundred-fold more good by helping to transform that mighty empire, than they could possibly have done at home. I have spoken at length upon this spirit of disloyalty to Christ, because it is the greatest hindrance to the progress of the Kingdom of God. One of our ablest ministers, who is settled over one of our strong churches, after long years of experience, wrote me these sig¬ nificant words: “Five-sixths of the people in our churches do not assume responsibility for giving the gospel to the whole world. The small percentage of people who give to mis¬ sions, or even believe in missions, is astound¬ ing, which means that a small percentage be¬ lieve in what is fundamental to Christianity.” Whether or not this is an over-statement, it is impossible to decide; but that it is not very wide of the truth, we are all aware. It is a severe arraignment of our Christianity, and it 12 gives evidence of disloyalty to the Master’s teaching, and of ignorance regarding the won¬ derful success that has come to the work car¬ ried on by the loyal minority. Whose is the Money? Second , there is very widespread disloyalty because of entirely erroneous conceptions about the ownership of money. Men start from the wrong premises, and believe that what they have is their own, and that it is en¬ tirely optional whether they give anything or not. You ask for a gift to foreign mis¬ sions, and they treat your request as they would one to buy a ticket for a lecture or con¬ cert, as a matter simply of personal choice and inclination. This is the worst possible heresy. God says, “the silver and gold and the lands are mine.” We, therefore, are not the owners, but only the trustees of what we have, a difference that is almost as great as that between darkness and light. The ques¬ tion, then, is not, “How much of mine shall I give?” but, “What part of God’s shall I keep for myself?” It is not what we give, but what we have left, that measures the gift from God’s standpoint. This was a fundamental idea with the He¬ brews, and it is, therefore, easy to understand why in Old Testament times they paid their tithes to the L,ord. Their religious organiza¬ tion was supported in two ways, by tithes and by freewill offerings. The latter were option¬ al but the former everyone had to pay or be disloyal. They were as much a part of the 13 warp and woof of their religion as the keep¬ ing of the Sabbath. One-tenth of their in¬ come from every source, and one-seventh of their time, were holy unto God. For a man to keep back any part of his tithe, was to rob God. This, they held, was sure to be fol¬ lowed sooner or later by disaster. The ring¬ ing words of the prophet Malachi are familiar to us all. This principle seems to have pre¬ vailed in other nations as well. New Testament Teaching. When we turn from the Old Testament to the New, we find no word by our Master about any abrogation of this obligation. To the Pharisees he said, “Ye tithe mint and rue and every herb, and pass over judgment and the love of God: but these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.” He seemed to assume that this rule was to con¬ tinue, like that for keeping the Sabbath, and that the one was to be as binding as the other. That we are responsible to God for the use of our money, is further made clear by Christ’s parables of the talents and pounds. We also have the command of Paul to give, not only systematically and universally, but propor¬ tionately , and all for Christ’s sake, as the nob¬ lest motive. The privilege of giving was em¬ phasized. The early church passed naturally from the keeping of the Jewish Sabbath to the keeping of the Christian Sunday; for a com¬ pleted redemption was greater than a comple¬ ted creation. In a similar way, out of the old 14 principle of tithing, they came naturally into this larger conception of giving out of love for their risen Lord. Is it reasonable to sup¬ pose that those early Christian leaders, after being trained to pay tithes as a part of their religion, would encourage less generous giv¬ ing, when they came into the liberty of the Gospel? Under the law, the tenth was the least any one could give: under the Gospel, “proportionate” would mean to the rich a still larger sum. Stewardship is the great idea in the New Testament, and the Christian who does not > recognize this is, in plain language, stealing trust funds. God could convert this world without our help, but he has chosen to take us into partnership and to give us a large in¬ terest in the greatest work in the world. The money he helps us to make is his money and how we use it is a test of our discipleship. Objections. It will be said that there are some who, be¬ cause of their poverty, cannot give one-tenth. There are such persons, just as there are some who, because they are engaged in works of necessity and mercy, cannot keep the Sab¬ bath; but in both instances these are the ex¬ ceptions. As a matter of fact, however, the objectors are not usually the poor, but those who are able to give a much larger propor¬ tion. As all men have is God’s, is it too much for them as a rule to give a tenth, when he loans them the use of his nine-tenths? We 15 are perfectly willing to grant one-seventh of our time in the observance of the Lord’s day. Should we object to a less proportion of our money ? Especially, it should be remembered, in the one case as in the other, that it is for our own best good. As the only Christians that are worth much are those who reverence the Sabbath, so only the Christians who give generously, as they are able, are of much value in the great army. Many feel that they are going to be impov¬ erished by giving their ten percent. My own experience and observation lead to a different conclusion. As a matter of fact, does not God add his blessing now, as in Old Testament days, to those who are true to him? Other things being equal, such an one is more likely to succeed. To quote in substance from an¬ other, is not nine-tenths plus God more likely to bring larger results, even in this world, than ten-tenths without him? Fidelity and Prosperity. On the contrary, fidelity in giving, and prosperity for ourselves, as a rule, go together in the Kingdom of God. Do you recall the passage in Ex. 36: 2-7, which tells how the people brought every morning freewill offer¬ ings for the building of the sanctuary? After a while the word came that there was more than enough for the work in hand, so that Moses issued an order to the people not to bring anything more, “for the stuff they had was sufficient for all the work to make it, and i6 too much.” In the record of the days of Hez- ekiah the King there are two significent sen¬ tences in one verse. (2 Chronicles 31: 10.) It is stated, that the people brought in their ob¬ lations so that they were left in great heaps, and there was great prosperity among the peo¬ ple. It is the usual rule, that those who hon¬ or God, God prospers. I would like to be president of the Board, when the treasurer should report to the prudential committee such a condition in our treasury as in the days of Hezekiah, when the supply overtook the demand, and have the joy of sending out a message like Moses of old, that we had enough and to spare to complete the work. Because of our wrong ideas about the owner¬ ship of money, our prayers > also, are an abom¬ ination to God. To pray “Thy Kingdom come,” and not back up that prayer to the full extent of our ability with our gifts, is what Dr. F. E. Clark calls “conscious or un¬ conscious hypocrisy.” Legacies. One of the saddest instances of this practi¬ cal disloyalty in relation to money, and of failure to recognize our stewardship, is seen in the disposition that men make of what they call their money, when they come to die- There have recently passed away two promi- inent members of New England churches. God had given to one of them an estate of about a million dollars, but when he died he did not leave a dollar for missionary or phil- 17 anthropic work. The other had been entrust¬ ed by God with an estate of many millions, and yet he willed only a very small percen¬ tage of his wealth to philanthropic work and not a dollar to missions. These two men might have encouraged their fellow workers, but instead they have aroused feelings of re¬ gret and disappointment, and in religious cir¬ cles they will soon be forgotten. And then the pity to themselves of what they have lost in the world to come! They might, without impoverishing any of their family, have so disposed of the estates that God let them have for a time, that they would to-day be a mighty living force in the world. Yea, more than this, the work would have enlarged un¬ der the divine touch, till it would have in¬ creased a hundred-fold, for as many years as there are in eternity. I often think with sor¬ row of these men who throw away such chances, who were false to their trust, and who, from the clear light of the other world, now see it all when it is too late. The First Remedy—Teach Kssentiae Christianity. How shall we correct this two-fold disloyal¬ ty, which narrows the bounds of the Master’s Kingdom, and appropriates the money which is all his? First , let me answer in the words of a letter received from Rev. S. H. Howe, d.d. , of Norwich, Conn., we must “ redefine the missionary commission; even back of that , we have got to redefine Christian discipleship." i8 Then, he adds, “I believe the way to get hold of this missionary work by the handle is to do a more thorough educational work, go to the foundations, and define essential Christianity, and press the missionary commission on all Christians.” Is not this an admirable state¬ ment of the first need of to-day? It is wise for us to continue to tell of the success of the work, and of the changes in far-away lands, where permanent institutions are being found¬ ed, and society is being reconstructed. But there are many who still remain untouched. Somehow the paramount claim of God must be pressed home upon their consciences, un¬ til they are made to feel that it is nothing short of treason to the King of Kings, to trifle with his express command. A very promi¬ nent layman and generous giver said to me a few weeks ago, that it was a sermon on “The Claims of Stewardship,” preached, not by his own pastor, but by a stranger, that impelled him to give, as he is now doing, thousands of dollars a year for missionary work at home and abroad. Until he heard that sermon, his mind had never seen his responsibility and op¬ portunity. Similar sermons preached by Rev. C. U. Morgan, d.d., in the early years of his ministry so impressed several young men of his church that, as they increased in wealth, they became generous givers to missions. To carry on this missionary work, is not simply a wish of God’s; it is God’s order, which we must obey, or else, at the great assize, we must answer for its neglect, and to Christ in person. An old sailor said to a young ap- 19 prentice: “Aboard a man-o’-war, my lad, there’s only two things—one’s duty, t’other’s mutiny.” The Second Remedy—Teach the Chie- dren Wored-Wide Missions. This need of greater loyalty to Christ brings home to us, with increasing emphasis, the supreme duty of the church to train at once all our children in world-wide missions. My own observation, confirmed by others, is that we have almost lost a generation of givers , and are running on the momentum created by the great men whose faith and self-sacrilice gave the mighty impulse to modern missions. In the words of a letter from an honored pas¬ tor, “we are propagating missions largely from what holds over from a former genera¬ tion.’ ’ Partly, perhaps, because of the increas¬ ing claims of what we call the humanitarian and the philanthropic, and partly because of the interest given to theological discussions in the years gone by, we have lost sight of some of the great fundamental truths, which fur¬ nish the very basis and motive of missions. The noise of the world and of our own discus¬ sions has been so loud, that we have not heard, as we ought, the voice of the Master, “to go and disciple the nations.” As an illustration of this indifference to missions, where we should naturally expect deep interest, a young teacher went recently to the dean of a Christian academy, and expressed a desire to have organized a mission 20 study class. The dean replied that they already had a Ladies’ Home Missionary Union, so-called, which gave rides to poor old ladies in the town, etc., and she thought the girls ought not to be asked to do anything more. Finally, the girls themselves came and wanted to know why they could not, like others, be allowed to take an interest in these larger things. A pastor would not permit an officer of this Board to say anything about specific gifts until after the offering had been made. He then consented, but was properly rebuked at the close of the service. A labor¬ ing man stepped up to the pulpit and said, “My mate and I can give $2.50 a month to support that work;” and an officer of the church said he could do the same. Because of this prevalent indifference among so many in the generation in active life, it is very diffi¬ cult for any of our missionary societies to make a rapid increase in current receipts. The officers and committees might well exclaim, in the language of Alice in the story, “You have to run as hard as you can to keep where you are!” It is a waste of power to devote most of our time and energy, as we have been doing, to this generation. Their habits have become fixed and will not, as a rule, be changed. Let us give our attention more to the young people, who can be reached and molded for the highest things. Need of Leaders. In the new campaign to reach our young people, we need (A) to train up in our 21 churches young leaders, with a passion for missions. It is a growing conviction that God in his providence selects men who have special qualifications for leaders. By their personality and earnestness, they interest others and make them active participants. When we think of Hampton Institute and its wonderful work, we recognize that it was General Armstrong, the mighty leader, who not only planned that institution, but by his own unselfishness and intensity of purpose, interested a nation in his efforts. A similar statement may be made of Booker T. Wash¬ ington and his school in Tuskegee. In a less conspicuous but just as real a way, we have leaders of different ranks, who, in proportion to their opportunity and ability, are able to interest their fellows in noble work. We need such leaders along missionary lines in every local church. The pastor, of course, is the natural and the best leader. As a rule, he has a hold upon the people and an oppor¬ tunity to influence them that is given to no one else in the community. To their credit be it said, that many pastors are using their great influence, and are making themselves the missionary leaders of their people; but I am very sorry to say that many others are not to be depended upon. The officers of our missionary boards so frequently have sad experiences, that they cannot fail to see that there are large numbers of pastors whose interest in missions is most superficial. You can tell, when you speak in a church and are introduced by the minister, just how much he 22 believes down deep in missionary work. Of course, the pastors are always courteous, but oftentimes they evidently have very little heart. Especially is this clear, when a pastor 'insists on taking the contribution before the address, and still more so, when, on that very Sabbath, he presents to his people some other object, evidently lying closer to his heart, as if to give notice that he does not wish his people to get so much interested in missions, that they will neglect this other need. Mem¬ bers of congregations sometimes protest to the speaker, after it is all over and it is too late to make a change. Such ministers pray for missions only seldom, or in a most per¬ functory way. They have no missionary meetings in their churches. They may preach one or two missionary sermons a year, but the whole impression conveyed to their congregations is that it is not very serious business. On the other hand, every pastor needs interested leaders in the pews. This need becomes imperative, when the minister is indifferent. It must be admitted that there is more indifference in the pews than in the pulpit. With these conditions in pulpit and pew alike, do we not see the necessity of a systematic effort to train leaders in all our churches, and the importance of such confer¬ ences as those at Northfield, Silver Bay, Winona, and all the other places? It must be remembered that this missionary work at home and abroad will never be done by a few men. What could the national republican and national democratic committees do with- 23 out smaller committees in the states and cities? In a similar way, we must have a missionary committee in every church, and each must have a leader. There should be in all our churches experts in missionary methods, able to render this service. The work already accomplished by those who have been mem¬ bers of these conferences, shows the possibil¬ ity, when each church is represented every few years by some young man or woman. Campaign of Intelligence. (B) It must be a campaign of intelligence. The leaders must be able to furnish the facts regarding modern missions; they must know the methods and the results. Some people are indifferent because they are ignorant. It is education and not exhortation which they most need. Many people are moved, not so much by the great motives of missions, as by the knowledge of what they have accom¬ plished. I have never yet seen an audience uninterested by the man who could marshal his facts and figures, and pour them out with earnestness and enthusiasm. This is what the average American needs to arouse him to action. This campaign of intelligence should begin in the home . The father and mother have the first touch upon their children. But we have to remember, that in many homes the parents are not interested in missions ; hence, the necessity of missionary education in the Sunday School. Is it any wonder that our 24 children put so small value upon missionary- work, when we have provided no place for it in our regular study ? I believe the time has fully come when home and foreign missions ought to be a part of the course of study in every Sunday School. Some time in every year it should have its place. We study the men of the Bible, but the line of heroes aad martyrs did not end with the early years of the first century. Our young people ought to know, not only about Abraham and Moses and David and Peter and Paul, but about Judson, Morrison, Divingstone, Carey, Hannington, Mackay, Martyn, Paton, Riggs, and Hamlin. It is a good thing to know which Pharaoh was on the throne when Moses lived, and how many chariots could be driven abreast on the walls of Babylon ; but it is infinitely more important to know something of the mission¬ ary work that is going on in New York and in Chicago; of the brave men and women labor¬ ing among the shacks and dugouts of the West and the rude cabins of the South. Our children should know something of the story of Japan for the last thirty years, of its schools and its missionary leaders. They should know that its great men are almost universally recognizing, that somehow the America that Japan loves has been made what she is by the power of Christianity. They should know something about missions in China, the nation that is trembling from head to foot, as she awakens out of her sleep of centuries. I submit that the living present is worth as much as the dead past. Certainly 25 let the children study the great works of God as he moved among the Hebrew people twenty or twenty-five centuries ago; but, at the same time, show them what he has been doing in our time, in the missionary conquest of America, and in the movement to conquer the world for Christ. Missions in Sunday Schools. The supreme need of the hour is the train¬ ing of all our children in missions. It is well, so far as it goes, to establish in all our churches mission study classes to instruct the leaders, but this is not enough. May I re¬ peat, that all our Sunday Schools should have some regular system of instruction? Nothing else will do, and there can be no substitute. I think it is not too much to say, that the mis¬ sionary cause is lost without it. My own ex¬ perience and observation lead me to say, that no young man can enter business life to-day, with its tremendous pressure, and be kept out of its whirl of worldliness, unless he has been filled first with the missionary spirit, and led to believe that all he has and all he is, be¬ longs to God. Our children cannot be safely left to breathe the materialistic spirit of the present age, without first being made spirit¬ ually immune. In childhood we must, by constant teaching, show them the great need of this work, the heroism of the workers, and the necessity that those who cannot go abroad themselves support those who can. Almost all Sunday Schools have difficulty in holding 26 the boys after the} 7 reach a certain age; they are apt to feel that they are too old and to slip out. I believe that the study of world¬ wide missions, home and foreign, would attract them strongly, and would help to hold them in this critical time in their lives. They would become familiar with the men who are bringing things to pass. Full- blooded boys want to be given something to do, which is worthy of their finest ideals. Every Sunday School ought to have a good set of missionary maps, a missionary library, and, in general, proper missionary literature of the most modern kind. We must be will¬ ing to put out some money, feeling sure that we shall get it back. Rev. C. H. Beale, D. d., recently said at a conference : “I know of churches that pay $2,000 a year to four per¬ sons to sing three times at one service on Sundays, while the same churches pay $250 a year for the religious education of five hun¬ dred children and youth in their care. This is the crowning absurdity of our church life.” Worse even than this, a prominent Congrega¬ tional church spent last year $3,500 for music and for the Sunday School $250. A member of the church committee recently asked the superintendent, if he could not cut down their Sunday School appropriation for next year, saying, ‘‘$250 is a pretty large sum of money to be putting into the Sunday School! ” Could there be greater folly? We must change the proportions in our expenditure and put the emphasis at a different place. This idea has been beautifully expressed by 27 Bisliop Thoburn, in the words, “ Instead of spending herself on the molding of lives that have first to be unmolded, the church should put the emphasis on molding those who are now pliable, and who constitute the church which is to be.” And the whole object of this missionary in¬ struction of the young is to lead them to larger giving. To awaken the intellect and emotions, and then not to give the latter practical expression, is to benumb and make callous the best part of our natures. Too many feel that the amount they can give is so small, that it will not count for much, and they therefore wait until they can give more. The way to form the habit of giving is by giv¬ ing ) even if it is but little. Experience shows that missionary study does lead to practical results. I am indebted to Dr. John F. Goucher, President of the Woman’s College of Baltimore, for the following illustration of the tendency of systematic and persistent work for and by young people. A Marked Instance. The Pittsburg Conference of the Meth¬ odist Episcopal Church contains 255 pastoral charges, including city, town, and country work. At the beginning of 1901, many of these pastoral charges were without any young people’s organizations, and in some there was a positive opposition to having the young people organized for or engaged in dis¬ tinctive church work. Many of their Ep- 28 worth League Chapters were without any appreciable spiritual force, and the conference and district organizations were inactive. Dur¬ ing the past three years and a half, there has been a marked growth of church life and ac¬ tivity in all desirable directions, and this bears a striking relation to the development of systematic mission study by their young people, as the following figures indicate: — Mission Study Classes. 1000 2 1901 (About) 40 1002 “ 100 1003 “ 150 Conference Percentage Contribution of increase to Missions. over igoo. $33,286 38,058 14 46,927 44 64,231 00 The four district Epworth Leagues in which the largest number of mission study classes have been conducted, propose to maintain a new mission in the island of Java, Malaysia Conference, which the church authorities have arranged to open for them. They secured $4,500 for this purpose last year, which is not included in the above statement. The missionary has been appointed, and the work will be commenced this fall. The Conference Epworth League supports a Conference League Missionary Secretary, who gives all her time to the organization of league chapters and study classes within the conference. Many persons have grown in their generous support of the church. The following state¬ ment of the giving of one person is a sample. The giving of some others is even more marked. 2 9 Contributed in 1900 $ .50 1001 1,50 commenced tithing, 1002 2.50 1003 46.50 The growth in spirituality, which has been emphasized first of all, is the chief cause of this increase in activity and financial co¬ operation. In other words, the starting of mission study classes among the young people in this one conference, has had such an in¬ fluence upon those who are older, that the contributions of that conference in four years have increased from $33,000.00 to $64,000.00 while the young people themselves have raised $4,500.00 besides, and started a new mission. And this is not an isolated case; for similar results have occurred in another conference. It pays not only spiritually, but financially, and that speedily, to train the young. It is denominational suicide to neglect them. Such early training makes generous givers. A prominent Congregationalist was asked why he gave so liberally and cheerfully. His answer was : “We were trained to it when children, and we could not sleep on our beds if we kept back the Lord’s money.” “ Sow an act, and you reap a habit; Sow a habit, and you reap a character.” Teaching oE Psychology. Modern psychology shows how habits be¬ come so fixed and permanent that there are comparatively few radical changes in charac¬ ter after the age of twenty-five. We know 30 that more than 95 per cent, of our church members have confessed Christ before that age. After twenty-five, appeals to the con¬ science and intellect seem to have little force. I believe that exactly the same law holds in missionary giving. The great givers were made by training in childhood ; the indifferent and the shirkers were made by neglect in childhood. Suppose that for the next twenty- five years the protestant churches in this country should enter upon a thorough and systematic campaign to train every boy and girl in missions. The generation that are now neglecting their opportunity would, at the end of that time, be gone, and their places in the business and industrial world would have been taken by this new generation of trained men and women. Wealth oh Christians. It is stated that the wealth of the world in¬ creased from 1800 to 1850 by a sum equal to the total wealth accumulated up to the begin¬ ning of the last century. From 1850 to 1875, or in twenty-five years, an equal amount was added for the second time. From 1875 to 1890, or in fifteen years, an equal amount was added a third time. From 1890 to 1900, or in ten years, an equal amount was added a fourth time. In this stupendous wealth, the United States has had the largest proportionate in¬ crease. The following table is a statement of the wealth of the United States as estimated by our government in each of the census years since 1850. 3i 1850 1800 1870 1880 1890 1900 . $ 7,135,780,000 . 10,159,616,000 . 30,068,518,000 . 42,642,000,000 . 65,037,091,000 . 94,300,000,000 The average decennial increase since 1870, is 46.3 per cent. It is quite probable that the percentage of increase from 1900 to 1910 will be considerably larger. Take the average in¬ crease of the past three census years, namely, 46.3 per cent, and it appears that the increase in wealth from 1900 to 1910 will be about $44,000,000,000, making the total wealth in 1910, $138,000,000,000. It is believed that the protestant Christians of our country own about $25,000,000,000. As we add to it, on an average, a billion dollars a year, twenty-five years hence,protestant Christians will be worth at least $50,000,000,000. Suppose now the owners of this wealth had been trained in childhood to give to missions ; would there then be any lack of money to prosecute the missionary work at home and abroad, on a scale undreamed of at present ? For our pres¬ ent purpose, let us throw out the millions of income from salaries and the sales of mer¬ chandise and farm products, and consider only the interest on accumulated wealth. The interest on the $50,000,000,000 at only 4 per cent, would be $2,000,000,000. If the average gifts of all were 10 per cent, as the gifts of the trained few are now, we should have an income for our religious work of $200,000,000. Does any one say that this is idle dreaming? It is 32 not so at all; it is entirely within the reach of the church of America to-day so to train its boys and girls that just such giving as this will be the inevitable result. This, I repeat, is the one great work before our churches to-day. Its faithful performance will change the present disloyalty of the majority into the loyalty of all, and give us the missionaries and the means for their support, necessary to evangelize the world in twenty-five years. If any person is still skeptical, may I call his attention to the accelerating power that is developing in this work ? At the beginning, while foundations were being laid, the work was not only slow but discouraging. Morrison labored in China for fifty years, and at the end of that time had only six converts. Dur¬ ing the first twenty years of our work in Bom¬ bay more than one missionary died for each convert. Now, the work as a whole doubles every ten years. At Silver Bay last July, a missionary from Korea reported that in that country the relig¬ ious forces had doubled nine times in seven¬ teen years. At the present rate the whole world will be converted before the end of this century. The child is born now who will see it. The world will be practically Christian, as much as America is to-day, in fifty years, and if we should put out our money and give our men as we might, from the human stand¬ point it could be done in twenty-five years. I would like to live that number of years and see India, China, and the Dark Continent glow with Christian light like our own land. 33 The Burning Oup:stion. Does anyone wonder why the president of the Board, in each annual address for the last five years, has laid such emphasis on the money side of the work? I am sure that any one who hears, both from the men at home on furlough and in letters continually, the appeals of the devoted men and women at the front, for larger appropriations to do the broader work waiting to be done, is in honor bound to take up these appeals and present them with aid earnestness to the representa¬ tives of our churches, hast November, when we made the appropriations for the year, for six hours the question was discussed, whether or not we could safely increase these grants. It was as sacred and solemn a discussion as was ever carried on, with the eternal inter¬ ests of multitudes involved. It was finally decided that, with the outlook at that time, an increase would inevitably mean a debt, which would be a weight, a hindrance, and a cause of depression in the year to come. But the officers of the Board would be disloyal to the men at the front who are doing our work, yes, Christ’s work, at such odds, and who are breaking down prematurely under the awful strain, if they did not speak again and again of these things. I have very recently seen a letter, written by the wife of one of our best missionaries to her sister in the homeland. Both husband and wife are doing a great work, almost more than they can bear, and are themselves giving one-half of their own 34 small salaries to carry it on. You know what sacrifices this calls for. To read such letters as these is almost unbearable. If the churches had not the ability, we might be silent. It is because they have the ability and will not use it, that we must speak, or be false to our trust. We are living in a wonderful time; it is as never before the age of the young people.. We glory in what Christian Endeavor has done in our land. We rejoice when men like Revs. Robert A. Hume, J. P. Jones, and F. S. Hatch tell us of the mighty work already accomplished by it in India. We are grateful to read this word from Rev. W. S. Ament in Peking, that “the Christian Endeavor move¬ ment and its principles are to be one of the great forces in the redemption of China.” We glory again in the work of the Interna¬ tional Young Men’s Christian Associations, of which there are already three hundred in the mission fields, about one-half of them in col¬ leges and universities. The Student Volun¬ teer movement is also taking hold of the bravest and best of the educated young men and women in our institutions. We shall have in the next few years, as never before, as a result of the work among young people, re¬ inforcements for our missionaries at home and abroad. We must match this consecration of young men who are to go to the front with an equally great consecration of money from those who are to stay at home. This is the work that presses now above everything else, and cannot wait. “ Nothing,” says Carlysle, 35 “ ever happens but once in this world. What I do now, I do once and forever. It is over, it is gone, with all its eternity of solemn meaning.” And the opposite is equally true ; what we neglect is also forever gone. We cannot, we must not, be false to our trust and our opportunity in this crucial hour in the history of America and the world. Let us throw ourselves and all that we have into this mission work, which we know is so near to the heart of Christ. It was his one purpose in coming to this world of sin and need ; should it not be ours ? All must in some way be mis¬ sionaries themselves, or support generously those who are. Anything less than this is disloyalty and treason to our King. May dis¬ loyalty be forever gone in a passionate desire to do the Master’s will and work ! Then we can sing that great hymn of James Montgom¬ ery’s which closes : “ Uplifted are the gates of brass, The bars of iron yield; Behold the King of Glory pass ; The Cross hath won the field.”