THE CHINESE INDEMNITY.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.')
SIE,—I was much interested in the letter of Mr. Samuel Vin- cent on the above subject in the Spectator of May 18th. The various Missionary Committees are rightly trusted with full powers in the direction of mission work, but this question of indemnity is one which concerns too intimately the prin- ciples of the Church of Christ to be wholly left to the decision of any Committee, however honoured. Many missionaries, 1
believe, are in favour of claiming compensation on the ground of the Chinese contempt for any sign of weakness. Whilst respecting the opinion of those who know more of the Chinese character than we who have not lived in China can know, it may be permitted to point out that the Japanese Buddhists whose temples in China have been destroyedare making no claim for compensation, and have made their appeal to the Christian missions to act in like manner. Surely the Japanese ought to understand the Chinese character at least as well as Euro- peans. The claim which is put in on behalf of native Christians who have lost so much is one of doubtful wisdom. Is it not, Sir, to make these virtually " aliens " by taking them under the protection of a foreign Government ? It is not our policy to put barriers between the native Christians and their fellow-countrymen. Would not these men whom we are so anxious to help be despised for receiving protection from "the foreign devils" ? A collection on behalf of "the poor saints" in all our churches would be more apostolic. But to me the greatest objection to making any claim through our Govern- ment is that such claim is backed by the "sword." I humbly submit that this is utterly foreign to the mind of Christ.—I
Previous page
