LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
MR. DENIFTG AND THE CHURCH MISSIONARY SOCIETY.
Pre MB EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR:1 Sue,—Letters have appeared in your last two numbers bearing on the cause that led to my disconnection from the Church Missionary Society. With the hope of throwing a little more light on the subject, and of bringing out facts which hitherto have been kept in the shade, and thus of enabling the public to judge for themselves in the matter, I will endeavour to conquer that repugnance which we all have to writing on personal matters, and state my views as concisely as possible. The most casual reader of the two letters that have already appeared will perceive that the point.of view of their authors is entirely different.
Mr. White, as a representative of a certain section of public opinion, takes the fact of my disconnection from the Church Missionary Society for having adopted the view known as " con- ditional immortality," and argues from it that had I still con- tinued to proclaim the dogma " of eternal torment," I should not have been disconnected; and, therefore, that it is not in- correct to say that my disconnection was owing to my refusing to teach this dogma.
To this, Mr. Wigram replies by asserting that the Committee do not require their Missionaries to teach the " dogma " in question. If this assertion could be shown to be in accordance with facts, Mr. White's inferences from the action of the Com- mittee would at once appear to be unfairly drawn. Now, whereas it would appear from Mr. Wigram's letter as though the Missionaries of the Church Missionary Society were at liberty to proclaim what doctrines they pleased on the subject of future punishment, as a matter of fact, the Committee have never in any way informed the Missionaries that they have this liberty. And the Missionaries of the Society are all under the impression that what are known as the old views, and no others, are considered orthodox by the Society. And furthermore, the Missionaries of Japan suggested to me, when they heard of my having given up these views, and having preached others, that it would be only doing what was proper on my part to communicate this fact to the Committee. And as a proof that not even to-day are the Committee prepared to swerve from the old lines, I will quote from a letter that has been sent to the Missionaries of the Society in Japan since my disconnection :—" We feel confident, however, that you will agree with us that it is impossible for the Committee to authorise the teaching by the Missionaries of the Society of the various views which have recently been put forth on eschato- logical subjects, which, being contradictory one to another, cannot all be true. They must not swerve from their old lines of careful adherence to the Scripture statements, and must look t) their Missionaries not to incur the risk of provoking contro- versy in the Mission field, and possibly of circulating erroneous teaching, by stating as dogmatic truths of Scripture things not
plainly revealed as such Many questions are among the secret things that belong unto our God, and should be approached and handled with the reserve becoming those who avowedly know but in part."
In reference to Mr. Wigram's statement to the effect that the Committee have been asked to give their explicit sanction to my teaching the doctrine of conditional immortality, I would say that I am aware of no such request having been made. All that the Committee was asked to do was to allow me the liberty to act up to my convictions in this matter, which they refused to grant. The Church Missionary Society, being a voluntary society, has perfect right to dismiss its agents at whatever time and in whatever way it pleases, but what I feel it my duty to protest against is any attempt made by the Secretaries of the Society to obscure by circumlocution the real cause of any disconnection.
_ I think, therefore, that the inferences drawn by Mr. White in the letter published in your columns were fairly drawn, and that, practically, disconnecting a man for having adopted one of the many current theories of eschatology, is no other than a disconnection on account of a refusal to teach the old view,—i.e., as far as a Missionary is concerned, for I suppose that no one is simple enough to suppose that with such a class of inquirers as we meet with in Japan, a Missionary is able to refuse to answer the question so constantly put,—What is the teaching of the Christian revelation in reference to a future life P No evasive answer would be for a moment allowed, and if the Missionary informed the inquirer that he had nothing definite to tell him, then the reply.would be immediately forthcoming, if the Christian revelation has nothing definite to tell ns about the region that lies beyond the horizon of all ordinary science and philosophy, then, why is it called a revelation " at all ? It is evident that every Missionary must adopt one of three courses in this matter.
Either he must proclaim the old view, which is that the soul is inherently immortal, that owing to the nature of its essence, it is incapable of being deprived of conscious existence, and, therefore that the finally impenitent must endlessly suffer. Or he must adopt one of those theories which, though very ancient, are known as " modern theories," and teach accordingly. Or he must remain silent altogether on the subject of the future life, and treat the whole subject of eschatology as of minor importance, and one upon which nothing definite can be said.
After much study of the subject ranging over some five years, I have seen fit to adopt the second course, and it is on that account, and on no other, that I have been disconnected from the Church Missionary Society. The Committee of that Society has never been asked to sanction the view, but only to tolerate the man ; and this it has refused to do.
In conclusion, it may be well for me to state that, in writing this, I am actuated by no wish to injure in any way the Society under which I have worked as a Missionary for so many years. No one feels more than I the importance of its receiving public support. It is only with the desire of letting the public know where the Committee of the Church Missionary Society stands in reference to the eschatological question which has been so widely and so earnestly discussed in Europe and America during the last ten years, that I have, somewhat against my will, taken up my pen on this occasion.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
