Native Agents to be selected by

the Lord.

to the work.

I.-In the selection of native agents, too much stress cannot, I believe, be laid on the principle, that it is the Lord Himself who selects agents to do His church's work. It is He who, in his own heart, selects them before they are born either naturally or spiritually, as He did Jeremiah, John Baptist, and St. Paul; it is He who appears to them afterwards, assuring them of His choice, as He did to the same Jeremiah and St. Paul, and Amos, as it is said: "the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel." And finally, it is, He who makes known His will to His church, saying: "Separate unto me, Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them," and as He did in Timothy's case by the "prophecies that went before on" him. Still, man must bear his part likewise, only in dependence on the Holy Spirit, and constantly looking to Him to guide us with His eye. But with All Christians regard to the human part in the matter, I would remark, not adapted first, that it is a great mistake to press native Christians to become paid agents; and that for the very reason just mentioned, that if God has chosen them for the work, no pressure will be needed: and if not, of what use will they be? It is natural that our predecessors fell into the mistake of thinking that every convert given them must necessarily become a fellow preacher; but we have no excuse now for such an idea. I once knew a converted policeman, who would have been an honour to his profession but the Missionary pressed him to throw up his appointment, and become a preacher; and as such he was almost useless. On the other hand, we probably all know many native Christians in secular employment, who are promoting the cause of Christ as much as they could possibly do if paid preachers, and probably much more. Secondly, it is impossible for man to select agents without trial, and this trial ought to be made in several various circumstances. The Missionary through whom he has been brought to the truth ought never to be the only one to decide on his selection. As a general rule, he ought to be tried in a training school as well as in active work; and for this reason, entrance into such a school should never be understood to commit a student to spiritual work. I say, as a general rule; for we all know that there are men who can never study, and yet are full of the Holy Ghost, and of practical wisdom also as well as zeal. Such cases must be dealt with as exceptions; but we must take

Careful selection necessary.

:

heed, lest their exceptional character leads us, unintentionally of course, to "quench the Spirit and despise prophesyings." Thirdly, we ought at least to set it before ourselves as an aim to be realised as soon as possible, to take the native church itself into counsel in the selection of agents, and even to give them a veto in the matter. But here it will be necessary to avoid the influence of those cliques, and personal animosities, and family considerations, and congregational divisions, which natives, as such, are more likely to fall under than foreigners; and we shall do this by extending over a considerable area, as considerable indeed as possible without making the whole thing unpractical, the native body who are to take part in the selection.

Native

Church

should be consulted.

trained by active work

and study.

Plan adopted

at C. M. S.
Divinity
School,
Allahabad.

II. With regard to the training of agents, we must be Agents to be all agreed, that it must be carried on in the same two ways by which they are tried before selection, viz., by active work out of school, and by study in a training school for the purpose. But upon this I would remark, first, that I think the training in school should not be in one continuous course of study, but divided by periods of active work, longer or shorter according to the character and abilities of the student, rather than according to the exigencies of the Mission. In the C. M. S. Missions in Hindustan proper, our agents may be sent four times to the Divinity School at Allahabad, viz., once as readers, for a year, to ground them in those things which are sine qua non as regards their future usefulness, and to see whether they have the ability to proceed further; again, as catechists, for three years, which we consider not too long a time for them to get an insight into the various branches of theology needed by them afterwards; once more, for a year, to prepare specially for deacon's orders; and lastly, for another year, before they are admitted into the full order of the ministry. The time when they are first sent, and the interval between this and the higher three years, depend on the judgment of the Missionary under whom they labour; while their nomination afterwards for deacon's and for presbyter's orders rests with the Native Church Council of the Province. The advantages of this alternation of study and active work, whereby the one is both a trial and a preparation for, and also a great opportunity of using, the other, are too obvious for me to dwell on. But further, I think that both kinds of training ought to be, more or less, simultaneous both

in school and in the field. Those, whose chief occupation is preaching, ought to be encouraged to spend their summer noons and winter nights in study; and students at a theological seminary ought to be sent, and (still better) taken forth at regular intervals to preach, or to read, if they can do no more; and criticism of these exercises should form an essential part of the teaching they receive from their professors. This is what we attempt to do at Allahahad; and this is one reason, I may remark by the way, why it is so essential that the Principal of a Divinity School at least, and if possible the Professors likewise, should be men of experience in other departments of Missionary work. Mere theologians have, in my opinion, departments no business in theological seminaries in this country. At the same time, we require our agents in the field to pass certain examinations, without which they cannot be promoted, and are inadmissible to the Divinity School; only taking care that the questions set be such as they are able to answer merely through private study, with a very limited number of books.

Professors of
Divinity

should have

experience in other

of work.

Is instruction to be

English or

in the

I must now touch on another very important and much debated question in connection with theological seminaimparted in ries. Is the instruction to be conveyed in English, or in the vernacular? And if in the vernacular, is English to vernacular? be taught therein as a subject? Those who advocate an English theological education dwell on the fact, that vernacular Christian theological literature is almost nil, while the English language abounds with the richest expositions of Christian thought in all its many branches; and therefore, they say, that if theological education is attempted to be given in the vernacular, not only must it be meagre itself, but the student can have no means of following it up afterwards, and we all know that where there is no advance, there must be retrogression, and a practical loss of what has once been acquired. Now this is indeed a powerful argument for our agents learning English (and learning it well, for reading if not for speaking), before they are sent to a Divinity School, or, if that be impossible, as soon as they leave it; but I can never see what argument it is for introducing English into the school itself. For, first, to teach English as a subject would be ruination to the whole object of such a school; for, to be of any practical value, it must take up so much English but time as to thrust theology itself into a corner; and if it is taught insufficiently to be of any practical value, it is,

Not in

in the

vernacular.

So.

of course, sheer waste of time. Dismissing, therefore, this idea as absurd, we inquire next, whether we ought to limit our students to those who have already acquired English sufficiently to follow instruction in that language. Such a question needs only to be stated in order to be refuted, at least everywhere besides, perhaps, the Presidency towns. Shall we, then, adopt a compromise, and while carrying on instruction in the vernacular for such as do not know English well enough, have an English class corresponding to each vernacular class in every Institution? This proposition is certainly more reasonable than the others; but it labours, first, under the obvious defect that it would require a double staff, double room, double money, to carry out. And secondly, it is my own firm persuasion, that even if we could get as many thoroughly English-educated students as we wanted, still it would be infinitely better to teach them in the vernacular, provided of course that their teacher was competent to do For what we teach must, I trow, be given out by them in the vernacular; and the task of translating Hebrew, or Greek, or Western thought into Indian thought (not merely words, of course), is, I believe, one that not so very many natives are yet competent to perform, and very few, if any, of those are likely to put themselves under us for instruction. No! it is our business, with all the home education we enjoyed as a basis, continually built upon by study of native thought and language, to make our students capable of expressing all Christian truth in a form which the natives of the country in general will understand and appreciate. A difficult business it is; but if we find it so, how much more so are our scholars A knowledge likely to find it? At the same time, it is obvious to re- of English mark, that the knowledge of English would always be of very great advantage to the students even during their improvement. course, as they could thus be familiarized with those English ideas which have been so largely adopted by many of their educated countrymen, and thus be made of use to them as well as the mass of the people; besides the fact already stated, that in the present state of things it is impossible for one ignorant of English to improve himself much when he leaves school for good. But the necessity, already dwelt on, of the students in divinity schools being taught theology, and most especially dogmatic theology in the very language in which they will have afterwards to use it, has a further conclusion than the

useful for

after

Hindi and Panjabi should be

used as well

as Urdu.

Christ to be

the one

Teacher.

The training a Native Agency our

most

important

work.

undesirability of teaching it in English. It involves also our not being content with a vernacular of the country, but our teaching it in every vernacular which the agents are likely to have to employ in their work. I do not know how far, if at all, this remark applies to South India, or even Bengal proper, though here, I suppose, Musalmani-Bengali should be taken into consideration; but it does most emphatically apply, I am persuaded, to Hindustan proper and to the Panjab. Theological seminaries in those provinces ought never to think of limiting their theological vocabulary to Urdu; but, for the very salvation's sake of the miilions of Hindus in both provinces, Hindi should be freely used in the former, and Panjabi in the latter. And as this is a mere matter of terminology and not of the essence of language, it will not involve the objections to which separate English classes are open.

In conclusion, let me observe, that in training our native agents as well as in selecting them, continual reference must be made to the one Guru of the Church. We must be ever stepping, so to speak, into the background, so as to let Him teach and train our students; and ever impressing on them the truth, that hunan training alone is nothing, and that their supreme aim and most earnest petition should be, to be codidakтoi, ?, "scribes discipled unto the kingdom of heaven," and hence able to "bring forth out of His treasure things new and old.”

OPENING SPEECH

BY THE REV. T. J. SCOTT, D. D. Bareilly.

The training of native preachers and evangelists is and must continue to be the most important work connected with our mission as foreigners in India. Our great work is to raise up and train an indigenous ministry, which must ultimately evangelize these millions. I do not undervalue our present work as evangelists, but that the Christianization of these millions must come from the efforts of a native ministry raised up at present by us, is a matter so completely self-evident as not to require discussion. I will confine myself strictly to the one point of "training" the native ministry. In the training of such a ministry it seems to me three points need special emphasis, (1) the moral life, (2) docprerequisities trinal preparation, and (3) zeal and enthusiasm for the work of a for ministerial minister. In this work of training, Jesus is our great model. In

Three

work. the New Testament we see how He did it. In the theological