Action and Reaction in China
HOW often in human affairs it proves true that one’s actions can cause somewhat unexpected reactions at a later time. It is evident that this has proved true in connection with Christendom’s missionaries in China. Despite clear Biblical counsel to the contrary, church missionaries in the past dabbled in politics. And, as a form of leverage in gaining converts, they emphasized material things. Pointing this out, Asia in the European Age 1498-1955, by Michael Edwardes, says:
“Napoleon, in the early nineteenth century, had declared that ‘the religious missions may be very useful to me in Asia, Africa and America, and I shall make them reconnoitre all the lands they visit. The sanctity of their dress will not only protect them but serve to conceal their political and commercial investigations.’ No other Western statesman actually said anything as blunt as this, but it became their policy just the same. . . . As ‘protected persons,’ missionaries frequently became involved in local politics. Some Chinese found it advantageous to become Christian so that they could call upon the protection of a foreign power against their own government. The missionaries were seen as a fifth column, an advance guard of the West and its subjugation of the whole of China.
“The results of Christian missionary effort in China were comparatively small. Those who were converted were more often than not assured by the missionaries of the worldly advantages of being known as Christians, under the protection of the missionary and the guns of those who protected him, rather than the spiritual gifts of Christ’s teaching. . . . Furthermore, the fundamental difference between the peaceable message of Christ and the aggressive actions of the ‘Christian’ powers was obvious to everyone.”—Pp. 190, 191.
What has been the historical reaction to these un-Biblical activities and attitudes of church missionaries? An American Baptist who recently traveled for a month in Communist China reported in a religious magazine: “I asked responsible comrades what Chairman Mao advocated that Jesus Christ did not advocate. I was told there is no comparison between Mao and Christ. . . . They told me that since the land reform program and redistribution of wealth the peasants feel that Mao has given them in this life what God promised in the next. . . . The word ‘missionary’ is a nasty word in China. The people equate missionary work with imperialism. The Chinese are not alone in this; during my visit to 12 African states before going to China I found that Africans were very anti-missionary.”