THE
HISTORY AND RECORDS
OF THE CONFERENCE
TOGETHER WITH
ADDRESSES DELIVERED AT THE
EVENING MEETINGS

PUBLISHED FOR THE WORLD MISSIONARY CONFERENCE BY
OLIPHANT, ANDERSON, & FERRIER
EDINBURGH AND LONDON
AND THE
FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY
NEW YORK, CHICAGO,   TORONTO
 

THE PROBLEM OF CO-OPERATiON
BETWEEN FOREIGN AND NATIVE
WORKERS
 

By THE REV. V. S. AZARIAH

Address delivered in the Asumbly Hall on Monday
Evening, 201ft June

THE problem of race relationships is one of the mo~t s~rious
problems confronting the Church to-day. The bndgmg of
the gulf between the East and West, ~d th,e attainment of
a greater unity and common ground In Chnst as the ~eat
Unifier of mankind, is one of the deepest needs of Our tune.
Co-operation between the foreign and native workers can
only result from proper relationship. Co.operation is ensured
when the personal, official, and spiritual relationships
are right, and is hindered when th,ese relationsh,ips
are wrong. The burde~ of my m~ssag: IS that, s~akmg
broadly, at least in IndIa, t~e relationshIp too often IS not
what it ought to be, and thmgs must change, and cbange
speedily, if there is t~ be a .la:ge measure of bea~ty co~operation
between the foreIgn mIsSIOnary and the IndIan worker.
I desire to say that personally my relation with my foreign
fellow~workers has been simply delightful, and that in all my
travels throughout India I have received nothing but true
courtesy and kindness from missionaries all over India, in
many of whose homes I have .been a welcomed guest.
Moreover, in all that I say I want It to be clearly understood
that I am fully aware of happy exceptions.
 
Having safeguarded my remarks with these preliminaries,
I pro~eed t~ state plamly some of my convictions in regard
to this subject. My personal observation during a period
of ten ye~rs, SOme of which have been spent in travelling
through dlfferent parts of India, in mission districts worked
by different Missionary SOcieties, has revealed to me the
fact that the. relationship between the European missionaries
and the In~Ian workers is far from what it ought to be, and
that a certam aloofness, a lack of mutual understanding and
openness, a great lack of frank intercourse and friendliness
exists throughout the country. '

This is not only my Own impression, but what I have
gathered from a large number of my Indian brethren, and
even a few European missionaries.

This feeling is stronger and more in evidence in Some
missions than in others. Some Missionary Societies are in
great advance in this respect over others. In the Young
Men's Christian Association we have a body that stands
~ore,?ost in ~av~g su~cessful1y solved the problem. Now,
if thiS separatIOn IS more or less widespread, and I am here
to say that I know it is, we ",-ill agree that this state of affairs
cannot but affect the co-operation of these two arms of
misSionary work, and it cannot but hinder the growth and
development of the Church in India. So far as such a
spirit exists, and wherever the spirit exists, it is impossible
for the Church to fully develop a vigorous life a.nd exhibit a
united front to the non-Christian forces round about.
I do not deny that there is blame On both sides. That
cannot but be so. I do not overlook the fact that hjnd~
rances to a. proper relationship exist also on the side of the
Indian Christians, but since my audience is not composed
of these, I feel tha.t it will serve no useful purpose to detnil
them here. Before my Indian friends I have endeavoured
to re~ove the hin~rances on their side, but what I plead for
here ~s tha~ the dIfficulties on the foreign missionary side
may, If possIble, be entirely done away.

I. Let us first consider the personal relationship that auaht
to exist for effective Co-operation. For the ideal of this
relationship we look to Our Master and Lord. The relationship between Him and His immediate disciples and fe11ow-workers was not only one of Teacher  and pupils,  Master and disciples, but, above all, that of Friend and friends. He placed Himself alongside of those weak, frail, and stumbling disciples as their Friend  and Brother, and lifted them up to a clearer vision, stronger faith, and nobler life. The    disciples were admitted into the closest fnendship with their Divine Teacher, they learned to love Him, confide in Him, follow Him, and walk even as He walked.

Can it be truly said that the foreign  missionary has become a *friend* to his fellow-workers? Can it be said that this has been his aim? I am afr~\.1d In many cas~s the
::l.l1swer must be in the negative. If it has been the ~1~11, as
I trust it h~s been, at le~st it bas not. been suffiCiently
~vowed, nor always Olade manifest i~ a.ctlon: I thankfully
remember that there are scores of miSSIonanes all over the
country who are justly pr~ud of t? e. fact that they. can COUD!
. t least of their Indian Chnstian fellow-workers amoD;:,
sthoemire tar ues•t friends, and there are In d'I an Chns"ha ns m' a.1 1
parts of India who are deeply thankful to count among then
closest friends many fo reign missionaries. But such are f~r
too few. 


Friendship is more than condescendmg love. I do not
for a moment deny that the foreign missionaries love the
country and the people of the co~ntry f?r ~hom they have
made such noble sacrifices, but friendship IS more than the
love of a benefactor. I cannot do. bett~r :han q~ote t~c
words of one who is himse1f a foreign [nlS~lOn~ry m SObut~
I d· H e writes : "The popular appellatlon In use a ou n lao ., b .
missionaries in this country IS 'father; ut a tlme comes
when children ought to begin- and if they develop nor-
rna1 1 y, do be;O:,' in-to think for themselves. and ..t o 1h" ave
aspirations and p~ans o~ their o~\'n. . That IS a .cntlca . ~lme
for the father in hiS relation to hiS chIldren. HIS cont:nue?
, fluence for (Tood at any rate for the greatest good, In his
1sno n's life now; :d,e'p ends on his becomm. g t h e son' s fn" en d .
This change from benefactor to friend imp~es that a new
element of reciprocity is introduced. If I . nghtly regard a
person as my friend, I respect his individuality and remember
that he has peculiarities, rights, and responsibilities of his own,
wruch require, iu some measure at any rate, that a feeling:
of equality and freedom shall pervade our relations and our
intercourse with one another. This is the point :where we
find ourselves in India to-day."

But while" East is East and ':Vest is ' :Vest," is such a
friendship possible between two races, that in habits,
customs, and modes of thought are so di:lmetrically opposed
to each other? I know in my own experience that such
friendships are possible. I am thankful to s:ty that some of
my best friends are among the foreign missionaries. I can
testify to the great enrichment that has come into my own
life through these real friendships. This very enrichment
impels me .to plead with my missionary brethren that they
will lay themselves out to form friendships with their Indian
fellow-workers.


I quote another authority, this time from North India,
the Lord Bishop of Lahore. He says: " \:Vith abundance
of kind feeling for, and unsparing labour and self-denia.l on
behalf of I ndian Christians, the missiona.ries, except a few
of the very best, seem to me to fail very largely in getting
rid of an air of patronage and condescension, and in establishing
a genuinely brotherly and happy relation as between
equals with their Indian flocks, though amongst these there
:lre gentlemen in every truest and best sense of the word,
with whom relat ions of perfect equality ought easily to be
established." Do not these voices from North and South
call attention to the same danger and the one remedy ?
The pioneez: missionaries were It fathers" to the converts.
The converts in their turn were g"l:1.d to ue their It children."
But the difficulty in older mis::iions now is that we have a
new generation of younger missionaries who would li ke to
be looked upon as fathers, and we have a new generation
of C};o] risti::lOS who do not wish to be treated like children.
]f the Christian community of the second and third gc n era~
tions, through the success of missionary wo.rk, has risen to
the position when they do not any longer care to be trcated
like children, should we not be the first to recognise this
new spirit and hasten to strengthen the relationship, by
becoming their friends? Is it not such a relationship, and
such alone, that can, more than anything else, prevent the
growth of the spirit of false independence, foolish impudence,
and flagrant bitterness against missionaries that we often
meet with in Indian Christian young men to·day?

The Bishop of Lahore goes on to make some practical
suggestions. He says: U If we could get into the way of
treating Indian Christians with perfect naturalness, exactly
as we treat English friends, asking them more frequently to
stay with us in our houses, and genuinely making friends of
them, realising in how very many things we have to learn
from them, and how large arc the contributions which they
can bring into the common stock- this, I believe, would do
more tban anything else to draw us more closely together
again, and it would be to the non-Christian world an illustration
of boundless potency and effect, of the unity into which our races can be brought within the body of Christ." Much can be d(;:me along these lines.

Let me give some extreme cases of the contrary attitude. I do it with the deepest pain in my own heart, feeling that if some of my missionary friends have failed, I am also responsible for it. I can now think of one Indian superintending missionary, for over fifteen years in responsible charge of large districts, who said recently that he had never been invited to a single meal at the house of any of his European missionary brethren. I think of a pastor, who is confessedly the right hand of a station missionary, who said to me that during the eighteen years he had been a pastor, his missionary had never once visited his humble home. Two men, holding very high positions in a native State, said to a friend of mine recently that though they had been for several years in the city, and even called on the missionary, the missionary never thought of returning the call. I remember two or three younger missionaries who have told me that while they themselves like to go and call on the leading Indian Christian gentlemen, their senior missionaries are against such innovations. I recall how years ago a young missionary told me of what he called the impudence of an Indian clergyman, who was a graduate of one of the Indian universities, in going forward to shake hands with him. "This man," he said, "thinks, that because he is a graduate and has put on European costume I must shake hands with him !",

I do not want you to. think that these instances represent the general state of affairs, nor do I want you to think that these are but solitary instances. Even if they were solitary instances, occurrences of this extreme type ought to be Impossible.

On the other hand, I can never forget a sight I saw near the foot of the Himalayas, on the borders of Kashmir. At dinner at a missionary's table the British Civil Surgeon of the district, the  missionary, an American Secretary of the Y.M.C.A., a native pastor, and an ordinary catechist sat round the table, with the wife of the missionary presiding at  the table. It was not a got-up show. The perfect ease with which the pastor and the catechist conducted themselves was proof positive that there the relationship was natural and customary. I noticed that that mission on the whole was far ahead in this respect of most others.


Let. me not be misunderstood. I do not plead for
returrung calls, handshakes, chairs, dinners, and teas, as
such. . I do, on the other hand, plead for all of them and
more if they can be expressions of a friendly feeling, if these
or anythmg else can be the outward proofs of a real willingness
on the part of the foreign missionary to show that he
is in the midst of the people, to be to them, not a lord and
a master, but a brother and a friend.

I I. The effective co-operation will only be possible with a
proper official relationship.

The official relationship generally prevalent at present
between the mISSIonary and the Indian worker is that
?etween a m~ster and servant; in fact, the word often used
III South IndIa by the low grade Indian workers in addressing
missionaries is e/aman or master. The missionary is
the paymaster, the worker his servant. As Ion" as this
relationship exists, we must admit that no sens: of selfrespect
and individuality can grow in the Indian Church.
A missionary of the American Board said to me years ago
that the last words his Board Secret:uy spoke to him in New
York harbour were, II Make yourself unnecessary in the field,"
I can bear testimony to the fact that that missionary is
endeavouring to do it in the most tactful way. The aim of
the Missionary Societies, we know, is to develop self-governing
Churches and to give freedom and scope to indigenous
leadership, and to strive to make themselves unnecessary in
the field. But the Societies have not convinced the natives
that this is their aim. Nay, in some missions Indian Christians
truly, though I know erroneously, believe that the
missionaries are against any full self-support and re.'11 selfgovernment, because that will make them unnecessary in the
leadership of the work. It is commonly supposed that the
man of independent thought and action is the man least
consulted in the administration of the mission. I know
some instances where independent action in the smallest
affn.ir has been repressed, and indigenous efforts- even
indigenous missionary efforts- have been looked upon with
suspicion and distrust.

There C<1.n never be real progress unless the aspirations of
the n~tive Christians to self-government and independence
are accepted, encouraged, and acted upon.

I do not forget there is too often a danger of Churches
cl:l.iming complete self-government and full independence
without any regard to the problem of self-support, :md of
1l1dividuals claiming equality in salary and desiring to be
called "missionaries" of a foreign missionary society.
'Vhile I am fully aware of these and similar dangers, I cannot
but feel that in most older missions there is great room for
advance in the direction indicated at this Conference.

In an article that appeared in a leading Anglo·Indian paper
on the World Missionary Conference, the writer says : "The
Indian Christian is kept in leading: strings. I t is true that
of late years there has been among the leading missionary
agencies a considerable advance in tbc way of giving Indian
Christians morc control over their own affairs, yet the reform
movement is atl too slow. Is it to be wondered n.t th:lt young
Indians of abi lity tum aside to the various secular professions
where the powers they.fed they possess will find a fuller scope
for their exercise ? I t is obviously unwise to go on from
year to year drifting along in the old way, for it leads to the
drifting away of the flower of the I ndian Christian youth from
the ministry of the Church."

Let me not be understood to say that this is the only. cause
why educated Christian young men do not enter the ministry.
The question of salary, I am afraid, often takes too prominent
a place in their minds. The spiritual life too often is not
vigorous enough to overcome the temptations to earthly
greatness. But at the same time it cannot be denied that
some are kept away from the ministry because of the conditions
existing in the missions.

I plead, therefore, that an advance step may be taken by
transferring from foreigners to Indians responsibilities and
privileges that are now too exclusively in tbe hands of the
foreign missionary. Native Church Councils should be
formed, where Indians could be trained in the administration
of their own Churches. Missionary Conferences should find
a place for Indian leaders, so that the Indian and the European
may consult and work together for the welfare of the
common work. The favourite phrases, U our money," U our
control," must go. Native Christi::lO opinion ought to be
constantly consulted in regard to any fresh step taken. In
short, all along the line, the foreign missionary should exhibit
uiUnistakably that he is not afrJ.id to give up positions of
leadership and authority into the hands of his Indian fellowworker,
and that his joy is fulfilled when he decreases and
the Indian brother increases.

I am fully aware of the fact that all advance in responsibili.
ty should be transferred gradually and not by the sudden
withdrawal of fo reign funds and control. But gradually, but
none the less steadily, it s/lnuJd be dOlle. For, wi thout grow·
ing responsibi lity, charactcr will not be made. \Ve shall
learn to walk only by walking-perchance only by falling and
learning from our mistakes, but never by being kept in le:1.ding:
strings until we arrive at maturity.
If such an advance is to be made, what should be the
relationship of the foreign missionary to the Indian Christian
leaders ? Surely, that of a friend. To quote again :
"The foreign missionarfs official connection with the
Indian Church must cease some day. If, when that day
comes, the leading Indian Christians aTC looking upon us as
old, jealous fathers, who did not sec.ID to like the idea of
their children trying to stand on thcrr own feet, we are not
likely to be consulted by them at those junctures when a
word of advice or encouragement might be badly needed.
Even if the situation is felt to be difficult, it will be a matter
of honour to the children who have set Qut to build their
own house to show that they can manage their own affairs.
But if we are regarded by them as friends, they will continue
to be willing, when need arises, to seek and receive advice
from us, even though they are no longer under any obligation
to be guided by us."

III. True co-operation is possible only with a proper
spiritual relationship.

No personal relationship will be true and permanent that
is not built on a spiritual basis. India is a land that has a
II religious atmosphere." To the Hindu U the one and only
ultimate is God: his great and only reality the unseen: his
true and eternal environment the spiritual."

In such a land, therefore, the easiest point of contact with the heart is on the spiritual side. The Indian nature has aptitude to develop devotional meditation and prayer, resignation and obedience to the will of God, the Christian graces of patience, meekness, and humility, the life of denial of self, the cultivation of fellowship and communion and the practice of the presence of God. These elements of Christian mysticism find a natural soil in the Indian heart. Not by decrying this aspect of the Christian life, but only by cultivating it and developing it in himself can a foreigner win the heart. of an Indian. It is then, and then only, the westerner can Impart to him what naturally he has not: elements of Christian character, Christian activity, and Christian organisation. These characteristics which the westerner has developed often fail to appeal to the Indian, because too often they are advocated by men who have not reached the heart of the Indian througb finding the point of contact.

Whatever others may think, I do not myself look forward
to any time in the near future when we in India will not need
the western missionary to be our spiritual guides and helpers.
Through your inheritance of centuries of Christian life you
are able to impart to us many things that we lack. And in
this sphere I think the westerner will be for years to come
a necessity. It is in this co-operation of joint study at the
feet of Christ that we shall realise the oneness of the Body
of Christ. The exceeding riches of the glory of Christ can
be fully realised not by the Englishman, the American, and
the Continental alone, nor by the Japanese, the Chinese, and
the Indians by themselves- but by all working together,
worshipping together, and learning together the Perfect
Image of our Lord and Christ. It is only II with all Saints"
that we can II comprehend the love of Christ which passeth
knowledge, that we might be filled with all the fulness of
God." This will be possible only from spiritual friendships
between the two races. We ought to be willing to learn
from one another and to help one another . .


Through all tbe ages to come the Indian Church will rise
up in gratitude to attest the heroism and self-denying labours
of the missionary body. You have given your goods to feed
the poor. You bave given your bodies to be burned. We
also ask for !we. Give us FRIENDS!