proper content of Christian doctrine, but of the form of presentation. And to show that the orthodoxy of our fellowmissionaries was by no means challenged or affected by the argument, the passage was written thus: Though we believe in the Trinity and Christ's place therein, though we believe in His miraculous birth and in the historicity of the New Testament miracles, we believe also in His true humanity." Why in making the quotation did Mr. Madeley deliberately omit the word though, thus making the passage mean something foreign to the purpose of the writer? Passing to the criticisms. The two matters upon which issue is taken are (1) the modern evolutionary view of the world and (2) the history of Hebrew monotheism. These subjects, be it observed, were referred to only incidentally in the article. It would have been beside the purpose to elaborate arguments upon them. It was assumed that readers of the RECORDER would be already acquainted with the general attitude of Christian scholars thereon, which was all that was needed to enable them to appreciate their bearing upon the questions in hand. This assumption seems to have been a mistake, at least in Mr. Madeley's case. Admittedly it is questionable whether the Genesis story of creation can be harmonized with evolution or modern scientific cosmogony. But what of that? Are we to proceed upon the assumption that the Bible is a complete and infallible guide on all matters whatsoever? Is it a scientific text-book, as well as a guide to salvation? Neither Mr. Madeley nor any reader of the RECORDER Will, I hope, be shocked by the frank assertion that such is not the writer's view, nor is it that by the vast majority of Christian scholars to-day. That the author of the Genesis had any idea of evolution or of science as we understand these terms, is most improbable. He had faith in God. as the source of all things, and SO have innumerable devout evolutionists to-day. Surely no one suggests that evolution is inconsistent with Theism. But why trouble about evolution?" is the final question asked; as though it might be some isolated or fantastic theory, only seriously held by such extreme materialists as Mr. Robt. Blatchford! So far is this from being the case, indeed, that evolution is now not merely "a good working hypothesis," it is the mould which is shaping all branches of human thought: its method is pervading all branches of education, and its terms are rapidly becoming familiar to the educated classes in China. To imagine that it can be ignored, is to be blind to the signs of the times; and to propagate as an essential part of Christianity, a cosmogony incompatible with it, is to sow the seed of unbelief and antagonism to our faith. But again let me emphasise ; the reference to evolution was but incidental to the point that the true view of God (the true Christian view, I hold) is of One not outside of nature, but in it, the One reality behind all seeming. And that this Gospel is not obscured but gloriously illustrated by man's growing knowledge of the universe, I verily believe. Turning now to the other question, 'What adequate basis is there in the face of the First Commandment for attributing the monotheistic conception among the Jews to the later prophets?' The evidence here asked for is contained in many standard dictionaries and works by recognized scholars. Among them I would refer Mr. Madeley to Montefiore's History of Hebrew Monotheism. Here I cannot take space to refer to more than the First Commandment. Does not this command itself imply the prevalence of a belief in the real existence of other gods? If not, what need to prohibit the worship of them? The people of Israel were commanded to worship only Jehovah, because He was their God, who had brought them forth out of the land of Egypt. Thus, so far from being a proof of the prevalence of monotheism, it may be regarded as evidence of the opposite. of But the undesirability iconoclastic preaching in this country, which was the point contended for in the article, is not challenged by Mr. Madeley, and I am glad to see that the editor, whilst of opinion that it was too hasty a generalization to describe missionary propaganda as hitherto too iconoclastic, advocates "the expulsive power of a new affection" as the best and quickest method of attaining our end. NINGPO. Yours sincerely, G. W. SHEPPARD. MR. BALLER AND BIBLICAL To the Editor of "THE CHINEese RecordeR.” DEAR SIR: One is confident that Mr. Baller's letter in your April issue does not represent in spirit, and in the conspicuous absence of a desirable characteristic, the company of revisers appointed by Conference, for whom he undertakes to speak. No one who has benefited by Mr. Baller's work on the Mandarin N. T., and his many and justly popular books, will be carried away by the tone of his reply to my letter on Biblical Terms. He fails to grasp the point which I endeavoured to make, that the work of the revisers of the Bible in Chinese does not seem to have included a thorough revision of the terms. This is a judgment formed upon a fairly exhaustive examination, for teaching purposes, of all the revisions available up to date. I maintain that this work is so necessary and so complex that (1) the time for doing it is now, before the revisions are cast in final form; and (2) the body most capable of undertaking it is a representative company chosen from the three bodies of revisers, which would consider the terms as a special and paramount issue and send the results of its deliberations to the three bodies of revisers. would be worth the while even of those whose constructive work is not necessarily non-existent because it has not come under Mr. Baller's eye in the form which his delicate wit suggests, to send in suggestions to such a company. It I feel more and more convinced that if the work of the revisers were concentrated upon one version of the Chinese Bible to begin with-and let that be the Mandarin version if it is so desired by the majority of those entrusted with the carrying out of the revision work-we should in time have three versions-a reasonable and Catholic-minded inquirers. My attention has recently been called to Dr. R. F. Horton's "My Belief-Answers to Certain Religious Difficulties (Jas. Clarke & Co., London, 1908), in which in chapter three: "Is Christianity the Best Religion?" may be found within the compass of twenty-two pages a full and a temperate discussion of this topic on broad lines with fullness of knowledge and sympathy. I desire especially to direct attention to this particular chapter, but every reader of these lines would be stimulated and helped by a perusal of the whole sixteen essays. ARTHUR H. SMITH. Our Book Table. The object of these Reviews is to give real information about books. Authors will help reviewers by sending with their books, price, original if any, or any other facts of interest. The custom of prefixing an English preface to Chinese books is excellent. A Drugging a Nation. The Story of China and the Opium Curse. personal investigation during an extended tour of the present conditions of the opium trade in China and its effects upon the nation. By Samuel Merwin. F. H. Revell Co. 1908. Pp. 212. The eight chapters of which this book is composed were originally published during 19071908 in the "Success" Magazine. They record the observations of the versatile editor of that Journal. The book has the excellencies and the defects of utterances by the astute man of the world, who is able to see everything at short notice and get the right perspective on each occasion, because he is "trained." Mr. Merwin is an able man, and is said to be an expert novelist. In this book he shows that he knows how to make use of his varied talents, and his verdict is most damaging to the apologists of the opium traffic. The strongest impression made is the deadly power, not merely of opium, but of money. "China has the opium; India gets the money." Had there been no revenue question, the opium question would have been automatically settled long ago. But there is a revenue question, and its adjustment remains difficult. But it will in time be overcome, just as will other age-long evils. There are several grievous misprints, as cure" for "curse," Taiku (twice) for Taku, and there are such wild overestimates as assigning (without provocation given) 950,000 persons as the population of Tientsin (when half a million ought to satisfy), and, even worse, 21⁄2 millions (!) for Canton. It is interesting to hear that the Tartars "wear different costumes, and speak, among themselves, a language wholly different from any of the eighteen or twenty native tongues,' when for all practical purposes Manchu is (or has been) a dead language. Still more eccentric is the information that there is no government coinage whatever; the mints being all private! Of course they are provincial, but that is " a horse of a different color." need to catch the fascination of exalted communion with God. The book throughout has the quality of winsomeness; the glow of reverent at-homeness with the Father in heaven, as the personal source of tranquil strength. It consists of fifteen sections, each with a text of Scripture, a meditative paragraph or two, and a prayer which has been born not made. And added to this there is a useful index of 286 classified texts on prayer. The fifteen sections cover the ground of the two New Testament terms: the one for "worshipping approach," the other for "heart's converse." It hardly includes the third element of wrestling supplication (so prominent in the Scriptures), but will help to form a basis for the exercise of "prayer when it is prayer indeed; the mighty utterance of a mighty need," as R. C. Trench defines that term deësis, "entreaty." For the importunate strenuousness with which the Lord's Prayer is to be prayed (Luke xi, 5-8), for "the energised supplication (or the prayer toiling earnestly)" of James v, 16, we must look to other books. This is, as it professes to be, a restful book. It does not represent prayer as "the most intense act a man performs" (J. R. Mott), but deals rather with the "whispered secret" of the Lord, as heard in quietude. It is not a morning trumpet-call to the militant prayer-campaign, but rather an evening invitation to rest in the Everlasting Arms. There are just one or two blemishes which may need to be removed in a second edition. (1.) The book is twice described "Volume I," yet at the end is said to be complete. (2.) The as author's preface says that the church in Europe prepared forms of prayer for worshippers, but later on affirms that The Church of Christ by no means uses prayer books,' which is rather rough on the C. M. S. and W. M. S.! (3.) The translator's preface says that, spite of the idiomatic difficultes of the English original, the whole has been rendered 'without the loss of a hair;' while in the descriptive columns we read that in consequence of the depth of the original, there has been a judicial selection. (4.) It is a detail, but Psalm xlii in our Old Testaments is headed 'Sons of Korah,' and does not profess to have been one of David's. It is true that the sanest modern scholarship accepts the psalms attributed to David as originally his in substance, but those definitely attributed to other poets are not regarded as his. (5.) The terms and are not in accord with accepted standards. W. A. C. Fifty Years in China. An Eventful Memoir of T. P. Crawford, D.D. By L. S. Foster. Bayless - Pullen Co., Nashville, Tenn. Illustrated. 377 pages. All who have ever met Dr. Crawford, and many others as well, will be glad to see this memoir of one who was in many respects a remarkable man. Coming to China in 1851, and associated with Dr. Yates for a number of years in opening up the work of the Southern Baptist Mission in Shanghai, passing through the Taiping rebellion, during which he with others had some exciting experiences, and afterwards coming to the time of the Civil War in the States, when all of the missionaries of the Southern Baptist Mission were compelled to relinquish all support from the home Society, and afterwards being transferred to Tengchow, Shantung, on account of health, he with his wife labored over fifty years for China, and lived to see marvellous changes in the country which so stoutly defied the Gospel on their first arrival. emer Dr. Crawford was nothing if not peculiar and a theorist. But with it all he was so genial, so hopeful, and withal so resourceful when it came to an gency, that it was a great pleasure to know him and hear him talk, even if one could not agree with his views. He was doubtless perfectly sincere in his ideas of "self-support," but his arguments would not carry conviction to the minds of most missionaries, and were not sustained by his own Society, so that he afterwards became dissociated from them in order to be perfectly free to carry out his own ideas. Doubtless he did good, however, in acting as a check upon those who might have gone too far in the opposite direction. The memoir shows the difficulties he met with in endeavoring to carry out his views. The last page of the book gives an interesting illustration of a phonetic system which Dr. Crawford devised for writing the Shanghai Dialect which, however, never came into extensive use; its sphere of operations being too limited. It is ingenious, and might, with modifications, be the basis of a system for writing Mandarin. Mrs. Crawford still labors on in the new field, to which they both went in their old age, and is a wonderful example of wisdom, fidelity, and faithful work, "even down to old age." X. |