History and Ecclesiastical Relations of the Churches of the Presbyterial Order at Amoy, China | Page 2

should have been allowed to form a Presbytery there, and
manage all your own affairs, and that your Boards at home should be
content to consider themselves a committee to raise and send on the
funds. But it is hard for the D. D's and big folk at home to come to that.
They think they must manage everything, or all will go wrong; while
how little it is that they can be brought to know or realize of the real
nature of the work abroad; and then it is the old battle of patronage over
again. Those who give the money must govern, and those who receive
it must give up their liberty, and be no longer Christ's freemen."
This is only a specimen, one of many, of the mistaken impressions
abroad in the Church concerning the views and doings of your
Missionaries. May we not, must we not, correct them? The letter also
illustrates the evils resulting from allowing mistaken impressions to
remain in the Church uncorrected. There has long been an impression
in our Church that the A.B.C.F.M. interfered with the ecclesiastical
affairs of our missions. We have been informed that several of our
young men, before our Church separated from that Board, were
deterred thereby from devoting themselves to the foreign Missionary
work. The writer of the above letter, probably having more of the
Missionary spirit, was not willing, on that account, to give up the work,
but was led to offer himself to the Board of a sister Church. The
Mission at Amoy, and our Church, have thus been deprived of the

benefit of his labors by means of an erroneous impression. When we
learned the fact of such an impression existing in this country, we
endeavored to correct it. In our letter of 1856, to General Synod, we
called particular attention to the subject. Here is a part of one sentence:
"It seems to us a duty, and we take this opportunity to bear testimony,
that neither Dr. Anderson, nor the Prudential Committee have ever, in
any communication which we have received from them, in any way,
either by dictation, or by the expression of opinions, interfered in the
least with our ecclesiastical relations." We failed to get that letter
published, and I find the erroneous impression still prevalent, working
its mischief in the churches.
But to return to the subject of the mistaken impressions concerning the
views of your Missionaries at Amoy. These impressions would have
been partly corrected in the Church, if the report of the proceedings of
Synod, in "The Christian Intelligencer," had been more correct on this
subject. That paper states, that, on Friday evening, "Rev. Mr. Talmage
then took the floor, and addressed the Synod for nearly two hours," but
does not give a single word or idea uttered by him. It is careful to report
the only unkind words against the Missionaries uttered during that
whole discussion, which, with this single exception, was conducted in a
spirit of the utmost Christian kindness; but does not give a word of the
remarks made on the Friday evening previous, on that very subject, in
justification of their course.
It seems to be a duty, though painful, to speak particularly on this
subject. Look at the following language: "I know that we are told that
the hybrid organization [i.e. the Classis, a court of the Church of Christ,
at Amoy] which now exists is every way sufficient and satisfactory;
that it is the fruit of Christian love, and that to disturb it would be
rending the body of Christ. Here one might ask, how it came to exist at
all, seeing that this Synod spoke so plainly, and unambiguously, in
1857; and _I, for one, cordially concur in the remark of the elder,
Schieffelin, that the brethren there 'deserve censure_.' We do not
censure them, nor do we propose to do so; but that they deserve it is
undeniable. But the point is, how can our disapproval of the mongrel
Classis mar the peace of the Amoy brethren?" This language was used

by the President of Synod, after asking whether the Synod was ready
for the question, "the question being about to be put," when an attempt
to answer it seemed altogether out of place. In all the circumstances it
seemed almost like the charge of a judge to a jury. I do not say that
there is any improper spirit manifested, or opprobrious expressions
employed in this language, or that the President did wrong in waiting
until the discussion was over before he uttered it, or that the
missionaries are not deserving of such severe censure--of all these
things let the Church judge--but I do say that the spreading of such
language and such charges broadcast, before the Church and before the