Missions In The Reformed Tradition
8
MISSIONS IN THE
REFORMED TRADITION
B. R. Easter
We do not need to look far for reasons to justify a missionary paper at this conference. The first could be the recent World Council of Churches meeting in New Delhi, stressing service and witness and inaugurating the Commission on World Mission and Evangelism. The second would be that this is Bible Year, and the Bible’s message is missionary—the Gospel for the world. A third reason might be the bicentenary of the birth of William Carey, the great Calvinist and missionary pioneer. A fourth—to consider the current charge that Calvinism chokes and jeopardizes missionary concern and zeal. But there is a deeper reason still, that embraces all these—our obligation to know and understand the missionary thought and achievement of our Reformed predecessors. Then we can make our distinctive contribution to the contemporary missionary situation. With this in mind, may we (1) survey the Reformed contribution to missions; (2) draw some conclusions; and (3) suggest our contribution to world evangel-ism today.
The Sixteenth Century
Here we must consider John Calvin in relation to the churches’ missionary task and face a question which is of real perplexity; first, because he did not write a missionary treatise; also, because there are many opinions regarding his missionary attitude. Many assert his lack of missionary concern, among them Warneck, Graham, Hunter, and McLeod Campbell. Others emphasize it, as for instance, Schlatter, Zwemer, Holsten, and van den Berg.
We must remember the times in which Calvin lived. Roman Catholic powers had sea control and access to non-Christians; Protestants had neither. The Reformed churches were fighting for life and existence and their theologians were almost entirely engaged in strengthening and extending their faith in Europe. As Zwemer writes: “John Calvin lived in the sixteenth not the nineteenth century. We cannot expect of him a world view and a world vision like that of Carey!” We cannot judge Calvin by our standards. We can only ask whether he had a vision of the Kingdom’s advance in the world and the churches’ duty to proclaim Christ to it. Here we examine briefly his theology and practice.
1. Theology. Calvin relaid the foundation of missions by re-discovering the Gospel. He sought to remove error and expound the Gospel as the Bible presents it. The Institutes profess to do just this. Calvin stressed the sovereignty of God’s Word over the church.1 Scripture must rule and dictate her message and activity. He also stressed the sovereignty of God’s grace in salvation. The heart of the Institutes (books 2 and 3) is an exposition of man’s need of justification and God’s provision of it in Christ. Calvin’s watchword sola gratia, speaks of God’s free mercy, and this is the Church’s proclamation: it gives her a full Gospel and purified evangelistic motives. Then, he further taught God’s sovereignty over all life. The Christian must glorify God in every area of existence. He must live entirely to God’s glory. This means lifelong obedience.2
Calvin made a penetrating analysis of man’s relation with his Creator. He drew the lines of an approach to non-Christian religions that still influences thought today. Man has a natural instinct for God.3 He is created in His image and cannot avoid meeting God’s revelation in himself, nature, and history.4 By reason of man’s rebellion against God and His revelation, man now lives in a labyrinth of darkness and foolish imaginings.5 Man’s continuous reaction to that revelation is heathendom.6 He will not acknowledge his Creator, but turns to other gods and philosophies in affront to the true God. God, however, still cannot be avoided and in common grace he restrains men in sin, enables some outwardly in good living, and gives some hunger for Himself.7
What is Calvin’s thought on the spread of the Kingdom? He expects the Kingdom to advance. The apostles began the work and it still continues.8 To Bullinger he writes, “The Kingdom of Christ should be extended not only inwardly but in every part of the world, for this is the will of God.” Again: “God has created the entire world to be a theatre of His glory by the spread of the Gospel.” This advance is a continual conflict of Christ with Satan. The coming of the Kingdom is God’s work. “The Kingdom . . . is neither to be advanced or maintained by the industry of men, but by God alone.” We depend on God’s opening the door.9 This should not, however, lead to passivity, but to action in dependence upon God. The Church’s task is to pray10 and to preach the Gospel to all men, as opportunity is given. Calvin teaches a universal offer of Christ to all as our duty. “This is our duty, everywhere to make known among the nations the goodness of our God.”11 “There is a universal call by which God . . . invites all men alike.”12 The performance of this duty expresses Christian compassion.13
One thing is not clear in his teaching—the relevance of the Great Commission to the post-apostolic Church. He maintains the uniqueness of the apostles’ office, and specifically limits it to the Twelve, in view of Roman claims. But he does not clearly distinguish between the unique apostolic office and the universal commission to the whole Church.14 We notice that in Calvin’s thought belief in election is no impediment to world-wide evangelism. It neither minimizes, nor limits, the universal offer. This notion Calvin repudiates: “Because we do not know who belongs to the number of the predestined, or does not belong, our desire ought to be that all may be saved; and hence every person we meet we will desire to be with us a partaker of peace.”15
2. Practice. We have one example of Calvin’s active missionary concern. In 1555 he was asked to send clergy with a Huguenot colony to Brazil. He promptly sent fourteen divines to minister to the colonists and to preach to the natives. Also, Calvin corresponded with these first Protestant missionaries. This shows him as being anxious to reach the heathen when given the opportunity.
All the aspects of Calvin’s thought which we have noted are important for the missionary enterprise. He was truly missionary minded in that he saw man’s plight, God’s grace in Christ, and the Church’s duty to preach to all men; also, because his whole life circled around concern of these beliefs overseas, his concern for the spread of biblical faith in Europe shows a missionary spirit. That his followers practiced missions when opportunity came proves this. The cause of Calvin’s apparent inaction is to be found in external circumstances, not in his thought. This is the considered view of Dr. van den Berg after thorough study of the evidence.16 In his theology lay deep missionary impetus which in changed circumstances blossomed into action. Today, Calvin guides us to the Word to subject our missionary message, motives, and methods to its direction.
Later on there was more activity. In 1577 a Czech nobleman, Vaclav Budovec, became ambassador at Constantinople, after study at Reformed colleges, including Geneva. There he engaged in evangelism among Moslems. Islam’s influence staggered him. He wrote Anti al Koran to defend Christianity against Islam, and he did win a Moslem to Christ.
As Spanish sea power waned, the English began to explore and colonize. To discover and open the world was a religious as well as a political and economic venture. To extend the nation was to spread the faith. During the 1576 voyage Martin Frobisher’s chaplain, Wolfall, “desired to save souls and reform infidels to Christianity.” With expansion came desire for a Protestant world empire accompanied by missionary endeavor. Christians felt that it was God’s time for the non-Christian world, and that their duty as colonists was “to bring those who know not God to a reverence of the Divine Name” (Robert Hakluyt in 1587). The first Virginia settlement in 1584 had this purpose: “The propagation of the Christian religion to such people as live in darkness.” Harriot, a scientist, expounded the Bible to the Indians there.
In 1590 a Dutch theologian and Anglican clergyman, Adrian Saravia, wrote defending Anglican orders and episcopacy in Diversis Gradibus Ministrorum Evangeli. He was “of no mean repute and great learning,” and a friend of Richard Hooker. He appeals to the Great Commission to defend his view of ministry and missions. The Church’s authority to carry the Gospel to the world rests on this Commission. The obligation to make disciples is her duty everywhere and in all ages. Saravia’s assertion of the permanent validity of the Great Commission was an important step forward. His thesis, “that the command to preach the Gospel to all peoples is obligatory upon the Church since the apostles were taken up into heaven, and that for this purpose the apostolic office is needful,” was not well received because of its controversial overtones. But Reformed Christians accepted Saravia’s view of the Great Commission in the next century.
The Seventeenth Century
Overseas opportunities, renewed study, and personal devotion, led to further enterprise.
1. In Holland, as the Republic grew, the East Indies, Formosa and Ceylon became colonies. Beside this came a reviving of spiritual life and missionary interest. The leaders of the “Second Ref-ormation” pioneered this new movement. The Synod of Dordt (1618) showed evident missionary concern: “This promise (of the Gospel) together with the command to repent and believe ought to be declared and published to all nations, to all persons promiscuously and without distinction. . . .”17
A clarion call came from Heurnius in De Legatione Evangelica ad Indos (1618). This “cry from the heart” sparked off latent interest. The Great Commission is unreservedly appealed to with emphasis on gratitude, sacrificial obedience, and compassion as motives for fulfilling it. Teellinck in Ecce Homo (1622) challenged the East India Company to action. Hornbeck of Leyden University taught all ordinands “missions” and sought to awaken interest. Grotius wrote Of the truth of the Christian Religion as a missionary handbook. It was reprinted and translated thirty times.
Voetius, a learned Professor at Utrecht, took on “the task of laying the foundations of a theological discussion of the prin-ciples and methods of the missionary enterprise”18 in his Politica Ecclesiastica (vol. 3) and Disputationes Selectae. This was a first Protestant attempt at what is nowadays called missiology. The missionary aim, according to Voetius, is to plant the Church and convert the heathen, an enterprise of which “the ultimate and supreme final cause is the glory and manifestation of divine grace.” Voetius also discussed and assessed the world religions in the light of Scripture. J. H. Bavinck writes, “he honestly sought the principles of missions within the Scriptures.”19
From the appeal came action. Antony Walaeus founded a missionary seminary in 1622, teaching theology, other religions, and languages. In Java, from 1619 onwards, schools and churches were founded, leaders trained, and the New Testament translated into Malay and Arabic. In Formosa a deep work was done by Candidus (1626) followed by Robert Junius (1631). Junius learnt the language, baptized 5,900 converts, and wrote Bible helps in Formosan. In Ceylon, work was shallower, but Baldaeus did evangelical work there. Later missionaries also reached Amboyna, South India, and even Brazil.
2. We find also in Britain growing missionary feeling, particularly among the Puritans. Richard Sibbes in Light from Heaven (1633) on 2 Timothy 3:16, urges taking the Gospel to all since “no one is now shut out.” He sees “hope for those Western peoples” and foresees that the message “may in God’s time proceed yet further West.” The Westminster Divines recommended prayer “for the propagation of the Gospel . . . to all nations.”20 Interest was concentrated on the American colonies. Many had a missionary purpose. Massachusetts colony, 1628, aimed to “invite the natives . . . to the knowledge of the only God and Saviour of mankind.” Its seal was an Indian crying, “Come over and help us.” In 1641 the Mayhew family began missionary work on Martha’s Vineyard which continued for 150 years!—“a persistent family missionary effort which has few, if any, equals.”21
Puritan interest focused mainly on John Eliot. Born in 1604, after leaving Cambridge he helped at Thomas Hooker’s school, was converted, and followed Hooker to Massachusetts in 1631. An accomplished scholar, he produced the New Bay Psalter (1640). In 1646, having learned the language, he began work among Indians near his Roxbury pastorate. He was well received, and many were converted and became “praying Indians.” This fine life’s work gained him the title of the Indian Evangelist. We notice: (1) He understood and befriended Indians. He learned their language and culture, and accepted their hospitality and kindnesses. His attitude was the pattern for later missionary approach. (2) He tended Christians as a true pastor. He translated the Bible by 1663: a vast job for one man. Puritan classics, catechisms and primers, and evangelistic literature such as Baxter’s Call to the Unconverted, were made available. Eliot gave what we should call elementary education, and schools were organized. Communities were formed where Indian Christians lived to God’s glory in obedience, service, and witness. He encouraged farming, home industry, and self-government. His “indigenous principles” produced results. By 1690 there were 24 Indian preachers, 20 men studying at Harvard, 14 congregations, and 25,000 Christians. (3) His example made a profound impression. He mirrored the ideal of the “Reformed” missionary, engaging in evangelism, preaching to all within reach with awful urgency. It was his example that challenged Brainerd, Fuller, and Carey. He was a man of invincible resolve to glorify God, regardless of cost, with determination and fearlessness. In his “pittie,” he loved, understood, and gave himself to, the Indians. His part in God’s work was acknowledged with humility: “It is the Lord who hath done what is done: it is becoming to . . . lift up Jesus Christ and ourselves to lie low.” He summarized his work thus: “Prayer and pains through faith in Jesus can do anything.”
Eliot influenced many Puritans by correspondence, but to a greater extent by published reports of the work, which awakened much interest and stirred others to action. In 1644 English and Scottish supporters petitioned Parliament for decisive missionary help. Parliament then formed “The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in New England” (1648) which, “was without counterpart in the earlier spread of Christianity or any other religion. Through it the Christian impulse was giving birth to a new type of organization.”22 Nation-wide collections brought subsidies for American missionaries. Cromwell projected a Council for the worldwide extension of Christianity, having four departments and a missionary seminary at Chelsea College. Baxter wrote to Eliot, supported him by prayer, stimulated concern, and revived this first S.P.G. after the Restoration (1663).
The Eighteenth Century
In the early eighteenth century there came a decline in devotion and missionary zeal. Nevertheless, some possessed world vision. Within Anglicanism, Thomas Bray’s industry resulted in the formation of the present S.P.G. (1701) and S.P.C.K (1698). Philip Doddridge was outspoken in demanding a missionary society and definite action. Isaac Watts kept alive the hope that “Jesus shall reign” through his hymns and organized missionary collections. In 1709 a praying ministerial group founded the Scottish S.P.C.K. to evangelize the Highlanders; later they supported American work. At Paisley, Robert Millar, “the Latourette of 21⁄4 centuries ago,” wrote The History of the Propagation of Christianity—a pioneer history of missions and a call for missionary activity.
Then came the Revival movements, almost simultaneous and largely independent of each other—the “Methodist” movement with Wesley and Whitefield; the “evangelical” movement within Anglicanism, and the New England “Awakening” under Tennent and Edwards. These stimulated missionary enterprise and produced immediate results.23 Edwards himself was a missionary at Stockbridge (1751). The most moving result of the revival in the missionary sphere, however, was the short, tragic career of the man who would have been Edwards’s son-in-law had he lived—David Brainerd. Supported by Scottish S.P.C.K., he inspired Doddridge, Carey, Martyn, Livingstone, and many others. Converted in 1738, and trained at Yale (1739–42), he began evangelizing Indians in 1743, aged 25. He lived a lonely, hard life, often depressed and ill, and died of tuberculosis in 1747. Four things impressed later generations: (1) his devotion to Christ’s Kingdom; (2) his concern in prayer; (3) his preaching, covering the “whole counsel of God,” emphasizing Calvary. Revival came “when he discoursed on the condescension and love of a dying Redeemer . . . it was astonishing how they were melted by the love of the Redeemer.”24 (4) The results. He saw ninety baptized, a Christian community formed, and a school built. He saw the Spirit at work in deep conviction, bringing changed and ordered lives. God honored his brief effort with deep, permanent results.
Nearly fifty years later twelve Baptists met in Kettering to launch a missionary Society. Their decision flowed directly from the Revival movements. Among them were Sutcliffe, Ryland, Fuller, and Carey. What lay behind this step of faith? In the background was Jonathan Edwards. It was he, not Wesley, who most influenced them. Edwards weaned Fuller from “hyper-calvinism” to the classical position, according to which the unreserved character of the Gospel offer was maintained alongside unconditional election. Edwards’s Humble Attempt (1748), an appeal to world-wide prayer, was sent to Sutcliffe, whose own Call to Prayer led to prayer associations being formed in 1784. This prayer movement was decisive for the new society. Brainerd’s Journal, published by Edwards, also made a great impression on them.
In the foreground was Carey. He pressed for action, wrote his Enquiry (1792), preached the famous Nottingham sermon, and cried “cannot something be DONE!” Edwards’s biblical theology, Brainerd’s example, concerted prayer, and Carey’s drive lay behind the inauguration of the Particular Baptist Missionary Society in October 1792. In this bicentenary year we recall that William Carey was (1) a Reformed Christian. He joined the Particular, or Calvinistic, Baptists. Dr. Smith calls him “a Calvinist of the broad missionary type of St. Paul.”25 From Fuller’s The Gospel Worthy of all Acceptation (1781) he learned Edwardian Calvinism. His Calvinism was biblical and balanced: “We are firmly persuaded that Paul might plant, and Apollos water, in vain . . . did not God give the increase. We are sure that only those who are ordained unto eternal life will believe . . . nevertheless, we cannot but observe with admiration that Paul, the great champion for the glorious doctrines of free and sovereign grace, was the most conspicuous for his personal zeal in the work of persuading men to be reconciled to God.”26
(2) Carey was a missionary theologian. No emotional zealot, he thought through his missionary principles with care and thoroughness in light of Holy Scripture. His Enquiry is noble, masterly, lucid, and factual, comparable with later and larger missionary treatises. This booklet proves “that the shoemaker minister . . . had already professorial thoughts in his mind.”27 The Form of Agreement also gives his basic ideas. His main principles were
(a) The Word of God is the basis and instrument of the missionary task. The Enquiry, section 1, proves the Great Commission’s permanence, removes objections, and founds our missionary “duty” upon the Scriptures. He lived by the Bible, and it was his foundation and tool. His use of the Word was varied, but in everything he was determined by it. “We must use every means within our power to excite . . . attention and reverence . . . to it (God’s Word) as the fountain of eternal truth and the message of Salvation” (Agreement 9).
(b) He viewed the world as the sphere of the missionary task. Section 3 of the Enquiry is a masterly and accurate survey with “sweep of purpose combined with wealth of detail.” He gained world vision from the Bible, from Captain Cook’s Voyages, and wide reading.
(c) The Church was the agent of the missionary task. He called the whole Church and every Christian in it, to action. A Society was to him a “second best.” He challenged the Church from its past and presented a threefold motive for action—the value of immortal souls, love for them, and obedience to Christ’s commands.
(3) Carey was a great missionary. The vastness of his achievement is overwhelming. His methods are up to date and fresh. Preaching is central—all other work surrounds and flows from it. “We must make the greatest subject of our preaching Christ crucified. The doctrine of Christ’s expiatory death . . . must ever remain the great means of conversion.”28 Indigenous principles were used. On arrival in India the missionaries formed themselves into a Church which converts could join. They stressed the need for national evangelists and pastors and adequate training.29 Translation work was phenomenal—six Bibles, twenty-four Testaments, in all thirty-five languages! Training of nationals was given priority—Serampore College trained clergy and gave a comprehensive Christian education to all. Carey tried to understand Indian culture. He studied Bengali and Sanskrit, printed Indian holy books, and sought to enter the Indian’s thought-life.
(4) What of his character? Two things strike us: (a) His dogged determination as a man of action. To quote his own words, “I can plod, I can persevere in any definite pursuit. To this I owed everything.” (b) His deep humility as a man of God. “What do we live for but to promote the cause of our dear Redeemer in the world. If that be carried on we need not wish any more.”30
The next step was the beginning of the London Missionary Society in 1795. Many factors converged in its formation: Carey’s letters were read by the Calvinist Independent David Bogue, the Warwickshire Prayer Association considered action, and the Letters of the Anglican chaplain, Melville Horne, had quickened Haweis and other Anglicans. The Society had no definite leaders, embracing all of “Evangelical sentiments” and world concern, Independents, Anglicans, and Presbyterians. It was thus an early attempt at evangelical cooperation. Their general standpoint is said to have been “Calvinistical.”31 Missionaries were sent to the South Seas, Africa, and Jamaica.
An early recruit, Vanderkemp, began the Netherlands Missionary Society (1797), which was mainly supported by Reformed Churches.
Among Anglicans, Grant of the East India Company appointed evangelical missionary chaplains and asked for missionary effort in India (1792). Evangelical clergy of the Eclectic Society discussed “missions” on several occasions. The members in 1799—among them Charles Simeon, Thomas Scott, Richard Cecil, Newton, and Venn—asked: “What can be done?” Venn outlined plans: Follow God’s leading, depend on God’s Spirit, select spiritual men, begin in a small way, launch a decidely Anglican Society. The Church Missionary Society was founded a month later, in April 1799, with Scott as first secretary. After early difficulties and despised beginnings it became the world’s largest society. It found its roots in Reformation theology.32 These attempts led to the great efflorescence of missionary endeavor in the nineteenth century.
The Nineteenth Century
Latourette has called 1800 to 1914 the “great century” involving ever wider missionary expansion and zeal. By 1900 there were 20,000 missionaries, 558 agencies, and 80,000 national workers throughout the world. The Reformed churches played an important part in this, and some of the finest missionaries were of Reformed stock: Judson, Livingstone, Moffatt, Morison and Martyn, Paton and Williams. A missionary, an institution, and a theologian will illustrate the vast Reformed contribution.
1. The Missionary. Alexander Duff, first missionary of the Church of Scotland, ranks among the greatest of missionaries. Dr. Pierson links him with Carey and Livingstone. Educated under Chalmers, reared in the Westminster theology, he went to India in 1830. His church accepted the challenge of the “evangelicals,” deciding in 1824 to engage in “missions.”
His life aim was “to be a missionary to the heathen; abroad, labouring directly among them; at home, pleading their cause among the Churches of Christendom.” (1) In India (1830–63) he was a missionary educator, making an epoch-making contribution, stressing higher education as a means of evangelism, Christian instruction, and spread of the Gospel. This education was biblically based; Christianity was the foundation and atmosphere of the curriculum. He also edited Christian newspapers and helped in the founding of Calcutta Hospital and University. (2) At home he was a missionary advocate, using his great preaching gifts for the cause. His preaching was “rapturous passionate eloquence”—his lecture tours were stirring trumpet calls to action, seeking to reach the whole Christian public. For twenty-three years he pressed for a Professor of Missions to train ministers with missionary zeal. In 1867 Duff became the first full Professor of Missions in the world. He established congregational associations, and wrote many articles to arouse interest. Pierson writes, “No man since St. Paul has done more to feed the fires of enthusiasm for world evangelism.”
2. The Institution. In 1812 Princeton Theological Seminary, U.S.A. was born as “a Gibraltar of orthodoxy and a school of eminent scholarship,” teaching Calvinism without modification and functioning as “a nursery for missions to the heathen.” It always fostered missionary and evangelistic zeal. The earliest Professors, Samuel Miller, Archibald Alexander, and Charles Hodge, encouraged this. They suggested in 1830 a Professor of “Pastoral Theology and Missionary Instruction” who “would promote among all . . . missionary zeal and active effort for the advancement of the Redeemer’s Kingdom.” Their reasons: to nurture missionary spirit, giving new ministers missionary zeal and through them the Church, and to call out recruits. Charles Breckenridge, appointed in 1836, gave the first definite missionary course in the world. Alexander used his personal influence and the great, devout Charles Hodge “did more for the heathen than this world knows” through conversation, sermons, and editing and writing in the Princeton Review. No wonder that some of Princeton’s most brilliant men became missionaries: within its first hundred years 410 went overseas, one out of every thirteen students.
3. The Theologian. Abraham Kuyper, eminent Dutch churchman and statesman, ranked with Bavinck and Warfield as the greatest Reformed thinker at the end of this century. He devoted his brilliant intellect and talents to reviving and reconstructing Reformed faith and life against the background of European rationalism and liberal theology. His writing and activity still wield influence. He edited a newspaper, entered politics, and became Prime Minister. He played a prophetic part in Church reform and also founded the Free University. His writings are profound contributions to Reformed thought. A prolific writer, he gave real attention to missions, which he ardently advocated, outlining aspects of a Reformed missionary theology as follows:
(1) He defined the study of missions as “Prosthetics,” the study of God’s adding to His church, considering it a distinct branch of the theological curriculum. (2) He insisted that Christians must understand accurately, and face directly, the other religions of the world. Their origin is found in man’s perverse reaction to God’s revelation. Our approach to them must be personal and humble. (3) He regarded “common grace” as God’s merciful activity upon mankind, restraining sin’s curse and blessing and directing life’s progress. (4) The Gospel, said Kuyper, asserts Christ’s kingship over all life. There is no sphere of life about which He cannot say, “It is Mine.” (5) In 1890 Kuyper called for a more God-centered viewpoint: “The missionary sent by Christ must follow the trail blazed by the Lord; if God in His election does not precede, the word of the missionary can bear no blessing.” His ideas were accepted by Middleburg Synod in 1896.
These examples indicate that last-century Reformed orthodoxy, so far from being bereft of missionary concern, actively stimulated it.
The Twentieth Century
Over the last sixty years have come dramatic changes. The great Missionary Conference at Edinburgh, 1910, set the pattern for modern missionary thought and activity. Three subjects discussed reflected the dominant lines of approach.
1. The Younger Churches. The increasing importance of national churches began to be realized. Many encouraged independence and self-expression in new churches. John L. Nevius, a Presbyterian, practiced “indigenous church principles” in China, emphasizing that the local church must be self-supporting, self-governing, and self-propagating from its inception. He reacted against paid mission workers advocating spontaneous witness. In Korea the “Nevius Method” produced amazing results: one hundred communicants in 1890 became 800,000 in 1958.33
2. Missionary Cooperation. Concern about this produced the International Missionary Council for world consultation and action. Reformed statesmen were active here, notably Dr. Samuel Zwemer, who made a considerable contribution until his death in 1952. A great Moslem missionary, he founded and edited The Moslem World. He became Professor of Missions at Princeton, and wrote over thirty books on missionary themes. “His zeal and devotion . . . inspired and decided thousands . . . to devote themselves . . . to the service of God.”34
3. Approach to Other Religions. Theological liberalism weakened the uniqueness of the Gospel—missions came to be seen as “a common search for truth.” Already in 1923, with many others, J. Gresham Machen recognized this threat; his Christianity and Liberalism was a masterly statement of the case against the new trend. At the 1928 Missionary Conference liberalism dominated, and this was followed by W. Hocking’s Rethinking Missions (1932). Machen analyzed this shrewdly: “It presents missions . . . (as) that of seeking truth together rather than . . . presenting the Truth.”35 The climate has changed somewhat since Kraemer’s The Christian Message in a Non-Christian World (1938), and the renewed biblical study of the past generation has had its effect—but the debate continues.
Today, Reformed missionaries are scattered throughout the world, and Reformed thinkers are attending to missionary topics. Dr. John Bavinck, of Amsterdam, has done much here, especially in his Introduction to the Science of Missions (1960).
Conclusions
We may say in general the Reformed have not been backward in either thought or action in the missionary enterprise; rather, the opposite. In particular
1. We see a definite pattern in our review. The Reformed missionary movement began as a trickle, became a stream, and eventually, a flood. In each century there was more activity than in the preceding. “As each century passed Protestants were progressively more energetic in spreading the Christian Faith.”36 There was ebb and flow, first comparative inactivity and then, increasing zeal. New activity was born of deep religious revival. Here we detect the Hand of God.
2. God used a variety of ways to stimulate action. He used the examples of Eliot and Brainerd, Carey’s writings, Horne’s Letters, and Buchanan’s Sermons. He used students—Judson, and Mills; businessmen—the Clapham Sect; clergy—The Eclectic Society. He used prayer for revival and awakening—Edwards and Sutcliffe. All were goads to decisive activity, showing that God never allows Christians to avoid His commands.
3. Each new advance sprang from a revival, not a weakening of Reformed doctrine. For instance—in seventeenth century Holland, “those in whom the piety of Dordt had become flesh and blood were the most enthusiastic advocates of . . . missionary obligation.”37 In eighteenth century England, “leadership was prevailingly Calvinist, and expansion of the Evangelical movement, which apart from Wesleyan Methodism, was informed with Calvinist piety.”38 This is so in every instance.
4. This leads us to assert, lastly, that the Reformed faith possessed within itself the dynamic and power for missionary outreach. Dr. Payne states, “Classical Calvinism had within itself the essential evangelistic impulse; when the rock was smitten, water gushed forth.”39 And Dr. Forsyth writes: “Missions have more to hope for from a narrow creed which remains great, than a wide humanism that runs thin . . . the width of the Gospel really springs from its depth.”40
What in Calvinism has demanded missionary activity? First, its willingness to listen and submit to God’s voice in the missionary Scriptures. Second, its view of Christ and the vital need of faith in Him for salvation. The unique Christ is the dynamic for missions. He must be proclaimed to be believed. Missionary action is also demanded by Calvinism’s adherence to the universal offer. Nothing in Calvinism minimizes or hinders this—election does not frustrate or overshadow here. Missionary duty rests on God’s will of command, not His secret purpose. The doctrine of definite atonement is also a missionary dynamic, indicating an achieved salvation, a sufficient Savior to proclaim, and a worldwide multitude purchased by Him (Rev. 5:9). The universal offer rests on this. Missionary action is prompted, too, by the doctrine of election, pointing to God’s free compassion, accentuating His activity, giving confidence and assurance; showing that the salvation of His chosen ones is God’s world purpose (Mark 13:27). Finally, Calvinism is compelled to missionary zeal by its concern for God’s glorification in the gathering of a worldwide Church. Clearly, Reformed missionary activity was stimulated, not choked by its theology, when this was united to a vigorous piety.
The Reformed Contribution Today
When I speak of the Reformed contribution, I do not advocate unwillingness to learn from the past or from others—but my point is that the Reformed tradition has a distinctive message in this field. Let me suggest here some lines of thought which need emphasis:
First, we need to make it clear that missionary work is not a merely human enterprise but is, primarily, the activity of the living, sovereign God. In and through our works, God works; He is the real missionary. Dr. Bavinck concludes after reviewing the biblical material: “The work of Missions is God’s work.” As salvation is of God, so are missions. 1 Corinthians 3:5–6: “We are simply God’s agents . . . I planted . . . Apollos watered but God made it grow. Thus it is not the gardeners . . . who count, but God” (N.E.B.). The work of missions also has a trinitarian character; it is the work of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In salvation—planned by the Father, achieved by the Son, applied by the Spirit—missions have a vital place. This all has wide implication: (1) It makes missions a continuing task, to be finished only when God’s own work concludes at Christ’s return. (2) It shows missions as one task. The One God, by the one Gospel calls one Church throughout the world. There is thus no tension between the claims of the Church at home and overseas: both must be met, for both are one. (3) It makes the fulfillment of the missionary task certain. God will certainly accomplish His purpose of calling out His Church through missions. This gives confidence and hope amid darkness, difficulty, and opposition. (4) It gives perspective to missionary thought, making our standpoint God-centered. The knowledge that the Triune God controls and directs the work is our rock in today’s changing world.
If missions are God’s work, then our guide in it is God’s Word. The Word must control our message, our motives, and our methods. We must allow God’s Word to decide our problems and direct our conduct, whatever our situation. This makes Reformed Christians radicals—testing past history and present experience in missions by Holy Scripture.
Next, we stress the importance of proclamation. Preaching is the central function of the missionary task in Scripture. It involves, of course, more than the spoken word—it includes the missionary and his personal attitudes also. We lay emphasis on the comprehensive message rather than the comprehensive approach. Here the comprehensive Calvinist view of Christ’s offices of Prophet, Priest, and King, is important. To the liberal we emphasize Christ’s Saviorhood as essential. To the pietist, we insist that Christ is LORD as well as Lamb—the One Who not only saves the soul, but also rules the life, transforming the whole man and his environment. He wills to renew and rule man’s language, customs, and culture (see Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 5:17).
The question of Christianity and other religions is still urgent. Here Reformed Christians stand on Scripture in its assessment of and approach to non-Christian faiths. Accordingly, they see, first, the reality of God’s general revelation in creation, history, and human life. This is still clear and unmistakable—from it man ought to know God. Second, they see that other religions are rejection of the revealing God: a deliberate denial, exchange, and turning from Him to darkness and chaos. General revelation now brings guilt and wrath (Rom. 1:18–19). Third, Reformed Christians recognize God’s present activity among those religions in common grace. Then, they stress the absoluteness and uniqueness of the biblical revelation in Christ bringing men the reconciliation to God, and the new light and power, that they need. We emphasize also the importance of a loving, personal approach to those of other faiths: appreciating the others’ position, feeling united with them in sin and need of grace, loving them as our neighbors depending on God’s Word to convict and lead to faith.
We must declare, too, that missions are directed utterly and finally to God’s glory. God’s purpose is to save a Church to His own glory, and the glory of His grace. The aim of missions is God’s self-glorification. His aim is ours too—concern for God’s glory must be our own ultimate motive. We glorify Him in obeying His command, in loving the lost, in sharing His concern to see His Church planted throughout the world.
What of our practical contribution? One thing is certain; if the contemporary revival of Reformed ideals among us is to be true to its own history and its own heart, one result will be missionary advance. This will mean Reformed Christians playing full, active, and vital parts in the missionary prayer, study, and service of their own congregation or group, and throwing themselves into every worthy missionary effort. It means ministers who have missionary vision themselves, stirring and challenging their people to wider world vision. It means that the movement will produce dedicated thinkers and missionaries of Reformed principles concerned supremely for man’s salvation and God’s glory. One way to meet the current charges of Calvinist missionary indifference is to “outlive” them, by showing practically that Calvinism still possesses the dynamic that reaches out to the world. Let the true missionary attitude which becomes us be explained to us by John Venn (1806): “Deeply affected by the sinful and ruined state of mankind, especially the heathen, he (the Christian) devotes his life, with all its faculties, to promote their salvation. With the world under his feet, with heaven in his eye, with the Gospel in his hand, and Christ in his heart, he pleads as an ambassador for God, knowing nothing but Jesus Christ, enjoying nothing but the conversion of sinners, hoping for nothing but the promotion of the Kingdom of Christ, and glorying in nothing but the cross of Christ. . . .”
SOLI DEO GLORIA