Chapter 9

"In the latter half of the year 1851, some of the Christians from Peh-chui-ia went to the large town of Chioh-be on business and preached the Gospel as they had opportunity. They found a few persons who listened to their message with interest and manifested a desire to hear more. When this fact, on their return, was reported to the churches of Peh-chui-ia and Amoy, other Christians went to Chioh-be. A great interest was awakened. A small house was rented for a chapel. This house was thronged every day throughout the day and evening. Soon as we had opportunity we visited the place to converse with inquirers and examine candidates for baptism. In January, 1855, the first converts at that place were baptized. The interest continued to increase. We found the premises we had rented entirely too small. As soon as a larger and more suitable place could be found it was secured. Soon after this a violent persecution broke out. The immediate effect was greatly to hinder the work. Only those who were sufficiently interested in the Gospel to raise them above the fear of man dared attend the place of worship. Still there has been constant progress.

"If the churches gathered by us are to be organized simply with respect to the glory of God and their own welfare, there is a fact in our circumstances which should have great weight in forming this organization. This fact is the intimate relation and hitherto oneness of the churches under our care and under the care of the missionaries of the English Presbyterian Church. In the foregoing short history of our work it will be seen that we have been and are closely connected with the missionaries of that Church. From the first we have had the pastoral care of their church gathered at Peh-chui-ia and in the surrounding region. They have not attempted the organization of any church at Amoy. By far the greater proportion of their influence and labors at Amoy has been in the direction of assisting us in our work. They have acted as though they thought it was of no importance whatever whether converts were received into church fellowship by us or them. Doubtless the church members, although perfectly aware that we and our English Presbyterian brethren are of different Churches and different countries, suppose that they form but one Church. When the time had arrived for a regular organization of our church in Amoy, the question presented itself: Shall we invite Mr. Douglas, then and still the only English Presbyterian missionary at Amoy, to unite with us in our deliberations? By the providence of God our missions had been brought closely together. We had been laboring together in the work of the Lord, were one in sympathy, held the same views in theology, and did not differ in regard to church polity. But one answer could be given to this question. We cordially invited him. He as cordially accepted of our invitation, and heartily engaged with us in our church meetings, held in reference to the election of church officers. He voted with us and our church members. He united with us in setting apart the officers-elect to their respective offices, and since then has usually united with us in our deliberations in our consistorial meetings. Surely in this matter we have acted according to the leadings of Providence and the spirit and instructions of the Gospel of Christ; for in Christ Jesus there is no distinction of nationalities. Our labors having thus far been so intermingled and our churches so intimately related and united together, we can see no sufficient reason for separation. If there be any advantage in the association of churches by the organization of Classes or Presbyteries, why should we deprive these churches in their infancy and weakness of this advantage? We have always taught our people to study the Word of God and make it their rule. Can we give them a sufficient reason for such separation? Doubtless if we were to tell them, that the churches by which we are sent out and sustained desire separate organizations, and therefore should recommend such organizations to them, they would acquiesce. They know that they cannot stand alone. Gratitude, also, and ardent affection for those churches by whose liberality they have been made acquainted with the Gospel, would lead them to do all in their power to please those churches. We can hardly suppose, however, that such separation would accord with their judgment, or with those Christian feelings which they have always exercised towards each other as members of the same Church. But we do not suppose that either our Church or the English Presbyterian Church will recommend such a separation. The Dutch Church in North America has always manifested an enlarged Christian spirit, and therefore we cannot doubt but that she will approve of an organization by which the churches here, which are one in doctrine and one in spirit, may also be one in ecclesiastical matters. Neither do we doubt but that the English Presbyterian Church will also approve of the same course. We do not know as much of that Church as we hope to know in the future. Yet we know enough of her already to love her. But if separation must come, let not our Church bear the responsibility.

"Another question of importance may arise. What shall be our relation as individuals to the Dutch Church in America? We see no reason and desire not to change the relation we have always sustained. We were set apart by that Church to do the work of evangelists. This is the work in which we still wish to be engaged. We must preach the Gospel. As God gives success to our labors we must organize churches, and take oversight of them as long as they need that oversight. When we find suitable men, we must 'ordain elders in every city.' Such is the commission we hold from our Church, and from the great Head of the Church. Theoretically, difficulties may be suggested. Practically, with the principles on which we have thus far acted, we see no serious difficulties in our way. We must seek for Divine guidance, take the Scriptures for our rule, and follow the leadings of Providence. We are all liable to err. But with these principles, assisted by your counsels, and especially by your prayers, we have reason to believe, and do believe, that the Spirit of truth will guide us in the way of truth."

Dr. Talmage also sent a communication to Dr. Thomas De Witt, then Corresponding Secretary for the Reformed Church in co-operation with the American Board. It reads:

"Oct. 1, 1856. There are some other facts arising out of the circumstances of this people, and of the nature of the Chinese language, which have a certain importance and perhaps should be laid before the Church. No part of the name of our Church, peculiar to our denomination, can be translated and applied to the church in Chinese without inconvenience or great detriment. The words, Protestant and Reformed, would be to the Chinese unintelligible, consequently inconvenient. The only translation we can give to the name Dutch Church, would be Church of Holland. This, besides conveying in part an incorrect idea, would be very detrimental to the interests of the Church among the Chinese. The Chinese know but little of foreign nations and have for ages looked upon them all as barbarians. Of course the views of the native Christians are entirely changed on this subject. But our great work is to gather converts from the heathen. We should be very careful not to use any terms by which they would be unnecessarily prejudiced against the Gospel. It is constantly charged upon the native Christians, both as a reproach and as an objection to Christianity, that they are following foreigners or have become foreigners. The reproach is not a light one, but the objection is easily answered. The answer would not be so easy if we were to fasten on the Christians a foreign name."

At the meeting of the General Synod, held in the village of Ithaca, New York, June, 1857, the following resolutions recommended by the Committee on Foreign Missions, Talbot W. Chambers, D.D., Chairman, were adopted:

THE MEMORIAL OF THE AMOY MISSION.

"Among the papers submitted to the Synod is an elaborate document from the brethren at Amoy, giving the history of their work there, of its gradual progress, of their intimate connection with missionaries from other bodies, of the formation of the Church now existing there, and expressing their views as to the propriety and feasibility of forming a Classis at that station. In reply to so much of this paper as respects the establishment of individual churches, we must say that while we appreciate the peculiar circumstances of our brethren, and sympathize with their perplexities, yet it has always been considered a matter of course that ministers, receiving their commission through our Church, and sent forth under the auspices of our Board, would, when they formed converts from the heathen in an ecclesiastical body, mould the organization into a form approaching, as nearly as possible, that of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Churches in our own land. Seeing that the converted heathen, when associated together, must have some form of government, and seeing that our form is, in our view, entirely consistent with, if not required by the Scriptures, we expect that it will in all cases be adopted by our missionaries, subject, of course, to such modifications as their peculiar circumstances may for the time render necessary. The converts at Amoy, as at Arcot and elsewhere, are to be regarded as 'an integral part of our Church,' and as such are entitled to all the rights and privileges which we possess. And so in regard to the formation of a Classis. The Church at home will undoubtedly expect the brethren to associate themselves into a regular ecclesiastical organization, just as soon as enough materials are obtained to warrant such measure, with the hope that it will be permanent. We do not desire churches to be prematurely formed in order to get materials for a Classis, nor any other exercise of violent haste, but we equally deprecate unnecessary delay, believing that a regular organization will be alike useful to our brethren themselves and to those who, under them, are in training for the first office-bearers in the Christian Church on heathen ground. As to the difficulties suggested in the memorial, respecting the different Particular Synods to which the brethren belong, and the delays of carrying out a system of appellate jurisdiction covering America and China, it is enough to say:

"1. That the Presbyterian Church (Old School) finds no insuperable difficulties in carrying into operation her system, which comprehends Presbyteries and Synods in India as well as here; and, 2. That whatever hindrances may at anytime arise, this body will, in humble reliance upon the Divine aid and blessing, undertake to meet and remove them as far as possible. The Church at home assumes the entire responsibility of this matter, and only ask the brethren abroad to carry out the policy held steadily in view from the first moment when our Missions began.

"The following resolutions are recommended:

"Resolved, 1. That the Synod view with great pleasure the formation of churches among the converts from heathenism, organized according to the established usages of our branch of Zion.

"2. That the brethren at Amoy be directed to apply to the Particular Synod of Albany to organize them into a Classis, so soon as they shall have formed churches enough to render the permanency of such organization reasonably certain."

IX. CHURCH UNION (CONTINUED).

This utterance of the General Synod, while made with the best intentions, fell with exceedingly painful echo on the ears of the missionaries at Amoy. Was the flock they had gathered with so much prayer and effort, and reared with such sedulous care, to be thus summarily divided and perhaps in consequence scattered? The missionaries felt persuaded that their brethren in the United States could not fully appreciate the situation or there would be no such action.

Mr. Talmage again took up his pen in behalf of his Chinese flock. If it had been dipped in his own blood his utterances could not have been more forceful-could not have palpitated with a heartier affection for his Chinese brethren's sake.

On Dec. 23, 1857, he wrote to Dr. Isaac Ferris, who, since the separation from the A.B.C.F.M. at the last Synod, had become the Corresponding Secretary for the Board of Foreign Missions of tile Reformed Church.

"So far as we can judge from the report of the proceedings of General Synod as given in the Christian Intelligencer, one of the most important considerations, perhaps altogether the most important mentioned, why the church gathered by us here should not be an integral part of the Church in America, was entirely overlooked. That consideration relates to the unity of Christ's Church. Will our Church require of us, will she desire that those here who are altogether one,-one in doctrine, one in their views of church order, and one in mutual love,-be violently separated into two denominations? We cannot believe it. Suppose the case of two churches originally distinct, by coming into contact and becoming better acquainted with each other, they find that they hold to the same doctrinal standards, and they explain them in the same manner; they have the same form of church government and their officers are chosen and set apart in the same way; they have the same order of worship and of administering the sacraments; all their customs, civil, social, and religious, are precisely alike, and they love each other dearly; should not such churches unite and form but one denomination? Yet such a supposition does not and cannot represent the circumstances of the churches gathered by us and by our Scotch brethren of the English Presbyterian Church. Our churches originally were one, and still are one, and the question is not whether those churches shall be united, but shall they be separated? Possibly the question will be asked, why were these churches allowed originally to become one? We answer, God made them so, and that without any plan or forethought on our part, and now we thank Him for His blessing that He has made them one, and that He has blessed them because they are one.

"Our position is a somewhat painful one. We desire to give offense to no one, and we do not wish to appear before the Church as disputants. We have no controversy with any one. We have neither the time nor inclination for controversy. We are 'doing a great work,' and cannot 'come down.' Yet our duty to these churches here and to the Church at home and to our Master demands of us imperatively that we state fully and frankly our views. We have the utmost confidence in our church. We have proved this by endeavoring to get our views fully known."

The subject did not come up again for discussion before the General Synod until 1863.

Meanwhile the churches grew and multiplied. The Amoy church, which in 1856 had been organized by "the setting apart of elders and deacons," was separated into two organizations in 1860, "preparatory to the calling of pastors."

Two men were chosen by the churches in 1861. In 1862 an organization was formed called the "Tai-hoey," or "Great Elders' Meeting," consisting of the missionaries of both the English Presbyterian and Reformed Churches and the delegated elders from all the organized congregations under their united oversight. The two men chosen as pastors were examined, ordained, and installed by this body.

During that year Mr. Talmage was called to stand by the "first gash life had cut in the churchyard turf" for him. His beloved wife, Mrs. Abby Woodruff Talmage, was called to her reward, leaving Mr. Talmage with four motherless little ones. He was compelled to go to the United States to secure proper care for his children. He came in time to attend the General Synod of 1863. There he advocated most earnestly the course which the brethren at Amoy had taken.

Dr. Isaac Ferris brought the subject before the Synod in these words:

"In 1857 the Synod met at Ithaca, and a most remarkable Synod it was. According to the testimony of all who were present the Spirit of God unusually manifested His gracious presence. A venerable minister on his return remarked, 'It was like heaven upon earth.' That Synod, under this extraordinary sense of the Divine presence and unction, judged that the time had arrived for the Church to take the responsibility of supporting its foreign missionary work upon itself, and, accordingly, in very proper resolutions, asked of the American Board to have the compact which had been in operation since 1832 revoked, and the Mission transferred to our Foreign Board.

"It was at that meeting that a memorial of our brethren at Amoy on the subject of organization, very ably drawn, and presenting fully their views and reasonings, was read and deliberated on. Their work had been wonderfully blessed, and the whole Church was called to thanksgiving, and the time seemed at hand to realize the expectations of years. The brethren asked advice, and the Synod adopted the carefully-drawn report of a committee of which the President was chairman, advising the organization of a Classis at as early a day as was practicable. Our brethren at Amoy were not satisfied with this advice, and considered the subject as not having had a sufficient hearing.

"In the progress of their work they have deemed it proper to form a different organization from what the Synod advised, and which was in harmony with the constant aim of our Church on the subject. The Board of Foreign Missions, when the matter came before them, could only kindly protest and urge upon the brethren the action of the Synod of 1857. Not having ecclesiastical power, they could only argue and advise. They would have it remembered that all has been done in the kindest spirit. They have differed in judgment from the Mission, but not a ripple of unkind feeling has arisen.

"The question now before the Synod is, whether this body will recede from the whole policy of the Church and its action in 1857 or reaffirm the same. This Synod, in its action on this case, will decide for all its missions, and in all time, on what principles their missionaries shall act, and hence this becomes probably the most important question of this session. It is in the highest degree desirable that the Synod should give the subject the fullest the most patient and impartial examination, and that our brother, who represents the Amoy Mission, be fully heard."

Mr. Talmage next addressed the Synod and offered the following resolution:

"Resolved, That the Synod hear with gratitude to God of the great progress of the work of the Lord at Amoy, and in the region around, so that already we hear of six organized churches with their Consistories, and others growing up not yet organized, two native pastors who were to have been ordained on the 29th of March last, and the whole under the care of a Classis composed of the missionaries of our Church and of the English Presbyterian Church, the native pastors, and representative elders of the several churches. It calls for our hearty gratitude to the great Head of the Church that the missionaries of different Churches and different countries have been enabled, through Divine grace, to work together in such harmony. It is also gratifying to us that these churches and this Classis have been organized according to the polity of our Church, inasmuch as the Synod of the English Presbyterian Church has approved of the course of their missionaries in uniting for the organizing of a church after our order; therefore, this Synod would direct its Board of Foreign Missions to allow our missionaries to continue their present relations with the missionaries of the English Presbyterian Church, so long as the present harmony shall continue, and no departure shall be made from the doctrines and essential policy of our Church, or until the Synod shall otherwise direct."

There were speeches for and against, by distinguished men in the Church. Dr. T. W. Chambers, President of the Synod, made the concluding address, as follows:

"If there be any one here who has a deep and tender sympathy with our brother Talmage and his senior missionary colleague (Mr. Doty), I claim to be the man.

"Mr. Doty was my first room-mate at college thirty-one years ago, and ever since we have been fast friends. As to the other, his parents-themselves among the most eminent and devoted Christians ever known-were long members of the church in New Jersey, of which I was formerly in charge. For several years I was his pastor. I signed the testimonials of character required by the American Board before they commissioned him. I pronounced the farewell address when he left this country in 1850. I have watched with intense interest his entire career since, and no one welcomed him more warmly when he returned last year, bearing in his face and form the scars which time and toil had wrought upon his constitution. It is needless to say, then, that I love him dearly for his own sake, for his parents' sake, for his numerous friends' sake, but, more than all, for that Master's sake whom he has so successfully served. Nor is there anything within reason which I would not have the Church do for him. He shall have our money, our sympathy, our prayers, our confidence-the largest liberty in shaping the operations of the Mission he belongs to.

"But when we come to the matter now at issue, I pause. Much as I love our brother, I love Christ more. Nor can I surrender, out of deference to our missionaries, the constitution, the policy, the interests of our Church,--all of which are involved in this matter. Nay, even their own welfare, and that of the mission they are so tenderly attached to, demand that we should deny their request. What is this request? That we should allow our brethren at Amoy, together with the English Presbyterian missionaries there, to form with the native pastors and the delegates from the native churches, an independent Classis or Presbytery, over whose proceedings this body should have no control whatever, by way of appeal, or review, or in any other form. Now, the first objection to this is, that it is flatly in the face of our constitution and order. A 'self-regulating Classis' is a thing which has never been heard of in the Dutch Church since that Church had a beginning. It is against every law, principle, canon, example, and precedent in our books. Perhaps the most marked feature of our polity is the subordination of all parts of our body, large or small, to the review and control of the whole as expressed in the decisions of its highest ecclesiastical assembly. I submit that this Synod has no right to form or to authorize any such self regulating ecclesiastical body, or to consent that any ministers of our Church should hold seats in such a body. If we do it, we transcend the most liberal construction which has ever been known to be given to the powers of General Synod. How, then, can we do this thing? Whatever our sympathies, how can we violate our own order, our fundamental principles, the polity to which we are bound by our profession, by our subscription, by every tie which can bind religious and honorable men?