The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1912-04-08

service and are spending more than
$50, 100000 annually on the work.
1t would be unfair to say that criti-
cism must be prohibited and that no
critical questions would be answered.
The critic could justly reply that
since he was unable to learn how his
money was being spent, he would
cease to contribute. On the other
hand the critic must be fair to the So
ciety and worker who naturally ex-
pect him to know what he Is talking
about before he speaks.
OF course there are different kinds
of criticism just as there are different
kinds of people. One speaks with a
view to helpfulness, another criticises
because he desires to find reasons TO
excuse himself from responsibility
while a third max talk against the
work because he is not content to
sanction the use of any ecclesiastical
harness or work in harmony with his
fellows on any task.
However the person who wishes to
be accorded a hearing on missionary
work (or any other work. should COM
served will make him an aid to the
building up of that work in some sub
stantial, beneficial way.
I. The critic must be a Christian.
A man out of Christ looks at the sub
ject from the wrong viewpoint. He
naturally thinks 1t unnecessary to
send the gospel to the heather II he
has refused it himself. Neither can he
be expected to support a teaching he
does not himself believe.
II. The critic must be a soul win
ner. That is. he must have some ade-
quate realization of the value of lost
soul and must have tried to bring
souls to Christ.
III. The critic must be an honest
student of missionary work. The
great task of missions cannot be
learned by intuition. 1t involves
matters touching the personal life
and liberties OF thousands and the
purses of millions. 1t deals with the
deepest principles of organization and
requires a broad knowledge Of the
working value of policies and meth
DDS. Therefore the person who would
dictate standards for the adoption OF
missionaries must know whereof he
speaks.
" The critic should have visited
the mission fields or talked freely with
missionaries. Theory Is one thing and
practice is quite another, especially
when the theory is created in Amer
lea, but has to be applied in Africa.
Parents find that the course of train
ing applied to one child is sometimes
worthless when applied to another.
even though the children be in the
same family.
Then again, IL person is capable
OF offering criticism he must see that
it is cautiously and wisely given, be-
cause:
I. 1t is unwise to criticise what
God has especially commanded. The
person who criticises the work of mis-
sions must remember that he is deal
ing with the triune God. Every per-
son of the Godhead is vitality inter
ested, and is also a personal partici-
pant in the work of saving the heath
en-. Therefore the critic stands on
perilous ground before his Creator.
II. There are 10000 missionaries
who have believed enough in missions
to be out on the field today. The
critic who remains at home in a well
feathered nest must realize that it is
no small thing to put his inexperi-
enced judgment up against the actual
labors OF consecrated thousands whose
universal testimony is that missions
pay"
III. The Transformation Of the
heather, which has taken place DUR
| ing the past 100 years. overwhelming
; II answers all those who would say
that the work is not worth while. Any
one VII: has watched the evolution OF