Missions to Muslims 9781463229252

Table of contents :
MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

Citation preview

Missions to Muslims

Analecta Gorgiana

703 Series Editor George Anton Kiraz

Analecta Gorgiana is a collection of long essays and short monographs which are consistently cited by modern scholars but previously difficult to find because of their original appearance in obscure publications. Carefully selected by a team of scholars based on their relevance to modern scholarship, these essays can now be fully utilized by scholars and proudly owned by libraries.

Missions to Muslims

S. A. Morrison

prêtas press 2011

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2011 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2011

1

ISBN 978-1-61719-822-9

ISSN 1935-6854 Reprinted from the Edinburgh edition.

Printed in the United States of America

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS BY S. A. MORRISON

T^EW would dispute that, compared with the triumphs of the Christian Church in other fields, missions to Muslims give the impression of failure. The results, whether measured in terms of the number of genuine converts or by any other standard, are apparently infinitesimal in proportion to the sacrificial outpouring of human life and material resources which they have entailed. The miniature mass movements amongst Muslims in the Dutch East Indies are no disproof of this conclusion. The majority of the Muslims there are animists at heart, with merely a veneer of Islam on the surface of their lives. Only in Iran and perhaps in parts of India are there indications of a deep and widespread movement from Islam to Christianity amongst people whose ancestors have shown themselves convinced Muslims for generations, and, be it always remembered, these people are non-Arabs by race. Such considerations constituted 'a concern' to the members of the Near East Christian Council, and led to the issue of a request to all those who were interested in evangelistic work amongst Muslims for a searching and unprejudiced enquiry into the causes of the relative failure of missionary work in Muslim lands. The Council could not believe that it was outside the purpose or the power of God that Muslims should accept the Gospel of His Son, nor could it honestly feel that the sole responsibility for the present lack of response lay in the obduracy of the Muslim heart. The suggestion was made that Muslim friends of missionaries and of indigenous Christians should be asked which elements in Christianity or its presentation attracted them and which repelled them. Simultaneously, Christian workers were invited to reconsider, in the light of the guidance of the Spirit of God, what are and what should be the objectives, motives and methods of missionary work amongst Muslims. 39

601

6O2

INTERNATIONAL

R E V I E W OF

MISSIONS

The Council cherished the hope that thus there might spring to birth a new evangelistic movement, purified, inspired and controlled by the living Spirit of God. The present article is one contribution to this enquiry, and its conclusions have been hammered out in frequent discussion with indigenous Christians and younger missionaries, meeting regularly in study groups in Cairo during the past few years. It lays no claim to be a complete and final solution of the problem. Its purpose is to stimulate creative thought, by a deeper analysis of the causes of our present lack of success. One commonly recognized reason why Muslims do not become Christians is the nature of Islam itself. 1 It alone of the outstanding religions arose after Christianity, and it alone claims to supersede it. According to the orthodox Muslim doctrine of divine revelation, Muhammed was the last and greatest of the prophets, greater than Jesus Himself, and to summon Muslims to Christianity is like inviting Christians to become Jews. From the Muslim point of view it is an invitation to revert to a less complete and less explicit revelation of God. But not only is Christianity inferior, from the Muslim standpoint, as a revelation of God; it is also inferior as a revelation of the ideal life for man. Jesus, says the Muslim, was an ascetic, who never married but renounced this world for the sake of the next. His example, therefore, is of little practical value for the average man of to-day. Muhammed, on the other hand, offered a pattern of right conduct for all conditions and all circumstances of life. In his varied career may be found a precedent for guidance in all emergencies. The teaching of Jesus, as evidenced by the Sermon on the Mount, is too idealistic and impracticable for this everyday world. Islam, in contrast with it, is the natural religion, practical in its teaching, suited to the needs and demands of human nature. To the non-philosophical Muslim mind the doctrines of Christianity appear vague and unintelligible, 1 See, for example, the article on ' The Muslim Point of View,' by Orientalist, in The Moslem World, January 1936.

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

603

whereas Islam is simple both in its fundamental doctrines and in its religious requirements. With all these advantages on the side of Islam, why, asks the Muslim, should he renounce his religion in favour of an inferior faith? Thus, as a revelation of God, as a criterion of human conduct, in the practical value of its teaching and in the intelligibility of its doctrines Islam is presumed to outclass Christianity. But, over and above these general considerations, the Muslim unhesitatingly denies the truth and validity of the message which the Christian missionary bears. First, the central Christian doctrine of the atonement is explicitly repudiated in the Koran, both by its rejection of our Lord's divinity and by its denial of His death on the Cross. Secondly, the Trinity is misunderstood both in the Koran and in popular Muslim thought, as signifying tritheism, so that Christians are in danger of the heinous sin of shirk (associating other gods with God). Thirdly, even if Christians may claim to be 'People of a Book,' of what value is this, asks the Muslim, when the Ingil (Gospel) as ijpw circulated is full of corruptions, and in any case resembles in its form the Muslim Hadith (Traditions) rather than the Koran, which is the very Word of God. And so from the outset the mind of the Muslim is closed against the acceptance of the main Christian doctrines—the Trinity, the divinity of our Lord, His death on the Cross, His atonement and resurrection. Even these do not exhaust the list of reasons why the Muslim feels justified in repudiating Christianity. Taught from childhood to rely on the almighty power and infinite mercy of God, he can perceive no necessity in the nature of things for a mediator between God and man. All the Jewish and Christian teaching about sacrifice for sin seems to him irrelevant, if not impious. It implies a curtailment of the divine Infinitude. Again, the Christian negation of 'good works' as determining ultimate salvation opens the door, in his mind as in that of some of St Paul's opponents, to a doctrine of licence.1 Moreover, the Muslim has a set of moral values quite different from the Christian's. He misses in Christianity the emphasis on 1

Cp., for example, Romans HI, 8.

6O4

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF MISSIONS

ceremonial purity; he condemns the Christian's partaking of pork and wine; he considers the Christian virtues of gentleness, meekness, long-suffering and forbearance as tinged with effeminacy, in contrast to the Muslim ideals of power, courage and manliness. By carrying sin back into the realm of thought and motive, Christianity lacks the clear-cut definition of 'greater sins' and' lesser sins' which characterizes Islam. Its teaching on prayer, fasting and the Christian life, being couched in terms of general principles, is not sufficiently concrete in form for the Semitic mind, which naturally prefers the detailed laws and regulations of the Sharia code. It is therefore no exaggeration to say that by nature and by upbringing the Muslim's outlook is diametrically opposed to some of the most vital doctrines of the Christian faith. To all these difficulties, springing from the normal Muslim attitude towards the Christian message, must be added others, that derive from the failure of the Christian Church and the Christian community to live up to the ideals of their Founder. The bloodstained legacy of the Crusades, the imperialistic policy of European powers, the disloyalty to the local Muslim government of disaffected Christian minorities resident in the Near East have united to embitter and sour relations between Muslims and Christians and to render more difficult the friendly approach of the foreign missionary or the indigenous Christian. Again, the impact of the West upon the East through the theatre, the cinema, the radio and the newspaper has exposed to view the seamy side of western civilization and lent some justification to the criticism that Christianity, having failed to redeem the life of European nations, is doomed to similar failure in the East. Whatever the Christian evangelist may say about the redeeming power of Christ, the Muslim cannot shut his eyes to the fact that the majority of beer-shops and licensed houses in Egypt are the property of European Christians, that the standards of personal and social morality of many Christians fail to rise any higher than his own, and that class and racial prejudice are embedded in the conduct of Christian nations, thus justifying the Muslim's claim that in actual practice Islamic brotherhood

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

is more real, more effective and more penetrating than the Christian. Even the Christian churches, which should embody and exemplify the Christian message, are at times a stumbling-block and an offence through their pictures, symbols and rites, which to the iconoclastic Muslim savour of idolatry, while their mutual antagonisms give the lie to the fundamental doctrine of Christian love. The motives of the missionary himself do not escape criticism, as in the eyes of many he is but an agent of a foreign power, or has chosen this career to increase his merit before God. Missions, again, are condemned for their attacks on the character of Muhammed and the validity of the Koran, as well as for their habit of taking advantage (as the Muslim sees it) of the immaturity of children in schools and of the weakness of sick folk in hospitals. Should there appear a Muslim who, undaunted by these difficulties, perseveres in his quest for the living Christ and is ultimately led by the Spirit of God to ask for baptism, at once he is confronted in Muslim lands like Egypt with a barbedwire fencing of legal, economic and social disabilities, sufficient to scare any normal individual. As Islam does not recognize apostasy, there exists no legal procedure for the registration of his conversion to Christianity, similar to that for the conversion of the Christian to Islam. To the end of his days, the convert retains the legal status of a Muslim; he must, for example, apply for a government post in his Muslim name. On the other hand, being known to his friends and relatives as an apostate, he is precluded from the family inheritance, unless he is prepared to deny his Christianity. More often than not the convert is dismissed by his employer, whether Muslim or Christian, who soon discovers that the presence of a convert on his staff is a serious handicap to his business. As a result, the missionary organization or church which was responsible for his baptism feels under an obligation to give him employment of some kind, for which he may, or more likely may not, be fitted, thus tending to segregate him from his fellows and to encourage in him the conviction that it is the duty of the mission to protect him from

6o6

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF MISSIONS

poverty or attack. Boycotted by his former friends and, as we shall observe below, suspected by his Christian brethren, the convert leads a lonely life, finding it difficult if not impossible to marry, and developing a conviction that every man's hand is against him. Conversion involves separation from the life of the majority and adherence to a despised minority. It is naturally regarded by the average Muslim as an anti-communal—sometimes as an antinational—act. Many Muslims are firmly convinced that no Muslim ever does become a Christian, whereas hundreds of indigenous Coptic Christians embrace Islam annually for mercenary or matrimonial causes. Thus the tide of public opinion is set against conversion to Christianity. Its flow is altogether from Christianity to Islam. We have above been analysing the formidable and deeplyrooted reasons which deter the Muslim from accepting Christianity. We must now turn to a different set of reasons, whose origin is to be sought in the history of the Christian Church in Muslim lands. Buffeted by persecution, driven in self-defence to seek survival by diplomacy and ready submission, cut off from the inspiration of contact with the Christians of other countries, the ancient churches of the Near East have lost much of their pristine spiritual vitality, and through fear of their Muslim rulers have ceased to engage in active Christian witness. The coming of the foreign missionary enterprise during the past century filled them with alarm. They feared the corrosive effect of evangelical teaching upon the Church's traditional beliefs, they resented the formation of Protestant churches from members of their own community, and they were apprehensive lest missionary activity would jeopardize their position vis-à-vis the Muslim authorities. For centuries they took little direct part in evangelistic work amongst Muslims, and until recently they have been sceptical of all forms of missionary activity. As some of the converts with whom they were acquainted had proved morally or spiritually unsatisfactory, or had relapsed into Islam, the conviction grew that genuine conversions from Islam were impossible. All new converts were viewed with

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

607

suspicion. Social fellowship was seldom accorded to them and marriage with Christian women virtually denied them. Sensitive to such an atmosphere, converts have for years complained of the coldness of the Christian Church. Fear has been one impediment to missionary work. Another has been the ignorance of the mass of the Christian population of the elementary truths of the Christian faith. In thought and practice they have approximated to their Muslim environment. Sharing the superstitions of their less educated Muslim neighbours they have absorbed the fatalistic outlook of Islam. As there is no missionary motive, so there is often no missionary message. Even the younger churches, which have been organized by the foreign missionary societies in the hope that they will be by their life and witness a divine instrument of Muslim evangelism, have failed to rid themselves of some of the deficiencies and weaknesses of the ancient churches. Many of them are afraid of the consequences of evangelism. Many adopt an attitude of scarcely-veiled suspicion towards converts. Many cling to modes of thought which are more Islamic than Christian. Only occasionally do we discover individuals who are ready to bear witness to their Muslim friends, either as paid evangelists or in a voluntary capacity. The difficulties above enumerated, arising from the Muslim's philosophy of life, the absence of religious liberty in Muslim lands and the attitude of the Christian Church, are in themselves sufficient to account for the paucity of converts from Islam. As we seek to consider the steps which, in our opinion, should be taken to meet and minimize these difficulties, we shall have occasion to refer to still further obstacles, attributable to the mistaken objectives or faulty methods of the missionaries and indigenous evangelists themselves. These obstacles in turn must be removed if the Spirit of God is to have freedom to work effectively in Muslim hearts. If we may begin with the indigenous churches of the Near East, the conclusion seems inevitable that a revival of the oriental churches is an indispensable condition of successful

6o8

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF MISSIONS

evangelistic work amongst Muslims. So long as the majority of Christians known personally to individual Muslims give by their life and thought a distorted picture of the Gospel of Christ, it is unlikely that Muslims will be attracted to the Christian message, however winsomely presented to them by the missionary or evangelist. All effort to foster the spiritual and ethical life of these churches is an invaluable, if indirect, contribution to the missionary cause. These efforts should, without exception, have as part of their purpose the encouragement within the churches of a sense of corporate and individual responsibility for evangelistic work amongst Muslims. Within the oriental churches lies a stupendous potential reserve of voluntary lay evangelism, that needs but the touch of the Spirit of God and the skilled training of the missionary to be released for direct and indirect missionary effort. The paucity of the resources of missionary personnel underlines the importance of calling out these reserves, without which it will be impossible to reach the millions in Muslim lands. The vision of missionary responsibility will in turn help to fan the flames of spiritual revival within the churches. Already in the Coptic Church in Egypt lay reform movements are emerging, which have as their aim not only the evangelism of unshepherded Copts, but also in some cases witness to Muslims. Both directly and indirectly these movements are helping to stem the tide of Coptic conversions to Islam. 1 There are indications that- the oriental churches are not averse to accepting such assistance as the foreign missionary can offer them, provided they can be assured that it is given in sincere friendship, and without any ulterior motive of attracting these reform movements within the orbit of the Protestant churches. Whatever reasons in the past obliged foreign missionary organizations to encourage the formation of indigenous evangelical churches, the question deserves serious consideration to-day whether present conditions justify a continuation of that policy. If the churches of the Near East, whether ancient or younger, 1 See the article by the present writer on ' T h e Indigenous Churches and Muslim Evangelism' in this Review for July 1936.

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

609

are to bear effective witness to Muslims, they need to examine afresh their traditional forms of church service and of ecclesiastical art and symbolism, in order to ascertain whether these are in any way repellent to the Muslims whom they wish to win. We are convinced that, in view of Muslim susceptibilities, modifications might advantageously be made without any appreciable loss to the spiritual life of the Christian worshippers. For the same reason, no effort should be spared to promote a better understanding between the different churches. Not only would this help to eliminate waste and overlapping in evangelistic activity, but, what is of greater importance, it would be a demonstration to the Muslim community of the fundamental unity of all churches in Christ. Nothing short of a sincere, vital and practical fellowship between all Christian forces and individuals, whether indigenous or foreign, can convince the Muslim world that Christian brotherhood is a reality, expressing in human relationships the truth that God is Love. From the problems of the Christian Church we pass to those of the Christian community. It is problematical whether any way can be found for the removal of those obstacles to missionary work which are the consequence of the impact of the West upon the East, other than a deepening of the spiritual life of the home churches in all European countries and an extension of their influence upon all phases of national life. The missionary societies and the indigenous churches, for their part, can so identify themselves with all movements for social reform, local and international, as to make it manifest that the vices of the West (immorality, drug-addiction, intemperance and so on) are as avowedly the enemies of the Christian Church in the Near East as they are in Europe itself. It is, we believe, a mistake in principle as well as in policy to maintain that the Church has no concern with such problems. Again, there is room for much progress in the dissociation of missionary work from all flag-waving and from the spread of western civilization as such. It is a most regrettable fact that in many countries of the Near East missions are regarded as being opposed, or at least indifferent, to the nationalist movement

6io

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF MISSIONS

which commands the devotion of the students, if not of the masses. The enquiry now being prosecuted by the Near East Christian Council into the relations between the Christian Church and nationalism is long overdue. Important, however, as are the revival of the oriental churches and the identification of missionary activity with all that is progressive in national life, as indirect methods of winning the Muslim world to Christ, neither the one nor the other can be a substitute for direct missionary work amongst Muslims. Only too frequently in the past have missionary forces been diverted from the main task of evangelism among Muslims to other less exacting callings. Great discipline of soul needs to be exercised by mission boards, churches and individual Christian workers alike, to ensure the centrality of the evangelism of Muslims in all their undertakings. Even, however, where the evangelistic approach to Muslims has been given priority over all other claims, obvious defects of method may be observed, which have militated against the success of the efforts made. In the first place, foreign missionaries need to acquire a greater mastery of Arabic. Relatively few of them have attained to facility in the understanding and use of an admittedly difficult language. How serious a handicap this is only those know who have had years of experience as evangelists to Muslims. Secondly, it is imperative that all missionaries and Christian workers should acquire a more intimate knowledge of Islamic thought—not, we would stress, from the academic standpoint, but as a means of understanding and appreciating the influences which are moulding the thoughtlife and spiritual experience of the group which the evangelist is hoping to win. This is no barren study of Islamics, but a living contact with the cultural, intellectual and spiritual forces of the day, and can be obtained only in the mission field itself. In the third place, experience has shown that a relatively small number of missionaries, or even of indigenous Christians, are conversant with the religious vocabulary of Islam. In their preaching and teaching most evangelists make use of Arabic words and phrases which bear a definitely Christian connotation,

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

6ii

but which convey a different meaning, or practically no meaning at all, to a Muslim audience, unless carefully explained. Not seldom controversy between Christians and Muslims on points of doctrine arises solely from their mutual ignorance of each other's religious vocabulary. Wherever possible, an Islamic Arabic vocabulary should be employed, and Christian Arabic words used only where the other fails, and then only with an adequate explanation. Fourthly, we need constantly to bear in mind that the essential doctrines of the Christian faith in their New Testament form were being presented to Jews or to inhabitants of the Roman Empire of the first century. They are, therefore, couched in terms and forms of thought comprehensible to the people to whom they were addressed. It does not necessarily follow that the same terms and thought-forms are the best or the most suitable for a Muslim audience of the twentieth century. For example, the phraseology of the New Testament concerning sacrifices, propitiatory offerings for sin and other aspects of the temple worship, would be readily understood by Jews and pagans of our Lord's day. It is not immediately intelligible to the modern Muslim. In fact, it is naturally repugnant to him. Only a mechanical conception of inspiration can, we believe, require that the truths underlying such forms of thought must be expressed in these identical terms to-day. What is urgently required is a restatement of the same truths in modes of thought which the Muslim can understand. Thus some of the Muslim misunderstandings of the meaning of the atonement can be removed. Similarly, many (though not all) of the difficulties centring around the Christian doctrine of the divinity of our Lord can be obviated by the presentation of this truth not in terms of the divine Sonship, but in those, equally scriptural, of the divine Word. And the same applies to the doctrine of the Trinity and other essential Christian beliefs.1 Closely connected with this point are two others, which are 1 T h e question of the presentation of these truths to Muslims has recently been made the object of a special study by the Evangelistic Committee of the Near East Christian Council.

6I2

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF MISSIONS

often neglected in practice. Most of the essential truths of the Christian faith cannot be understood by a Muslim on the first hearing. He is not prepared emotionally, mentally or spiritually for their reception. Much preliminary teaching is indispensable to a right attitude towards them. To plunge therefore into an exposition of them on the first occasion is, we are convinced, a contradiction both of psychological teaching and of Christian wisdom. And—another important lesson—in view of the Muslim claim that Islam supersedes Christianity, it is essential that the missionary message should be completely free of all sub-Christian or un-Christian traits. And yet, the conception of God, of the nature of salvation, of the atonement and of heaven and hell, as presented in much Christian preaching to Muslims, contains ideas which are regrettably medieval or subChristian. Traits of tritheism enter into the presentation of the atonement, which give some justification to the child's comment: 'Jesus I love—God I hate.' There is here, we are convinced, great need for clearer, more Christian thinking. Again, there is sometimes grave danger of the centrality of the Christian Gospel of redemption, with its message of the love of God revealed in the life, death and resurrection of our Lord, being lost in teaching, or in controversy, concerning relatively minor points of Christian doctrine. The evangelist must ever be on his guard against such side-tracking. Its effect is not only to confuse the Muslim as to what is the essence of the Gospel, but also to confirm him in his impression of the complicated character of Christianity. One other consideration in this connexion is the wisdom of following our Lord's own method of teaching, in which He adapted His message to the specific needs of the group or the individual to whom He was speaking at the time. For one, 'salvation' meant release from fear; for another, a deeper faith; for a third, the conquest of pride; for a fourth, the abandonment of ambition or of worldly wealth. And so in Muslim lands we must not conceive of one single unvarying message for all. To the sheikh we bring the good news of the love of God, transcending the limitations of a legalist system; to the effendi, the

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

613

experience of spiritual power to transform personal and national life; to a peasant woman, freedom from fear of evil spirits and from the bonds of superstition. Even within each group there will be adaptations of emphasis to meet the needs of different individuals. And, finally, the proved futility (with rare exceptions) of the controversial method of approach, in preaching and in literature, and its tendency to produce 'intellectual' rather than 'spiritual' conversions, has led to a recognition of the need for a 'spiritual' approach to the Muslim, accompanied by personal friendship and practical Christian service. Dr Cash, in his recent book on Christendom and Islam, has stressed the importance of sharing our deepest spiritual experiences with the mystically-minded Muslim. We are certain that it is only as Muslims, whether orthodox, mystics or liberals, are brought face to face with the personality of Jesus Christ as revealed in the New Testament, and behold His Spirit incarnate in the Church, in community relationships and in the lives of individuals, that they will realize that, far from Islam superseding Christianity, it is Christianity which brings a more profound revelation of God and a higher ideal for man. Only so will they realize that spiritual truths must be 'spiritually' understood. It is unfortunate that Protestantism has laid such stress upon the ultimate value of the individual as frequently to overlook the complementary truth that the individual can develop his full personality only in a spirit-controlled group. There is at present far too much individualism in missionary work in the Near East. Lack of space has necessitated the statement of these basic principles of Muslim evangelism in the briefest form, but we are convinced that their non-observance has been in large measure responsible for the scanty results of much Christian preaching. The convening of prayer-meetings for the conversion of Muslims will not of itself effect any considerable change, unless those participating are prepared for a radical reconsideration of their missionary methods. Were such a change to be achieved in an atmosphere of sincere love for

614

INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF MISSIONS

individual Muslims, and were there to emerge a Christian fellowship which would provide a home for the convert, there would, we believe, be far more conversions to Christ than we see to-day. This in turn brings us to two other vitally important factors affecting Muslim evangelism, more particularly in regard to the Church and the convert. The conviction is growing with many that, while maintaining the uniqueness of Christ as the final revelation of God, the Christian Church would gain rather than lose by seeking to conserve all that is good in the faith and practice of other religions. By its insistence on the divine unity, by its repudiation of idolatry, by its emphasis on adoration in worship, by its practical brotherhood, and by its application of religion to every department of human life, Islam has a lesson to teach the Christian Church; and the Church, for its part, should endeavour to discover a Christian counterpart for all those elements of Islamic religious experience, such as the Zikr, the reading of the Koran and the formal prayers, which have meant so much in the spiritual life of individual Muslims. The present services of the Christian Church in the Near East are not, we believe, sufficiently related to the religious needs of the Muslim environment or of the Muslim convert. And, secondly, every effort should be made to secure greater religious freedom in Muslim lands. Beyond question, the disabilities of converts are to-day one of the major obstacles to the acceptance and confession of Christianity. Whether the future will see an improvement or a deterioration in this respect will depend largely on the interplay of political and cultural forces, over which missions and the churches have little direct control. Nevertheless, indirect influence may be brought to bear for the removal of misunderstandings about the aims of missions and for the production of an atmosphere favourable to religious freedom. All action should be scrupulously avoided which would lend any justification to such charges as were levelled against missions in Egypt during the newspaper campaign of T 933While restrictions remain, and even afterwards, more might

MISSIONS TO MUSLIMS

615

be done to co-ordinate evangelistic activities amongst men and women, so as to secure the conversion of households and natural groups rather than of isolated individuals. Only so can many of the problems affecting the life of the convert be solved. Also, closer co-operation is needed from the outset between the teaching of enquirers by evangelists and the normal life of the Church. We do not believe that the difficulties engendered by conditions of evangelism in Muslim lands require, as some have suggested, that groups of converts should develop their own spiritual and communal life, independent of the recognized churches. The purpose of this article has been to call attention to the many diverse factors contributing to the apparent failure of missions to Muslims, and to suggest ways in which these obstacles may be surmounted. But, lest any traces of a defeatist attitude be suspected, we would in conclusion assert our sincere conviction that missions to Muslims, far from being a failure, have in many respects been marvellously successful. The growing dissatisfaction with Islam and the sense of its inability to measure up to the demands of life at its highest are traceable in part, at least, to Christian missions. Not a few Christian ideas have become embedded in the normal outlook of educated Muslims. Christian standards are being subconsciously accepted as the criterion of social progress and of the ideal life. Christian practices and institutions are being copied as an integral part of western civilization. Individual Muslims and occasionally groups of Muslims have confessed their faith in Christ. Hundreds of others are attracted to Him. Missions also, while establishing vigorous evangelical churches, have contributed indirectly to the emergence of new life in the ancient churches of the Near East. All these facts we thankfully recognize and acclaim. What we now hope and pray is that this article may stimulate creative thinking for the discovery of new ways whereby missionary work may be rendered more effective, more fruitful and more Christlike. S. A.

MORRISON