108 



KEV. r. BAYLIS, M.A.^ ON 



Missions and the Science of Morcdsj^ 



While it is possible to trace, as has been done above in 

 outline, mutual dependence of missions and science, it cannot 

 be supposed that this relation is the whole of the story. 

 It must be admitted that it is quite possible for some 

 branches of missionary work, to enter into a sort of rivalry, if 

 not a still less happy relation, with some forms of science. An 

 example which comes most readily to mind is that of anthro- 

 pology both as a theoretical science and even more where it is 

 in any considerable degree an applied science. In the mission 

 Held of to-day the anthropologist is a sort of younger brother 

 of the missionary. The non-Christian races and particularly 

 the backward ones, occupy the attention of both. The mis- 

 sionary has often in the past been the best informant of the 

 anthropologist, and sometimes his best pioneer in getting 

 access to a shy or savage tribe. Sometimes, however, he is a 

 formidable and yet possibly useful, critic of anthropological 

 facts ; and he would like to be the means, by his wonderfully 

 enlightening gospel, of cutting short the life history of the 

 so-called " primitive " conditions in which the backward races 

 are still found. 



It might appear, then, to be a case of parallel approach to 

 great problems of human life and history, and it might be 

 expected that mutual helpfulness and sympathy should result. 

 Perhaps so. But there is one element in this case that is not 

 usual. The place which has to be found for the knowledge of God 

 makes a diff erence here which does not usually arise. The Science 

 it may be admitted is no more anti-Christian or non-Christian 

 than any other Science ; but it is a very remarkable case of the 

 inevitable limitations of Science on the religious side. 



What we contrast with Missions is anthropology as it tries 

 to read on scientific principles the riddle of the nature and 

 history of man as a moral and religious being. Taking this 

 problem on scientific grounds, just the same grounds, mutatis 

 mutandis, as are taken by physics, chemistry, biology, and 

 other branches of science, a theory of the evolution of morals, 

 and even of the evolution of religion, holds the field to-day. 



In Mr. Hobhouse's Morals in Evolution, which will serve as 

 a good sample of books on the Science of Morals, recorded facts 

 about standards of moral conduct and about the basis of these 



The writer apologises for reproducing on this subject part of an 

 article in the C.M.S. Revieiv for April, 1907. 



