by Andrew Porter, editor
Historians commonly view British missionaries as agents of the British Empire. Were they? What motivated these preachers of the gospel—the reign of God or the reign of Queen Victoria? This helpful collection of essays edited by Andrew Porter deals with the question of how British missionaries related to the British Empire.
Wm. B. Eerdmans, 255 Jefferson Ave., S.E., Grand Rapids, MI 49503, 2003, 250 pages, $45.00.
—Reviewed by Daryl Climenhaga, associate professor of global studies, Providence Theological Seminary in Manitoba, Canada; former missionary in Zimbabwe.
Historians commonly view British missionaries as agents of the British Empire. Were they? What motivated these preachers of the gospel—the reign of God or the reign of Queen Victoria? This helpful collection of essays edited by Andrew Porter deals with the question of how British missionaries related to the British Empire.
The authors of the essays are experts in their fields, and one can read their contributions with confidence. The examinations of English missionaries in Africa and Asia (particularly India and China) reveal that they often confused church with empire, yet remained focused on proclaiming the gospel. Although the charge remains that missionaries were imperialist agents, this book makes clear that the British missionary enterprise had significant independence.
The racism of high imperialism unnerves, especially when it appears in the attitudes of missionaries. Yet missionary support for the British Empire was never absolute. Missionary pioneers such as David Livingstone and David Scott in Africa often sympathized more with their host culture than with their home country. Several essays note the missionaries’ resistance to Social Darwinism. They saw the African people as uninformed, rather than lower on an evolutionary scale. It is reassuring to learn that missionaries resisted the equation of “primitive” with “sub-human.”
The gospel transforms missionaries as well as their converts. De Gruchy’s closing essay captures well the effect of the gospel on missionaries and converts alike as he asks persistently: “Who did they think they were?” This question highlights a difficulty of historical scholarship, which can oversimplify by omitting faith from its examination. We certainly need the perspectives of history and sociology, but De Gruchy reminds us that faith was central to the missionary enterprise.
These essays demonstrate how easily missions becomes confused with politics. They also examine how missionaries remained devoted to their task, even while living as British imperialists. Imperial Horizons reminds us how missionaries today still wrestle with being in the world but not of it. As North Americans in a post-9/11 context, the questions Andrew Porter et al examine are our questions as well.
Check these titles:
Stanley, Brian, ed. 2001. Christian Missions and the Enlightenment. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.
Walls, Andrew F. 2002. The Cross-cultural Process in Christian History: Studies in the Transmission and Appropriation of the Faith. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books.
Copyright © 2005 Evangelism and Missions Information Service (EMIS). All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from EMIS.
