In the Spring of 1877, Protestant Missionaries joined together to meet in Shanghai to discuss a Christian missions view of opium in China. There were two wars often referred to as the Opium Wars. The first Opium War was 1839-1942 and the second 1856-1860. In both cases, much of conflict was driven by trade between Great Britain and China, with France also involved in the second one. Opium was not the only issue, but certainly was the most problematic, with European powers working against the Qing dynasty trying to suppress the opium trade.
Some of the results of the Opium wars aided missionaries— such as the ceding of Hong Kong to England. With that in mind, it is valuable to see how Protestant Missionaries viewed this.
Cornell University is nice enough to make a paper from the 1877 gathering available as a scanned document online. If you want to read it, you can CLICK HERE.
To my own mind the great hindrance which opium as distinguished from other vices and evils presents to the Gospel must be traced not so much to its use, as to the history of that use, and Mr. Stevenson in the course of his speech fully coincides
Here is a quote from that paper.
I must be permitted also in passing to notice the fallacy which somewhat persistently underlies the arguments of those who criticize the present Anti-opium agitation. It is assumed that our great object is to cure the Chinese of opium-smoking, and that one mearns to attain this most desirable end is the stoppage of the Indian supply. Surely this is a fallacy and a mistake. Our great object is to rid Christian England of the shame and wrong connected with her opium-selling, more than to cure Heathen China of her vice of opium-smoking. So far as human agency is concerned, China must cure herself. Hospitals and Opium Refuges practically useful as they are, must yet ever be so few and feeble as to act the part of protest prompting and suggesting, never of universal efficacy.
This is the true issue. England has not only injured China by her share in the trade; she has through the moral effect of the history of that trade, crippled her power to apply the one remedy for all China’s woes— the Gospel.
A. E. Moule ‘The Use of Opium and Its Bearing on the Spread of Christianity in China,’ A paper read before the Shanghai Missionary Conference, May 19, 1877. pages 2 and 3.
Reading this quote, one sees some nuance. Moule, an Anglican missionary under the Church Missionary Society recognized the dangers of opium use. On the same page as the quote, he notes that opium is a vice, not necessarily better or worse than other vices. While around 150 later, we might feel that opioids are a bigger vice than other vices, I do see a positive side in this. It is a common tendency for people in Culture A to see the vices associated with Culture B to be more repugnant or more immoral than their own associated vices. Moule sees opium as a vice that leads to great moral problems but doesn’t assume that the vices of the English are better, or more “Christian.”
He notes that actions of the Anti-opium contingent are commendable, as well as those trying to help those who are suffering from opium use and addiction. However, he adds the note that the opium solution in China, from the human side of things at least, can only be solved by the Chinese, not by foreign missionaries.
In the quote, he notes a problem that is of bigger concern to himself at least. Because Great Britain has had a hand in actually promoting (at times at gunpoint) the expansion of opium use in China, the empire has undermined its self-identification as a “Christian Nation” and has undermined its testimony, and that of its missionaries, in bringing the message of Christ to China.
I will admit that I can relate to that a bit. I remember visiting a Brazilian church in Parana. That church supported Brazilian missionaries around the world. One of the major mission sites they supported was work in the Palestinian Territories.
It occurred to me at that time that Brazilians have an advantage in ministering to Palestinians. Brazilians tend to have a rather positive reputation world-wide. I think most people don’t feel conflict with Brazilians except in terms of sports perhaps (futbol, F-1, volleyball, etc.) This contrasts with Americans. Years before that, I was in the US Navy, involved with the First Iraqi War (“Desert Storm”). One day, when we were on port call in Haifa, Israel, I had the oportunity to visit Jerusalem. It was a nice visit— got the vibe of a “Christian Disneyland” in some ways, but I still treasure that visit.
Coming out of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre there were a bunch of young Palestinian boys. They were hoping to sell us stuff. None of us were interested at that point in time, so the boys shifted the sales tack to… “Buy before you die. Buy before you die. Die for the glory of Saddam Hussein. Buy before you die.”
Years later, in Brazil, it occurred to me that as an American I was not likely to have much of an impact on those Palestinian boys, or Palestinian adults either. Americans have tended to have a rather aggressive role in the Middle East, and many American Christians (drawing from Christian Zionism) have often seen the Palestians as “the enemy.”
I serve in the Philippines so I don’t have to deal much at all with the Israel and Palestine. Still, the challenge remains that Americans will often have trouble in working in a number of Asian countries because of geopolitical issues that American missionaries have no direct role in.
At risk of being a bit controversial here, perhaps meddling is a bit of an American vice. Or maybe not. I don’t know. But there are repercussions. That is why I am more focused on training Asians for mission work to Asia. Frankly, the problems of Asia, humanly speaking, are going to be solved by Asians, not by American missionaries.
