Moreover, the collection of money is a highly developed art.  It is extraordinary what pressure men can bring to bear upon converts to induce them to subscribe, so that the contribution is in many cases little different from the payment of a tax.  It is truly amazing to read how many forms of appeals and fees can be invented to collect money from more or less unwilling givers.[1] We cannot then accept the existence of self-supporting churches as an evidence of liberality, nor base our calculation on the sum subscribed for the upkeep of such churches.

[Footnote 1:  This is a list of the means employed to raise money by one missionary in order to assist the people in his district to arrive at self-support:—­

(1) Sunday collections. (2) Share of first fruits (crop seasons). (3) Monthly membership family assessment. (4) Special missionary or harvest thanksgiving (twice a year). (5) Pinch of rice at every meal as thanksgiving (women’s share). (6) Box in houses for prayer meetings, etc. (7) Church box. (8) Dedication of special pepper or cocoa-nut trees for church repair. (9) Bible society collections. (10) Hospital collection. (11) Baptism offerings. (12) Marriage offerings. (13) Lord’s Supper offerings. (14) Special gifts for church building or equipment.

It is not surprising that he adds that he is told that some of the new converts have gone back because they see the regularity and frequency of giving.]

Nevertheless, seeing that self-supporting churches are widely recognised, let us begin with these and seek to find out what information a table of inquiry might supply.  We should ask first for the number of self-supporting churches in relation to (a) the number of communicants (or full members) in the district, and (b) the number of Christian Churches organised, but not self-supporting.  By an organised Church we understand a body of Christians in any place who hold regular religious services, and may send delegates to any council which may exist for the whole station district.

-------------------------------------------------------

--------------
Communicants.|Proportion of  |Organised|Proportion of   |Remarks
|Communicants   |Churches.|Organised       |and
|connected with |         |Churches        |Conclusions.
|Self-supporting|         |Self-supporting.|
|Churches.      |         |                |
------------------------------------------------------------

---------
|               |         |                |
_____________|_______________|_________|________________|___

_________

From this we should learn briefly, and as a starting-point, the proportion of the self-supporting churches, and that might help us to understand the progress made towards self-support as it is understood in the district, and enable us to compare it with that of other districts.  But this by itself would not be of any great value in assisting us to understand what progress had been