of the work which they are asked to perform.  They need to enjoy the intellectual apprehension of the larger aspects of the work, and the relation of their own detailed operations to those larger aspects; and it is commonly recognised that the understanding of the meaning and purpose of the detail upon which each operative may be engaged is a most powerful incentive to good work.  In the past leaders relied more upon implicit, unreasoning obedience, supported often by affection for the leader’s own character, and profound trust in his wisdom, and a general hope of advantage for each individual who carried out orders unhesitatingly and exactly; but they did not think it necessary, or even desirable, that the common workers should understand their plans and act in intelligent co-operation with them:  to-day, intelligent co-operation is prized as it has never been prized before, and its value is realised as it has never been realised before.

If this is true in the world of arms, of labour, of commerce, it is equally true in the world of foreign missions.  The common worker, the subscriber, the daily labourer, is beginning to demand that he shall be allowed to take an intelligent part in the work, and missionary leaders are beginning to see the importance of securing intelligent co-operation.  In the past the appeal has been rather to blind obedience, and immense stress has been laid upon the “command”; the appeal has been to the emotions, and love for Christ, love for the souls of men, hope of eternal blessings, hope of the coming of the Kingdom, and (for direction of the work) trust in the wisdom of great missionary leaders or committees, have been thought sufficient to inspire all to put forth their best efforts; but to-day, as in the labour world, as in commerce, as in the army, so in the world of missions, the intellect is taking a new place.  Men want to understand why and how their work assists towards the attainment of the goal, they want to know what they are doing, they want to understand the plan and to see their work influencing the accomplishment of the plan.

It is no doubt true that the demand for intelligent co-operation, both on the part of the subscribers and workers on the one side and of the great leaders and boards of directors on the other, is at present slight, weak, uncertain and hesitating; but it is already beginning to make itself felt, and must increase.  Certainly it is true that the support of a very large body of men is lost because they have never yet been able to understand the work of foreign missions.  They are accustomed in their daily business to “know what they are driving at,” and to relate their action to definite ends; and they have not seen foreign missions directed to the attainment of definite ends.  They have not seen in them any clear dominant purpose to which they could relate the manifold activities of the missionaries whom they were asked to support; and they cannot give to the vague and chaotic that support which they might give to work which they saw clearly to be directed to the attainment of a great goal which they desired by a policy which they understood.  The attitude of these men is the attitude of those who await an intelligent appeal to their intelligence.