AGAIN, THE DEVELOPMENT on the field of interdenominational statistical activity is to be noted. The Christian Movement in Japan, Korea and Formosa has statistical features in the annual volumes. The Christian Occupation of China was rich in statistics. The new statistical survey of Christianity in India, made under the supervision of the Rev. Alexander McLeish, of Ajmer, is another evidence of the same movement. In lesser measure there are similar results in other parts of Asia, Africa and the island world. These field efforts at statistics increasingly tend to exhibit the point of view of the growing Churches rather than that of the missionary societies, and the categories of classification used give evidence of this tendency.
Attempts at tabulating missionary statistics for a world atlas must make the most of what can be gathered from board offices, supplementing these returns by whatever can be gleaned from field sources such as have been already described. The problem of adjusting and unifying the figures resulting from these two different streams of effort is one that must somehow be worked out by the editors and staff.
Either of two processes may be followed in compiling statistics of missions. A set of rubrics may be chosen which have proved generally acceptable to mission boards and home base constituencies and which include the major classifications which have seemed to be pertinent for mission data. The hundreds of society and field reports which constitute the major sources to be used can then be scanned and the statistical facts gleaned can be listed under their appropriate headings, so far as the headings provide places for the facts. With a prearranged statistical scheme, and with available returns properly tucked away in the columns where they belong, the drawing of totals for fields and continents becomes a desirable and natural outcome. The results are usable for interpretative purposes and have real significance and value. In general, this has been the plan followed as a rule in compiling world statistics of missions.
Another method would be to study the situation in each area to be presented statistically, to choose just those statistical categories which would exhibit the facts characteristic of the particular area, and then to build statistical schemes accordingly for each field. The results, thus following the particularized statistical procedure appropriate for this or that geographical unit, would better exhibit the facts. As the foci of record making, and as co-operative and union movements develop on the fields, this kind of statistical procedure will doubtless come to be more and more in evidence. The quantitative measurements of growth and development of the Christian movements will naturally tend to become as varied as the life they are used to measure. But totals for all the fields under many headings will then become well-nigh impossible to provide. Totals will be appropriate only for the particular headings which might emerge as characteristic of many fields.
The editors of the Atlas fairly faced this issue of statistical method and decided on the former procedure, on grounds of practicability. I am still of the opinion that our processes would have broken down under the sheer weight of the load to be carried had we attempted the second type of study in connection with the present Atlas.
Given the conditions of compilation, the particular sources used and the statistical technique followed in the preparation of the Atlas, it is plain the results obtained for any particular area are likely to show marked variations from returns compiled for that same area by any group seeking light on this or that special problem. Reports of different dates are likely to be used. Additional sources may be available. Other headings for classification may be thought desirable. Yet the Atlas and any such study may each represent the best and most thoroughgoing processes practicable under all the circumstances and for the particular objectives sought.
Attempts at tabulating missionary statistics for a world atlas must make the most of what can be gathered from board offices, supplementing these returns by whatever can be gleaned from field sources such as have been already described. The problem of adjusting and unifying the figures resulting from these two different streams of effort is one that must somehow be worked out by the editors and staff.
Either of two processes may be followed in compiling statistics of missions. A set of rubrics may be chosen which have proved generally acceptable to mission boards and home base constituencies and which include the major classifications which have seemed to be pertinent for mission data. The hundreds of society and field reports which constitute the major sources to be used can then be scanned and the statistical facts gleaned can be listed under their appropriate headings, so far as the headings provide places for the facts. With a prearranged statistical scheme, and with available returns properly tucked away in the columns where they belong, the drawing of totals for fields and continents becomes a desirable and natural outcome. The results are usable for interpretative purposes and have real significance and value. In general, this has been the plan followed as a rule in compiling world statistics of missions.
Another method would be to study the situation in each area to be presented statistically, to choose just those statistical categories which would exhibit the facts characteristic of the particular area, and then to build statistical schemes accordingly for each field. The results, thus following the particularized statistical procedure appropriate for this or that geographical unit, would better exhibit the facts. As the foci of record making, and as co-operative and union movements develop on the fields, this kind of statistical procedure will doubtless come to be more and more in evidence. The quantitative measurements of growth and development of the Christian movements will naturally tend to become as varied as the life they are used to measure. But totals for all the fields under many headings will then become well-nigh impossible to provide. Totals will be appropriate only for the particular headings which might emerge as characteristic of many fields.
The editors of the Atlas fairly faced this issue of statistical method and decided on the former procedure, on grounds of practicability. I am still of the opinion that our processes would have broken down under the sheer weight of the load to be carried had we attempted the second type of study in connection with the present Atlas.
Given the conditions of compilation, the particular sources used and the statistical technique followed in the preparation of the Atlas, it is plain the results obtained for any particular area are likely to show marked variations from returns compiled for that same area by any group seeking light on this or that special problem. Reports of different dates are likely to be used. Additional sources may be available. Other headings for classification may be thought desirable. Yet the Atlas and any such study may each represent the best and most thoroughgoing processes practicable under all the circumstances and for the particular objectives sought.
