Clergy Training and Theological Education: The Anglican-Episcopal Experience in China
History of the Missionary Movement & World Christianity, June 30 – July 2,
Conference Paper (Final Draft)
Clergy Training and
Experience in China
Kong Sheng Kung Hui Archives
Hua Theological College
This paper explores in some detail
theological education in the Chinese Anglican and Episcopal (Sheng Kung Zong, 聖公宗or Sheng Kung Hui 聖公會) traditions.
Clergy training and theological education were priorities for the
various Anglican mission societies and for the American Church Mission (ACM,
The Episcopal Church). There were significant regional variations, however. At
least fifteen institutions for the training of clergy and theological education
were established at one time or another by churches and societies that came to
be associated with the Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui (CHSKH), including union
theological colleges in which the CHSKH participated. Anglican and Episcopalian
missionaries started or co-operated in theological education based on regional
needs and initiatives, but with different approaches to the task at hand. There
were various academic and church requirements for ordination to the CHSKH
priesthood, and these were never standardized. In addition, there were
variations in approach to the training of rural and urban clergy in different
dioceses, to the relationship between spiritual formation and academics, and that
between ecumenical and denominational perspectives. Most clergy were trained in China, but a good
number of promising candidates were sent overseas for theological education.
The CHSKH established the Central Theological School in 1922 in an attempt to
standardize the theological training of Sheng Kung Hui Clergy, but it was never
able to train a large number of clergy, and it was not consistently supported
by all the dioceses. Clergy training during the war (1937-1945) and post-war years,
and in Hong Kong after 1951 are also examined. This paper concludes with an assessment
of the Anglican experience of clergy training and theological education in China,
including Hong Kong, in order to understand the strengths and weaknesses of
Anglican clergy preparation within the broader Protestant (or non-Roman)
Key Words: Anglican, Episcopal, Sheng Kung
Hui, clergy, theological education
education and the training of local or native clergy were closely linked goals
in the Protestant and Anglican missionary experience all over the world. This
has become a subject of some interest in the study of world Christianity. The
missionaries believed that a local clergy was essential for the indigenization
of the church and for the contextualization of theology. By the late nineteenth
century, the training of clergy and catechists in Asia, Africa, Latin America
and the Pacific became more specialized as separate institutions for
ministerial training were established in many places. By the first decades of
the twentieth century, many of these had become theological colleges. Some later developed
into outstanding theological colleges and divinity schools, others struggled
along, and still others disappeared from the scene.
institutions and clergy training centers were established from the 1950s
onward, addressing new challenges for ministerial formation in different
contexts. Today, there is an increasingly globalized understanding of
theological education, linking institutions and communities from Europe and
North America and the Global South. As such, we can now speak of theological
education in the context of world Christianity.
It was not
always this way. This paper is a preliminary treatment of clergy training and
theological education in one Christian tradition in one country: the Anglican
and Episcopal experience (聖公宗) in nineteenth and twentieth century China. My purpose is to: (1) interpret
and analyze Anglican and Episcopal theological education in its diverse
expressions; (2) consider the Anglican-Episcopal experience in relationship to the
changes in Chinese church and society; (3) illuminate issues that were
distinctive for Chinese Anglicans and Episcopalians, particularly after the
founding of the Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui (CHSKH) in 1912. By approaching
Christian theological education historically, focusing on one tradition, my
hope is both to explore a neglected subject in the study of the CHSKH in China,
and to discover new ways of understanding continuing issues and approaches,
which are still of relevance today.
The Study of Chinese Theological Education and the
theological education has been very well studied and surveyed. The first
comprehensive study was made by P. F. Price in 1917 and published as part of
the Proceedings of the Fifth Annual
Meeting of the China Continuation Committee.
Theological education was also a subject discussed in great detail in the 1922
volume The Christian Occupation of China,
which came out at the same time as the “Burton Report” which, among other
things, noted the decline of the enrollment of theological students in Chinese
theological colleges since the last survey.
American Methodist missionary Samuel H. Leger did a major study of Chinese
theological education a few years later.
There he made the important distinction between the “apprentice type” of clergy
training, informal and practical, and academic theological education in
seminaries and colleges. This distinction was important for Anglicans then and
now. The most thorough and comprehensive
study of theological education in China was the so-called “Weigle Report” of
This report included detailed statistics and substantial recommendations, but
the outbreak of the war with Japan made most of the latter impracticable. In
1941, C. Stanley Smith provided an account of theological education in wartime
China noting future challenges, the most prominent among which were recruitment
of qualified students, faculty, and finance.
Smith also wrote a supplementary chapter for the “Weigle Report” covering the
decade 1933-1934 to 1943-1944, and a shorter report (cited above) after the end
of the war. The last study in the
missionary era was the so-called Anderson-Smith report that surveyed
theological education after the departure of missionaries from China, and
suggested the continuing training of Chinese clergy in Southeast Asia.
All these studies were produced by Western (primarily American) missionaries
and Chinese Christian leaders interested in improving theological education in
China based on educational theories and ideas that were then current in China
and the US.
Over the last
twenty years, scholars have reconsidered their study of the thirteen Christian
colleges in China, each of which was involved in clergy training and
theological education at some point. Xu Yihua has written several important
studies of theological education in relation to the Christian colleges, and has
discussed the above-mentioned studies in detail. He offers useful analyses and historical
reflections of Chinese theological education, largely based on his own research
on the Christian colleges. Xu discusses theological education in terms of the
entry-level education of students who became candidates for the ministry, the denominational
background, the relationship of seminaries to universities, British and
American systems, and other factors, and provides a history of theological
education in China, focusing on the Yenching School of Religion and St. John’s
In a subsequent essay, Xu compares these two institutions and argues
that a shift towards free-standing theological schools was inevitable given the
changing situation of the church and university education in China in the years
leading up to the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.
light of all of the work that has been already done, why do we need another
study of Chinese theological education, and particularly one that focuses on a single church tradition? It is important, I believe, for at least three
reasons. First, the studies of theological education in China from the 1920s on
did not necessarily reflect the thinking of CHSKH bishops, many of whom had
very different thinking on Sheng Kung Hui theological education, as opposed to
Protestant theological education in general. Missionaries and scholars
associated with the CHSKH did participate in many of the studies, but it is
difficult to assess whether this had a significant impact on the CHSKH as a
whole. The education of CHSKH clergy was
a contested issue in the church, and practical, academic and spiritual matters
were interwoven. For the CHSKH, the accent
throughout was on flexible patterns, which sometimes meant making a virtue out
Second, in most
of the studies done in recent years, the major theme has been to contrast
practical and academic approaches to theological education, and set these in
the context of a changing Chinese society and political order. This is an
important theme, to be sure, but it is an inadequate measure in and of itself.
For the CHSKH, academic and practical learning were important, as indeed they
were for other Protestant denominations.
Advanced theological education could never be separated from practical
clergy training. But in addition, personal and ecclesial spiritual formation were
also important for the CHSKH. This is a qualitative consideration, and difficult
to assess, but one that was not adequately emphasized in any of the above-mentioned
quantitative studies. It is reflected in the reports and letters of
bishops and educators. Spiritual formation may be regarded as an Anglican
distinctive, then as now. It bears some
resemblance to theological education in the Roman Catholic tradition.
Consciousness of the church year, daily prayer, training in liturgics, patristics,
immersion in the Western spiritual tradition (and, at least in some cases its
Eastern Orthodox counterpart), the seminary itself as a spiritual community –
these were significant areas of interest for missionaries and Chinese clergy
alike. Anglican distinctives sometimes caused
tension with other Protestants when the CHSKH was involved in union theological
colleges. The “apprentice type” of theological education (more commonly called
mentoring today) emphasized the relationship between teacher and student. This was not simply a temporary expedient when
a proper college was lacking, but an important part of Anglican-Episcopal
tradition. It continues to be important
today, in England and North America as well as countries of the Global South. There
were strengths and weaknesses in the Anglican approach in China, but
theological education could not be limited to the issue of the academic versus
The third reason
is related to the other two. There is a clear link between theological
education in China before 1949 and Anglican theological education today. This
is why I pay special attention to Hong Kong (where I teach in the last
remaining Sheng Kung Hui theological institution) and Canton. This is also
important for any consideration of theological education in the context of
world Christianity. In the last part of this paper, I will look at the
experience of clergy training in Hong Kong from 1950 onward to illustrate some
continuing themes, issues and problems.
major studies mentioned above, theological institutions in China before 1949
may be divided into three kinds: (1) theological training schools for
catechists and evangelists, primarily for junior middle school students and
requiring two or three years of study; (2) theological
colleges or seminaries. By the
1920s, these required senior middle school education and awarded a B.Th. after
three or four years of study; (3) graduate
schools of theology and divinity
schools for university or seminary graduates. After three years of study,
students were awarded the B. D. (or more recently an M.Div.) degree. Some seminaries and colleges combined the
second and third forms. According to the 1935 “Weigle Report,” there were 2
graduate schools of theology, 13 seminaries or colleges and 14 theological
training schools. This does not include some of the diocesan colleges and
All three forms
of theological education were important for Anglicans and the CHSKH, although
by the 1930, the second and third forms were more prominent. The categories
overlapped, and even advanced theological training was often done informally,
at least in some of Sheng Kung Hui institutions. Anglicans in China stressed
the need for a well-educated clergy, but this did not necessarily mean that
they favored a university model of theological training.
Five issues in
theological education were constants for Anglicans in China, although they were
not necessarily equally important at all times and in all places. These were similar to issues facing other
Protestant denominations, but also in some ways distinctive.
- What standards should be
established for the training of a clergy? This was more complicated than it may
appear. Different patterns were established for the training of rural and urban
clergy at different times. There were different emphases in English and
American approaches, and in the different institutional approaches noted above,
based upon the educational level of ordinands or postulants. The question of
standards was to some extent forced upon the missionaries and the Church given
the education levels of the men who presented themselves as possible candidates
for holy orders.
- The question of language
was particularly important for Anglicans and the CHSKH. Clergy needed to
function in Chinese, but facility in English was also important given the
importance of the prayer book and the liturgy. In some seminaries the medium of
instruction was Chinese (Mandarin, Cantonese or another dialect), in others
English, and in others a mix. How language shaped theological education was a
recurring topic in CHSKH meetings on theological education.
- The relationship between denominational
and ecumenical theological education. Anglicans and Episcopalians had
special requirements for theological education, as noted above. Some Anglicans pioneered in ecumenical
initiatives, such as the union colleges, but others remained resistant to
ecumenical theological education. Practical considerations sometimes determined
the choice of one or the other.
- Financial support for theological education was an issue for all churches, right up
to 1949. The seminaries were always
dependent on the foreign mission boards, although the CHSKH said that in principle individual dioceses should be responsible for theological
education. Financial questions sometimes dictated answers to questions about
standards, ecumenical co-operation and
teaching faculty, and these were in turn related to questions of clergy
- The contextualization of
theological education in China. This
became an important issue in the 1930s, but missionaries and Chinese leaders
had been discussing it long before that.
between English and American approaches to theological training (and later
Canadian, Australian and New Zealand Anglican approaches)
runs through all of these issues. Many
ordinands were sent overseas for training, but this was more common in the
American Church Mission and later among the Canadians than it was in the
British mission societies. Americans were closely involved with the thirteen Christian
Colleges in China which were themselves American
institutions. This meant, for example,
that the Theological School of St. John’s University and St. Paul’s Divinity
School were more closely related to the ACM than the British societies even
after the founding of the CHSKH.
Nineteenth Century Beginnings in Anglican Clergy
Kuang-tsai (黄光彩) was the first Episcopalian Christian in China (1846), the first deacon
(1851) and the first priest (1863). He
certainly received catechetical instruction and some form of clergy training in
the process, but we have no record of this. Most likely, he was trained in a personal
capacity by Bishop Boone. Huang had travelled with Boone to the United States
before he was baptized, learned English and was Boone’s Chinese teacher, as
well as his assistant.
Regular forms of theological education began slowly among
Episcopalians in China, and more slowly still among Anglicans. In both cases, the training of clergy up until the early twentieth century was
informal and even haphazard, making use of a mentoring or apprenticeship
method, by both English and American missionaries. Chinese converts first
became evangelists and catechists, with limited but important functions. They
preached, made pastoral visits, and provided basic Christian education
especially in rural areas. Only a few went on to become priests.
St. Paul’s College
(Hong Kong) was formally established in 1851, although teaching at the college
had begun some years earlier. Vincent
Stanton founded the institution, and there is some evidence that he hoped to
train native clergy and Christian teachers in Hong Kong, according to the
principles of the Church of England.
However, St. Paul’s never developed into a theological college, and it distinguished
itself as a boy’s preparatory school instead. The earliest Hong Kong Anglican clergy，including Lo Sam Yuen(羅心源), Kwong Yat-sau (鄺日修) and Mok Shau Tsang(莫壽增) all studied at St. Paul’s for
secondary school, general education and informal
theological training. Both Lo and Kwong were fluent in English because of the
time they had spent in Australia, but Mok worked mainly in Chinese.
St. Paul’s at one time tried to become a training
center for English CMS missionaries. In 1876, Edmund Davies (CMS) arrived
with six young men to be trained as priests at St. Paul’s, but this idea
failed, although several of the men went elsewhere in China as missionaries. St. Paul’s continued to train young men for
ministry in Hong Kong, but it was not primarily a theological college for
clergy training. In 1899, Bishop Joseph Hoare closed
the college and restarted it as a theological school, but this only lasted for
a decade. St. Paul’s
in those years was the site for the training of catechists from Canton, under
the direction of CMS missionaries. There were five or six students, but just
two who completed their coursework.
Instruction was mainly in English, and focused on the Bible, Geography, and Arithmetic, as well as courses in the Chinese Classics. ishop Hoare taught at the college,
and the students who died with him in the typhoon in 1906 had been part of the
training class. As we see below, he
liked to be close to the students, and taught them “in ambulando” as he liked to say. This was a form of mentoring, which
emphasized teacher to student relationships.
Hoare had been a
CMS missionary before becoming the Bishop of Victoria. He arrived in China in
1875 and started Ningpo Clergy Training
College in Chekiang Province. It later became
Trinity College, and provided training for most of the priests in Zhejiang, who
largely served in rural areas. Hoare described the curriculum as “evangelistic
theology taught ambulando,”
emphasizing a personal, pastoral and
practical approach, as that of a mentor with his disciples. Most students had
little formal education, and instruction was primarily in Chinese (Ningpo
dialect). The classes focused on the Bible and other
subjects in an Anglican college setting. Between 1876 and1893, there were 165
students at the college. Of these 57 became teachers
and catechists, and 8 were ordained to the priesthood.
This was an outstanding achievement for a small, non-academic institution. The institution founded by Hoare later became
the Holy Trinity Training College (寧波神道院), and continued to train priests for the
Zhejiang diocese until 1950.
By 1876, there
were twenty Bible schools and theological seminaries in China, with 231
least three of these were Anglican or Episcopal: Ningpo Theological Training College,
St. Paul’s Divinity School in Hankowand
the diocesan school that became Foochow Theological Seminary in 1883. The standards of most of these schools were
not very high and most students, both urban and rural, came with little more
than a primary school education. They
studied for three or at most four years, after which they became catechists or
evangelists, and perhaps priests. Foochow continued to ordain more priests in
the Diocese of Victoria than either Hong Kong or Guangdong, and it had a
special need for a college of its own.
There were very
few Chinese priests in the late nineteenth century, but outstanding among them
was Yen Yung King (顔永京), who
distinguished himself as a scholar, a translator and a
pastor. He was related to the ACM in Shanghai. Yen studied at Kenyon College
and the Episcopal seminary Bexley Hall, and was one of the first Chinese
students to return from America.
Not many priests were sent overseas for study at this time, but their numbers
would increase in the twentieth century. Yen ranks among the outstanding
priests and scholars in the history of the Sheng Kung Hui.
John’s College (later University), established in 1879, was the most important
Anglican-Episcopal center for theological study in the late nineteenth century
and well into the twentieth. Bishop Samuel I. J. Schereschewsky, the leading
spirit behind St. John’s, saw its main purpose as the training of a Chinese
clergy. The Theology School began in March 1880 and the first students were from Boone Boy’s School. There were four faculty members, one of whom was
Chinese. The Theology School quickly fell on hard times, and in its various
incarnations, it had a checkered history.
It moved back to Hankow a few years after its founding, but in 1893, it
returned to Shanghai and was established as an English-medium college. (Instruction at Boone was in Chinese.) St.
John’s had a three-year program into the early twentieth century, and all
faculty were appointed by the Bishop, who served as Dean. Bishop F. R. Graves, the longest serving
bishop in Chinese Anglican Episcopal history (1891-1937), saw the Theology
Department as his preserve. St. John’s would continue to play a very
important role in Anglican theological education after the founding of the
The CHSKH, Central Theological School
and St. John’s
By the early
twentieth century, most Anglican dioceses had their own programs for clergy
training, but these tended to be informal and unsystematic. Chinese clergy were
few in number. Hong Kong had only one
Chinese clergyman in 1900, and Foochow (still part of the Diocese of Victoria),
twelve or thirteen.
There were more clergy in Shanghai and Hankow.
The ACM had a training center in each city, and they moved more quickly
in the ordination of Chinese clergy. By
the late nineteenth century, Anglicans and Episcopalians began to work toward cooperation
in many areas. Important meetings of bishops and clergy to strengthen efforts
toward unity were held in 1897, 1899, 1903, 1907 and
1909. The CHSKH was formally established on 26 April 1912 in Shanghai. All 11 diocesan bishops were in attendance,
as well as 39 clergy (19 of whom were Chinese) and
32 laymen (28 of whom were Chinese) . This became the first national church body of any denomination established
The idea for
establishing a national theological seminary was first mooted at the Second
General Synod of the CHSKH in 1915. A
committee was appointed that year to study the establishment of such an
institution and it made its report to the next General Synod. This report
focused on the five general issues that were introduced earlier in this paper.
As a result, the Central Theological School was formally established at the
Third General Synod of the CHSKH in 1918. The first faculty members were
appointed in 1920, two missionaries and one Chinese, but CTS was not opened
until 1922, in buildings belonging to the American Church Mission on the
outskirts of Nanjing. Mandarin was the language of instruction.
CTS had been
modeled on the Central Theological School in Japan, which was seen as a great success. But the context in China was quite different.
Japan was much smaller, without many dioceses and no
dialect issues. Although the CHSKH had a centralized, hierarchical structure,
in such a large country, dioceses tended to function independently. This, alongside the fact that there were many
different mission boards and overseas churches related to the CHSKH
meant that promoting the centralization
of theological education would be difficult. All of this contributed to the
fact that the CTS was in difficult straits for most of its history, in terms of
faculty, finance, students and relationship to the dioceses.
The first two
deans of CTS were missionaries, Revd. Basil Mather and Dr. Ridgely, but DrTang
Zhongmo (湯忠謨), who had
been teaching with Mather and Ridgley at CTS from the beginning, was appointed
dean in April 1927.
The small faculty was drawn mainly from the American Church Mission, the SPG
and CMS in the 1920s and 1930s, making it very diverse in terms of
churchmanship, but still liberal in outlook and very academic. Students were
mostly from small towns and rural areas. The constitution of the CTS was
finally approved at the Eighth Synod of the CHSKH in 1934. It stated: “the
purpose of the C.T.S, shall be the promotion of theological learning and
especially the training of men for Holy Orders in the C. H. S.K.H.”
CTS was designed to be the CHSKH seminary.
However, in this General Synod and the one following, the committee overseeing
the seminary urged closer cooperation between CTS and the much larger Nanking
Theological Seminary, an ecumenical institution, but a school with no Anglican
founding member. The two schools, though in the same city, were
geographically far apart. In addition, many
in the CHSKH, including the CTS faculty, wanted the school to remain an
from Peking in 1938, after Nanking had been overrun by the Japanese, Bishop
Norris said that the history of CTS had “been one long struggle against
adversity.” There were issues of location, property, finance, faculty
and the recruitment of students. There were never very many students at the
school, and only five or six dioceses had sent students to CTS. Many dioceses gave no financial support and
preferred to send their own ordinands elsewhere, or train them on their own.
Thus, the Honan diocese sent its students to Cheeloo School of Theology in
Shandong, South China had its own seminary in Canton, and others had local
arrangements. Many in the CHSKH were suspicious of what was being taught at
CTS: it was seen as too liberal and academic, and not appropriate for students
from rural areas. The few CHSKH university graduates who presented themselves
as candidates for the priesthood were reluctant to go to such a small school.
They would prefer to go to a university-based college with a more cosmopolitan
atmosphere, such as the Yenching School of Religion in Peking or St. John’s
University. Bishop Norris (as opposed to Bishop Hall in Hong Kong who sent his
candidates to Canton Union Theological College) wanted the school to give more
attention to both devotional life (formation) and practical training. Bishop
Norris believed that CTS had emphasized systematic academic training too much.
Criticisms of a
different order were made by the CMS.
One missionary wrote, “Nearly all of us, Chinese and Foreigners, were
opposed to the Nanking C.T.S.” because it was too academic and theologically
following comment from an evangelical student is one of two reproduced in CMS
records, and was presumably sent with the letter just cited: “The religious
“flavour” in the teaching given is very thin indeed, i.e. heaven and its
opposite abstract concepts; an undue stress on the humanity of our Lord, his
great personality something like or greater than the great ones of the earth as
over against His Divinity.” CMS missionaries and evangelical students from Zhejiang
had a criticism that was fundamentally different fromthe high churchmanship of Bishop Norris.
came after it was clear that CTS could no longer stay in Nanking. The Japanese invasion of the city in December 1937 resulted in the ruin of CTS and the looting of its premises. Bishop Norris
suggested that the school be re-opened in Peiping. After the fall of Nanking, some of the
faculty and students moved to St. John’s, but by late 1938, the school had been
reopened in PeikingPeiping according to Bishop Norris’
There never were very many students or faculty at CTS during the war, and in
1945, CTS was relocated to Shanghai under new leadership, sharing space at St.
John’s before the St. John’s theology division was closed for good.
University Theological School continued after the founding of CTS, and the two institutions
faced similar problems in terms of faculty, finance and
student recruitment. In addition to these two seminaries related to the CHSKH
and the ACM, St. Paul’s Divinity School was still operating in Hankow, and so
there was duplicate (or triplicate) effort.
“One school with a staff of six or seven could do much better work at
less cost of time and money than three half-staffed schools” could do.
St. Johns and CTS were both under the Bishop of Jiangsu, although they had
different governing boards. They each had their own spheres of influence that
they did not want to give up. St. John’s was by far the stronger
institution. But it never had more than
7 or 8 theology students, and usually only 4 or 5.
The fact that it offered a combined college and theological course, using
English as the medium of instruction, meant that St. John’s, unlike CTS,
graduated a number of highly educated CHSKH clergy and lay leaders, most of
whom were priests in urban churches. According to Xu Yihua, from 1896 to 1946
St. John’s had about sixty graduates, including eleven CHSKH bishops.
Small as the number of graduates was, it represented a significant figure for
CHSKH clergy, and bishops as a whole.
School of Religion has been mentioned above, and a brief word is needed about
the significance of Yenching in the context of Anglican theological education.
The Yenching School of Religion (1916) was always the preeminent graduate
school of theology in China, in terms of the quality of its faculty and
international reputation. It was ecumenical, but neither the CHSKH, nor the ACM
nor any of the missionary societies were formally a part of Yenching. Still, Yenching had the two most important CHSKH
theologians on its faculty, Wu Lei-ch’uan(吴雷川) and Zhao Zichen (T.C
Chao, 趙紫宸), and other
Anglicans taught there at different times. Some CHSKH bishops regarded Yenching
as disconnected from the Church, and Yenching trained few graduates who became
priests. In fact, the Yenching School of Religion, like the Anglican-Episcopal
thelogical colleges, had very few students at all, an average of only 4 or 5 a
year between 1916 and 1931,
and fewer still after that. Yenching was in the odd position of being the most
contextualized theological college, but it arguably had the least impact on the
Zhao Zichen, who
himself became a CHSKH deacon and priest in 1941, was without a doubt the
leading Christian theologian of his day.
He spoke and wrote a great deal on many subjects, including ministerial
training in China. He saw the importance
of relating theology and the church to the life and culture of the country, and
for this, seminary faculty needed to be spiritual guides as well as qualified
academics. Writing in 1948, he believed that the seminary should be a
“fellowship in Agape,” promoting practical activities, theological study, moral
and religious discipline in worship, prayer and spiritual life.
His views in this essay reflect, at least in part, his own turn toward the CHSKH.
However, there is little evidence that he had much of an impact on CHSKH
thinking about theological education in this last year before the establishment
of the People’s Republic of China.
Canton Union Theological College
Canton Union Theological College
(CUTC) was a very different type of institution from CTS, St. John’s or St.
It came into being just two years after the formation of the CHSKH, in October 1914, and became the leading seminary for the training of Cantonese speaking clergy,
including clergy of the CHSKH.
It should be noted that in the decades leading up to the separation of the
Diocese of Hong Kong and Macau from the CHSKH in 1951, Hong Kong and Macao
could not be considered separately from Guangdong and South China in terms of
Sheng Kung Hui clergy and theological education. There was continual movement back and forth
between churches in this very large diocese.
training that had been done at St. Paul’s College in Hong Kong moved to Canton
in 1909, and the new school became Holy Trinity
College, under the direction of CMS missionary Percy Jenkins. The first graduate to be ordained an Anglican
priest was Wan Ha-Po (Ha Po-wan, 夏步雲1913).
Lee Kau-yan (李求恩), one of the most prominent CHSKH priests in
Hong Kong up through the early 1960s, was also a graduate of Holy Trinity. By the end of 1914, at least ten
Anglicans from Hong Kong and Guangdong who were attending the college were candidates
for the priesthood. That year, Holy Trinity College became the CHSKH component
of the new CUTC.
CUTC was in many
ways a model ecumenical initiative for its time, with strong Anglican
participation through both CMS and the Diocese of South China. The founding
missions were: The American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions
(ABCFM), the American Presbyterian Mission (North), the CMS, the London
Missionary Society, the New Zealand Mission, the Methodist Missionary Society
(English) and the United Brethren Mission.
In 1915, the Canadian Presbyterian Mission (later, the United Church of
Canada) joined the union. The ABCFM withdrew in 1928. Chinese Churches later joined the union,
including the Kwantung Synod of the Church of Christ in China, the South China
Synod of the Methodist Church and the South China (or Kwong-Yuet) Diocesan
Synod of the CHSKH.
Similar to the
other union colleges, CUTC students could take a university level theology
degree or do a Bible School level diploma. For all churches and missions
involved, there was always the problem of the educational level of their
candidates for ministry, especially those from small towns and rural areas. There
was both a college (theology) and a training (Bible School) department at CUTC,
and students were admitted to one or the other depending on their prior
education. In each department there was the study of the four classic
theological disciplines: (1) Bible; (2) Theology and Ethics; (3) History; and
(4) Pastoral Theology. The medium of instruction was Cantonese, but English was
also taught and many of the missionary faculty taught in that language. For
students in both departments, the emphasis was on practical theological
training as well as solid grounding in the Bible.
Already in 1929, CUTC maintained some affiliation with Lingnan University, but
exactly at what level remained a continuing topic of discussion until formal affiliation finally came after
the War, in 1947.
mission or church looked after its own students at CUTC. CHSKH students lived in St. Andrews Hall, a
hostel on the college campus.
The hostel was a dormitory and a small religious community that facilitated the
formation of ordinands through the use of an apprenticeship or mentoring model.
Percy Jenkins continued to be the Anglican presence at CUTC in St. Andrews Hall
until the early 1930s. He taught Old Testament. Other CMS missionaries, and at
least one Chinese priest, taught at CUTC at different times. In its first
decade, CUTC had graduated 96 students, twenty from the CHSKH.
Most CHSKH Hong Kong and Guangdong clergy and many lay leaders were trained at CUTC
from 1914 to 1938, and then again from 1945 to 1952. There were always women
students at CUTC, the most well known of whom was Florence Li Tim-oi (李添嬡), who studied in
the college department. Jane Hwang (黃羡雲), who became a
priest in 1971, studied at CUTC in the late 1940s. Other prominent graduates or
students from Hong Kong included Edward Lee (李應標), S. C. Lee (李兆强, who also taught in the college), Kong Chi-wing( 江之永), Chow Ming Chou(周夢秋), Cheung Wing Ngok(張榮岳), and Chung Yan Laap (鍾仁立).
Bishop Hall held up CUTC as a success story of Anglican-Ecumenical co-operation.
Both he and Bishop Mok were board members.
Anglican-Episcopal Theological Education in China,
The war was a
time of crisis for the country as a whole, and put the churches and theological
institutions in especially difficult situations. It forced ecumenism on theological education,
and many CHSKH seminaries and dioceses became involved in union institutions in
order to have any theological education at all. We have seen that CTS and St.
John’s Theological School continued for a time, did
the Yenching School of Religion in Peking.
St. Paul’s Divinity School moved with Hua Chung University to Hsichow (Xizhou,
Dali) in Yunnan.
After the fall
of Canton in October 1938, theological students from
CUTC stayed on to help with relief work for a few months. The college moved to
Shatin in 1939, where studies continued under tutorial supervision.
CUTC eventually moved to Yunnan, as students and faculty made the arduous journey
from Hong Kong to Haiphong by ship, then Haiphong to Kunming by train (fourth
class), then Kunming to Hsia Guan and Hsichow by boat, horse and on
foot. The autumn term began in September 1940, and Gilbert Baker was part of the team who was teaching and looking after
students in their residence hall, Wen Ling Tang. CUTC effectively became part
of Hua Chung University and its theological seminary, with a shared
curriculum. Bishop Hall taught several
classes there. There were a relatively large number of theological students –
44 – two-thirds of whom were in the upper class.
China Union Theological College (WCUTC) was started in Chengdu in 1937. It became host to Nanking Theological
Seminary, which sent five faculty members to
Chengdu, and the college also attracted faculty and students from elsewhere.
Its Board of Management was drawn from four or five missions and churches. The Diocese
of Western Szechuan had seven students there during the war, although it had
trained ordinands in its own diocesan college in Chengdu previously. WCUTC
granted a B.Th. degree after two or three years of study. Between 1937 and
1945, there were 25 to 73 students in any given year, and a total of 327
students studied there during these years.
Plans were made for the continuation of the college after the end of the
war, but the Nanking faculty returned to Nanking, and WCUTC was closed in a few
years time. Bishop
T. K. Shen taught at WCUTU in 1945-46, after he had left Xi’an.
CTS moved from
Peking back to Shanghai after the war, and once again shared space with St.
John’s University. Bishop Shen moved back to Shanghai from Chengdu, after he left
WCUTC and resigned as bishop of Shaanxi (1946).
He was named dean of CTS and taught liturgics and other subjects. Six
students were admitted from the Missionary Area of Shanghai in February 1947. In the following term, CTS had 15 students from 5 dioceses, and the next
year, 33 students from ten dioceses and two missionary districts, in four
classes. St. John’s Theological School had closed during the war, and CTS faculty
were drawn from there and from other university departments. Missionaries and
priests in Shanghai also taught part time.
Gilbert Baker taught at CTS that first year, but he later moved back to
CUTC at Lingnan University in Canton.
There was initially
some controversy over the location of CTS. Francis Cho-min Wei (韋卓民)
wanted the school moved Wuchang or Hankow to join with St.
Paul’s Divinity School, and there was still the abandoned CTS property in
Nanking. The decision was made at the CHSKH Tenth General Synod (1947) to locate
the school in Shanghai, with a renewed call that it become the primary location
for theological training. However, even in Shanghai, there was still no
permanent site for CTS, although temporary buildings, including a dormitory and
chapel, had been erected on the St. John’s campus.
In 1949, the 33
students came from 10 dioceses. There were 7 college graduates, a rather
remarkable number, 3 clergy refreshers, 1 Russian Orthodox student
and 22 undergraduates. Three women students joined in the Spring 1949 term, but
by then some male students left due to the Civil War. In addition to its
regular program, CTS began to offer trade courses, in the belief that clergy
should also be “productive workers.” The courses were in gardening, hair cutting, and carpentry. By this time, the faculty were mostly clergy
from Shanghai and foreign missionaries. Financially,
CTS was supported by overseas missions, mainly the AMC and CMS.
As the Civil War deepened, the seminary continued. Classes were stopped for
only three days, before and after the Red Army took the city on May 25,
Shen was at first hesitant to co-operate with the Communists, and wanted the
CHSKH to remain aloof from politics. He
did not allow students to take the day off on October 1, 1949 when the People’s
Republic of China was founded, saying, “We are different.” Still, the church and the seminary began to
adjust to the new order. In 1950, the House of Bishops resolved that CTS would
be the theological training institute of the whole Church and the individual
dioceses should take financial responsibility for maintaining it. The seminary
could no longer expect support from foreign missionaries.
Still, as late as 1951, Bishop Shen was soliciting funds from CMS and the SPG
and other mission boards, claiming that CTS would be “the only purely Anglican
theological college in China.”
class of six graduated from CTS graduated in June 1950, when there were still 30 students at the seminary. By the end of that year, Bishop Shen wrote to
Bishop Hall in Hong Kong requesting him to receive CTS post-graduate students
for their remaining year of work. The
lack of funds had become acute, and the departure of missionaries meant that
the school no longer had many teaching faculty. He went on to suggest that the
graduate section of CTS be relocated to Hong Kong.
Hall refused Shen’s request, and as we shall see, he was also hesitant to have
the students and faculty of CUTC moved to Hong Kong.
The last class
of three B. D. level CTS students graduated in 1951. CTS closed in the summer
of 1952, and that Fall it became part of the newly formed Nanjing Union
Theological Seminary. Other CHSKH
students went to Nanjing from Foochow, a union institution of which the
Anglicans were a part. There were certain classes for CHSKH students in
Nanjing, and they held their own services of morning and evening prayers, at
least for a time.
Bishop Shen taught at Nanjing Seminary until his retirement in 1958. The CHSKH
ceased to exist in 1958, and so that year marks the end of Anglican-Episcopal
theological education on the mainland.
In 1945, there
were three union theological colleges in China of which the CHSKH or the CMS
was a part(1) West China Union Theological
College, discussed above; (2) Foochow
Union Theological College; and (3) Canton Union Theological College. CUTC moved back to Canton in 1945, and it became part of Lingnan
University in January 1947. Lingnan University was one of the thirteen Christian Colleges that
had been chartered as an American institution. Because of this, CUTC had to
retain its own administrative structure in programs for both university and
post-graduate students. Roman Catholics were also related to Lingnan through
the Jesuits who taught there.
Hall had always supported the CUTC and the role that Anglicans played in
ecumenical co-operation at the college.
However, he was not quick to embrace the relationship with Lingnan
University. Writing in 1946 to the CUTC
president, he said: “The one serious danger with the University is that we
unconsciously use the secular yardstick of “University standard” to measure the
qualifications of our staff. As far as CHSKH is concerned, we shall ignore it
entirely. This may affect salaries –
unless we are careful – as at Yenching. A man in the theological department
cannot get a “Professor’s” pay unless he has a doctorate.”
This reveals the tension that had always existed in CHSKH
relationships with universities – including St. John’s – about questions of
standards, and how standards in turn reflected question of
Between 1945 and
1951, the Diocese of South China sent its ordinands and students of ministry,
in both Hong Kong and Guangdong, to CUTC. In 1950, Bishop Murong Yin (慕容賢) became
chair of the board of CUTC, and over the next year, because of the changing
political situation, missionaries on the faculty gradually withdrew from Canton. In the summer of 1951, the new Diocese of
Guangdong was created, with Bishop Murong as diocesan bishop. The new
Diocese of Hong Kong and Macau became a detached diocese of the CHSKH. In 1952,
the former Lingnan campus became Sun Yat-sen University, and its faculty was
combined with other universities. CUTC
became a separate institution on a greatly reduced scale, but continued to
function as a theological seminary until the late 1950s.
Anglican Theological Education in Hong Kong,
with the mainland as a whole, theological education in Hong Kong was conducted at
many different levels after the end of the war. For Anglicans, Ming Hua College
began as a diocesan institute for theological study, admitting its first
students in 1946-1947. According to its
prospectus, “The aim of the College is to give theological training to educated
young people of the Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui, so that they may take a larger
part in the leadership of the Church and in assisting the parish priest.”
Bishop Hall was the principal and S. K. Cheung (張紹桂) the first dean. The teaching staff (9 in all) were all English
except for George She and S. K. Cheung. Ming Hua College would continue to offer
general courses on the Bible and theology for the laity for the next few decades.
addition to Ming Hua, Bishop Hall also created a separate program offering a
Diocesan Diploma in Theology (the so-called “D. D.T program”).
It offered courses on theological subjects taught in different locales in
Kowloon and Hong Kong. There were both English and Chinese sections, and the
lecturers were often the same people who taught at Ming Hua College, Hong Kong
Union Theological College and the Chung Chi Theology Division,
discussed below. This was a creative initiative that sparked the interest of
many young people and lay leaders in the Church, some of whom went on to study
for the priesthood.
more formal training of clergy did not begin in Hong Kong until the mid-1950s. We
have seen that the Diocese of South China supported CUTC in the late 1940s, and
sent most ordinands there. Bishop Hall initially
resisted the idea of moving CUTC to Hong Kong in 1950, just as he had opposed
receiving CTS students from Shanghai in the territory. He wanted CHSKH priests
to stay in China. Writing to the CMS General Secretary a year after the
founding of the People’s Republic he noted, “I have written to Bishop Shen
protesting very strongly against the withdrawal from China of the best educated
students of CTS and suggesting they go to Yenching where we have three CHSKH
priests teaching in English. An “Overseas” theological college can only train
for “Overseas” work, witness the Russian Seminary in Paris.”
These were noble sentiments at the time, but also quite unrealistic.
the separation of the Diocese of Hong Kong and Macau from the CHSKH, something
had to be done for the training of priests in Hong Kong. Chung Chi College was
founded in 1951 with the support of Protestant churches and missions in Hong
Kong, but initially, no provision was made for theological studies. At the
request of the Board of Chung Chi College and the Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui
(HKSKH) Standing Committee, Union Theological College in Hong Kong (HKUTC) began
in September 1955.
HKUTC was designed to be a post-graduate institution, sponsored by co-operating
churches “to train their own pastors primarily for city parishes and town
Churches and to train Chaplains of Middle Schools.”
The co-operating churches were the Church of Christ in China, the Methodist
Churches, the HKSKH and the YMCA.
staff was part-time and the academic committee was chaired by Canon A. P. Rose
of St. John’s Cathedral. Teaching was bi-lingual, but a reading knowledge of
English was required of all students a
three-year program of study. HKUTC set a
rather high standard for itself in theological preparation, but not all
students were prepared for this. In the first year, there were three full-time
HKSKH students and two students from other churches. The faculty was mostly
Anglican, but there were also lecturers from other churches. HKUTC
had a “semi-permanent” home at St. John’s College of Hong Kong University,
where there were daily services of morning prayer in the college chapel. The chapel
was also made available for other denominations.
It was clear from the start that HKUTC was Bishop Hall’s initiative, inspired
by his experience of CUTC. Other
churches were invited to “join in” to what was essentially an Anglican
Hall sent most ordinands or possible candidates for the priesthood to HKUTC
from 1955 until his retirement in 1966. However, there were some non-stipendiary clergy who received their training through the D.D.T. course. At least one candidate
for the priesthood – future Archbishop Peter K. K. Kwong (鄺廣傑) – was sent by
Bishop Hall to the United States for theological training. The first HKUTC graduates
– the three Anglican students who entered in 1955 – received a “Licentiate in
Theology” diploma in 1961. In 1962, Bishop Hall appointed Michael Goulder to be principal, in an effort to raise academic standards.
There were six full time Anglican students when he arrived (9 students in all).
By this time HKUTC was mostly Anglican – Methodists and Presbyterians were already preparing
to go to Chung Chi. Goulder became frustrated by the low academic standards of
HKUTC and he resigned in 1966.
Well before the mid-1960s, discussions
were held among the churches about pooling their resources in education. The founding of Chung Chi College was an
example of ongoing co-operation among Hong Kong churches and mission agencies.
The Christian colleges on the mainland had been closed, and Chung Chi College
represented an effort to capture the same spirit in university education. Bishop Hall was a leading figure in the
establishment of the College and the HKSKH provided needed support in terms of
leadership. In 1954, Hoare Hall, named
after Bishop Joseph Hoare who had died with his students in 1906, was dedicated
on the campus, with much support coming from the HKSKH.
By the late 1950s, there were
discussions about opening a seminary or theology department at Chung Chi.
As a result, in 1963, seven churches joined together to form what eventually became
the Theology Division of Chung Chi College.
From 1964 onward, there were regular in
the HKUTC and the HKSKH Diocesan Theological Education Council about whether to
send students to Chung Chi or perhaps the Lutheran Theological Seminary. The
possibility of retaining a separate section for Anglican students at Chung Chi was
also discussed. It
seems clear that Bishop Hall did not want to send
theology students to the ecumenical Chung Chi Theology Division as it was
constituted, even though the HKSKH was a founding member. In fact he never
did. By the time Gilbert Baker became
bishop in the fall of 1966, it had become increasingly clear that HKUTC was no
longer viable. It continued for a few more years with several students and new
leadership but in the
summer of 1972, HKUTC was, in effect, folded into Chung Chi, and for the next
decade most Anglican candidates for the priesthood went there. However, Bishop Baker
also sent some promising HKSKH candidates for the priesthood overseas for
many in the HKSKH, this was never an ideal solution. Given the high tide of
ecumenism in the 1960s, the Chung Chi Theology Division downplayed
denominational distinctions in both campus life and education. It did not have morning and evening prayer,
or a regular Eucharist for Anglican students. The Prayer Book and courses in Anglican tradition were not part of the
curriculum at Chung Chi, even though there were Anglicans on the faculty. Bishop
Baker retired in 1981, and was succeeded by Bishop Peter K. K. Kwong. In the mid-1980s,
Bishop Kwong asked Paul Tong and Ian Lam to organize a six-week summer program
at St. John’s College for HKSKH ordinands to supplement the education they were
receiving at Chung Chi and help form them for the priesthood.
Around the same time, the HKSKH decided it would no longer send its candidates for
the priesthood to Chung Chi, but to Anglican or Episcopal seminaries in England
and the United States. This was the pattern for HKSKH theological education in
the 1980s and 1990s, but there was informal theological training in Hong Kong
approached, the detached diocese of Hong Kong and Macao made the decision to become
an independent province. It was determined that the new province would need its
own theological college for the training of priests and future leaders. And so,
in 1996, Ming Hua College was renamed Sheng Kung Hui Ming Hua Theological
College. Since that time, ordinands have been trained at Ming Hua. The college still
maintained the library of the former HKUTC, and it refurbished its premises on
Glenealy. A new college building was
dedicated in 2007. In this new form,
Ming Hua Theological College became the only Anglican-Episcopal or Sheng Kung
Hui seminary in Greater China.
In true Anglican Tradition, the special contribution
of the Sheng Kung Hui to Chinese Christianity has been the thoroughness of
teaching, dignity and beauty of worship, and Episcopal Church order. These
things have depended on a well-trained ministry with a relatively high –
though, in fact very simple – standard of maintenance. This is commonly
recognized in China to have been the right policy. In many places, the reverse
is now true, and Anglican clergy are less well cared for than some churches
which have only one single missionary organization behind them.
1943, at the height of the war against Japan, the eight CHSKH bishops meeting
in Chungking summarized some of the issues that had always been a dilemma for
Anglican and Episcopal theological education in China. At the time, nine of the
thirteen CHSKH dioceses were under Japanese occupation. The CHSKH was the
product of at least thirteen churches and mission societies, all with distinct
traditions in theological education. The
letter was sent to eleven of these to appeal for additional funds and support
both then and in the post-war period.
Bishop Y. Y. Tsu was also asked to take this appeal to North America on
his forthcoming visit.
and financial support was only one of the continuing problems for theological
education in the CHSKH. As we have seen
the issues of standards for ordination varied, and different programs in the
same theological institution were often established at lower (B.Th.) and upper
(B.D.) levels. The question of language
– facility in English (where St. John’s excelled), and the use of Mandarin or
another dialect (Cantonese in the south, for example) – was never resolved, but
it probably did not need to be, given the different requirements in different
dioceses. There were also different approaches to whether theological education
should be Anglican or ecumenical, and this too varied from place to place and
from time to time. At the heart of the matter was the unresolved contradiction
between the need for a well-trained CHSKH clergy of high educational standard,
a clergy well-formed in Anglican tradition and spirituality, and the absence of
strong theological institutions with adequate funding and church and diocesan
support. Related to this was the small number of well-trained Chinese faculty,
and the small number of well-educated candidates for holy orders.
There were too many competing centers for the
training of clergy from the nineteenth century onward. At one time or another,
there were at least fifteen different institutions for the training of clergy
(See Appendix), and at any given time, none of them had very many students. After the founding of the CHSKH, the CTS was
established for the whole church, but St. John’s continued, alongside a variety
of union colleges and diocesan training programs. Some promising candidates for the priesthood
were sent overseas for their studies, and informal apprenticeship or mentoring programs
existed alongside all of the other forms of clergy training. It could be said
that China was a large country, and because travel was difficult, a variety of
forms of clergy training were needed. There is certainly some truth in
this. But at the same time, the CHSKH
was a small church. There were only 232
priests serving a total of less than 67,000 parishioners after the end of the
The issue before 1951 was that a large
number of institutions were training a small number of priests, and often
competing with one another for students and finance.
yet, despite all of the problems, the CHSKH produced well-educated priests and
bishops, who well-connected with the churches.
They had a clear sense of their CHSKH identity, and many were active in
society at various levels. Even a cursory look at Christian publications in the
late 1940s will reveal the many ways in which CHSKH priests were involved in
church and society. The theological
colleges, though poorly equipped, poorly staffed and poorly financed gave a
great deal of attention to their students and all aspects of their lives. The
flexibility of Anglican training helped make this possible.
The CHSKH had
always valued a highly trained priesthood.
Many lay leaders were also theologically literate. Theologically
educated lay Anglicans played important roles in the universities (Francis C.
M. Wei), the YMCA (T.Z. Koo and David Yu) and church
and society as a whole. By 1949, the Bishops’ Conference of the CHSKH was
entirely Chinese, with the exception of Bishop Hall of South China. All other foreign bishops had resigned in the
years leading up to the founding of the People’s Republic, but there were able
assistant bishops to take their place. After
1949, Anglican leaders played an important role in the newly formed Chinese
Christian Three-Self Patriotic Movement. They were socially and politically
progressive, but they also brought to the TSPM a sense of churchmanship. Many prominent
Anglicans, both lay and clergy, were severely criticized in the movements of
the 1950s and 1960s, and that others were forced to leave China to continue
their work elsewhere. CHSKH leaders were
often on different sides vis-à-vis developments in the People’s Republic of
In Hong Kong
after 1949, there was a significant and consistent record of Sheng Kung Hui
leadership in church and society. The
HKSKH continued to reach out to SKH members on the mainland and beyond.
prominence of CHSKH leaders cannot be solely attributed to the role of
theological education and clergy training in the Anglican-Episcopal experience
in China. It is also a result of the
general CHSKH interest in education and social welfare, the prominence of many
Anglican families and the social involvement outstanding individuals. It must
also be remembered that despite the record of clergy and lay achievement in
church and society, there were many areas that the CHSKH fell short.
As we consider
the history of theological education in world Christianity today, it is
important to take into account what can be learned from the past history of the
Chung Hua Sheng Kung Hui in China, and what this might mean for the training of
priests for service in church and society in the years to come. The problems
and the possibilities are still with us.
Revised 20 July 2011
Kung Hui Theological Schools and Colleges in China, and Union Theological
Institutions in which the CHSKH was involved
(The numbers in parentheses indicate the
date of founding, when known)
SKH Theological Colleges
- St. Paul’s College (1851), Hong
- Ningpo Clergy Training College
(1875, later became Ningpo Trinity Theological College (宁波三一神道院 ), Ningpo *
- St. John’s Theological School
- Beijing Diocesan Training
- Central Theological School
(1924) , Shanghai*
- St. Paul’s Divinity School
(circa 1876, later became Hua Chung University Theological School*)
- St. Paul’s Theological College,
Chengdu (West China Diocesan Training Center*)
- Ming Hua Theological College
(1996), Hong Kong
Institutions in which the SKH was involved
9. Yanjing School of Religion
10. Union Theological College (1914), Guangzhou
11. West China Union Theological College (1937), Chengdu and Wuhan
12. Hong Kong Union Theological College (1955), Hong Kong
13. Foochow Union Theological College (1883),* Fuzhou
14. Nanjing Union Theological Seminary (1952), Nanjing
15. Theological Division of Chung Chi College (1963), Hong Konh
*SKH schools listed in the 1949 Chung Hua Sheng Kung Yearbook
Stanley Smith, The Development of
Protestant Theological Education in China(Shanghai: Kelley and Walsh,1941).
L. Chung), 華南教區百年史略 (Hong
Kong: The Bishop's House, 1941), pp. 39-40.
It should be added
in the 1930s and 1940s, many priests and bishops received some of their
theological education, or supplementary training, overseas. This underscores
the importance of English in the training for the CHSKH priesthood. Prominent
clergy who studied overseas included Lindel Tsen (鄭和甫the first Chinese Presiding Bishop of the CHSKH), C. T. Song (宋哉之), T. K.
Shen (沈子高), Y. Y. Tsu(朱友魚), K.T.Mao (毛克忠), Quentin Huang (黄奎元), Kimber
Den (鄧述坤), Lin (林步基),
Wang Shenyin ( 王神蔭), Zheng Jianye (鄭建業), Zhao Fusan(趙復三 ) and
K. H. Ting (丁光訓). More went
to seminaries in the United States and Canada than to England.
“Central Theological School
Newsletter, February-August, 1947,” by T. K. Shen; “Central Theological School
Newsletter, September, 1947 to February, 1948,” by T. K. Shen; “Central
Theological School Newsletter, March to October, 1948,” by. T. K. Shen, HKBU
Archives of History of Christianity in China, CMS Archives, Reel 384 “CHSKH,
SPG General Secretary to Bishop Roberts, 30 January 1951, HKBU
Archives of History of Christianity in China, CMS Archives, Reel 384 “CHSKH,
Shen to Hall, 1950.10.06, HKBU Archives of History of Christianity
in China, CMS Archives, Reel 384 “CHSKH, 1937-1950.”
Book I, Union Theological
College Board (協和神學院校 董會議)， BHA。
“Reports and Resolutions of the Tenth General Synod of the Chung
Hua Sheng Kung Hui,” HKBU Archives of History of Christianity in China, CMS
Archives, Reel 384 “CHSKH, 1937-1950.” In 1946, the number of CHSKH church
members was 66,551, down from 78,616 ten years earlier, presumably because of
the war. 中華聖公會年鑒 （上海：總議會中央辦事處，