臺灣基督長老教會的南北互動與合一：以北部教會為中心（1872-1951）

Abstract

本研究首先指出臺灣基督長老教會於1951年成立總會後，北部大會仍存續的特殊狀況，並非單從戰後的歷史發展可以解釋，必須追溯至日治時期南北教會的發展差異。從南、北兩會入臺後的發展來看，我們可以發現兩邊母會的歷史與規模，深刻影響海外宣教區的發展路徑。身負首個海外宣教區成敗重責的馬偕，強烈領導風格導致母會同工招募不易，其子偕叡廉與女婿陳清義的傳承，引發新人運動的長期創傷，還有加拿大聯合運動分裂，導致外籍宣教師大量流失。此外，兩邊母會的控制力強弱也是關鍵，英國長老教會有豐富的海外宣教區經驗，一直都能對南部教會有效管控；但加拿大長老教會卻因為海外宣教區經驗不如英國長老教會，不時受到海外宣教師的情緒勒索，甚至以辭職相逼。相對來說，南部教會雖然偶有紛爭，但集體的教士會組織能夠抑止寡頭領導的狀況，既有充足人手照顧宣教區，也能讓各項宣教機構穩定發展。上述諸項原因，就是日治時期北部教會規模不如南部的因素。加諸北部教會爆發新人運動後，短時間內大量替換的新領導階層係受日本（神學）教育影響。北部教會原本就因母國規模限制，而稍弱於南部教會；新人運動成員國族觀念紊亂，對日本教會界的依賴比臺灣原有外籍宣教師高，與長期穩定接班的南部教會不同。兩邊的差異導致日治末期的政教關係落差，並維持著「北小南大」的規模差異，後續北部教會於成立總會時，便堅持保留北部大會以避免事業機構經營權被南部教會稀釋。值得注意的是，南、北兩會在戰後初期都是歡迎新統治者的到來，是普世教協案後才讓南部教會被迫走上反抗的道路。這樣長期的歷史發展與觀念差異，唯有透過長時段的脈絡追索，才能以理解與同情，並趨近於客觀的態度面對，以利我們坦然面對過去的歷史。This study first points out that the continued existence of the Northern Synod after the establishment of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan in 1951 is a unique situation that cannot be explained solely by postwar historical developments; it must be traced back to the developmental differences between the northern and southern churches. From the development of the Northern and Southern Missions after entering Taiwan, we can see that the history and scale of the respective mother churches deeply influenced the development paths of their overseas mission fields. George Leslie Mackay, who bore the heavy responsibility for the success or failure of the first overseas mission field, had a strong leadership style that made it difficult to recruit coworkers from the home church. The succession by his son George W. Mackay and his son-in-law Tan Chhing-gi triggered the long-term trauma of the New-People Movement. In addition, the division caused by the Canadian Union Movement led to the mass loss of foreign missionaries. Furthermore, the strength of control by the two mother churches was also crucial: the Presbyterian Church of England, with its rich experience in overseas missions, was consistently able to effectively manage the Southern Church; but the Presbyterian Church in Canada, due to its less experience in overseas missions, was frequently emotionally blackmailed by its overseas missionaries, even threatened with resignation. In contrast, although the Southern Church occasionally had disputes, its collective Missionary Council organization could restrain oligarchic leadership, provide sufficient personnel for the mission fields, and allow various mission institutions to develop steadily. These factors account for why the Northern Church was smaller in scale than the Southern Church during the Japanese colonial period. After the outbreak of the New-People Movement in the Northern Church, a large number of newly replaced leaders within a short time were influenced by Japanese (theological) education. The Northern Church, originally weaker due to the limitations of its mother church, was further affected by the disordered national identity of the New-People Movement members, whose dependence on the Japanese church community was even greater than that of the original foreign missionaries in Taiwan, unlike the Southern Church which had long-term stable succession. These differences led to disparities in church-state relations at the end of the Japanese era and sustained the scale gap of “small north, large south.” As a result, when the Northern Church faced the establishment of the General Assembly, it insisted on retaining the Northern Synod to avoid the dilution of its control over institutional enterprises by the Southern Church. It is worth noting that both the Northern and Southern Churches initially welcomed the arrival of the new rulers after the war; it was only after the World Council of Churches incident that the Southern Church was forced onto the path of resistance. Such long-term historical development and conceptual differences can only be approached with understanding and sympathy—and with an attitude close to objectivity—through long-term contextual tracing, enabling us to face past history candidly.