By far the most protracted of these controversies was over the word that ought to be used in Chinese to express the idea of God. Under date of November 4, 1865, he made this entry in his Journal: “This week I had a note from Mr. Mills, saying that a proposition was current at Peking to get out a Union New Testament in Mandarin, and to use in it _Tien Chu_ for God, and _Sheng Shen_ for Holy Spirit, and that all but Mr. ⸺ had signed it. I cannot sign it at all; I am utterly opposed to any such a proceeding. I cannot conscientiously use these words.” That was his first gun in a battle that for him completely ended only with his life. His contributions to the discussion were sufficient to be in substance, as we have already seen, gathered into a separate volume. In 1907 his “Letter Book” shows that he was still remonstrating against a request to the Bible societies to employ for God and for spirit Chinese terms that violated his convictions. His very last recorded utterance on the subject was in a letter dated November 17, 1907. In it he expresses his gratification that in an edition of the New Testament for China, issued by an English Bible society, they were “to use the terms _Shen_ and _Sheng Ling_ for God and Spirit.” He added: “This suits me. These and these only are the right terms, and despite all appearances will ultimately win in the really orthodox and evangelistic church of China.” It is not improbable that the drift of opinion for various reasons as to this was against him; but it was in this faith that he died. As to his part in the discussion concerning what came to be known as “Methods of Missions,” no more need be said here than that the men who took part in this were alike seeking the best solution of a difficult problem, and never wavered in unbroken fellowship and confidence as comrades in the larger work of giving the gospel to China. It was not until 1905 that Dr. Mateer published his book on this subject, and then only when urged by some of his associates. In the battle as to English in the college, Dr. Mateer had to yield to the majority who came into control after the removal to Wei Hsien. He was great enough not to allow the new policy to chill his love for the institution, or to stay his hands from such help as, in addition to his occupation with the Mandarin version, it was possible for him to lend either by influence or money, or even by physical toil. In his final relations with the college he proved himself to be still its loyal and generous supporter.