writes Professor Marcus Dods, "Buddhism reserved its highest blessings for the man of contemplation, who could pass through the world as a stick floats down the river-unattracted to either bank." Love for others and corresponding service, although down in the books, have not been and cannot be insisted upon in the spirit and power of Christian altruism. "The contrast between the Gospel of Christ's salvation and the law of Buddha's deliverance is so great that words cannot measure it. The moral culture which schools the mind into utter passivity and indifference to all things and persons is the very antipodes of the spiritual culture which loves and blesses all the works of God, which embraces all souls, and is reconciled to the Supreme Will." The proposed deliverance of Buddhism is from the misery of restless desire rather than from sin. Its programme contemplates the deliverance of self rather than of others. Its outcome is rest and ecstasy for the man, not as a member of a perfected society, but as one who has escaped into untroubled isolation. Its supreme desire is the individual Nirvana, that state of mind in which the personality is virtually extinguished and the spirit is in a state of poise and rest. It is a final goal of existence where there is no further prospect of "becoming" to trouble the soul. The possible round of rebirths is ended, and a blissful serenity and security are henceforth the happy portion of the possessor of Arahatship. This experience, it may be noted, is possible in connection with the present earthly existence. Is it any wonder that the record of Buddhism as a ministry for the elevation and renovation of human society is marked by failure?

At the

Confucianism and its social role.

In like manner let us consider briefly the influence of Confucianism, and see if we can detect the secret of its social shortcomings. outset we are impressed with its natural capacity to influence society, and if any mere ethical code can contain the secret of social regeneration, Confucianism might be expected to reveal it. The special sphere which it expressly seeks to regulate is society. It fixes its attention upon the five relationships, between ruler and subject, father and son, husband and wife, elder and younger, and friend with friend. The five regular constituents with which it endows our moral nature are named as "benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and sincerity," and it requires "affection between father and son, concord between husband and wife, kindness on the part of the elder brother and defer

1 Reynolds, "Buddhism," p. 34.

2 Professor T. W. Rhys Davids, "Buddhism: Its History and Literature," pp. 151, 173, 175.

ence on the part of the younger, order between seniors and juniors, sincerity between friends and associates, respect on the part of the ruler, and loyalty on that of the minister; these are ten righteous graces equally binding on all men."1 There is nothing here which Christianity would repudiate; on the contrary, rather would it sanction and enforce them all. Much emphasis has been given to the fact that the ethics of Confucianism are on a high plane. This is true and should be frankly acknowledged. Indeed, it is to be expected that the human reason, in laying down an elaborate programme of reciprocal duties, if it were true to itself and guided by the light of natural religion and human experience, would instinctively accentuate these points; and not only China, but the world, may be thankful that an ethical code like this has dominated so many millions of our fellow-men for centuries. It is not the simple code of Confucian ethics which has paralyzed China's social development; it is rather the fact that it lacks motive power of the right kind; it is deficient in vitalizing forces.2

The more we study this monumental system of ethical religion the more its fatal weaknesses come to light. Where is God? we inquire. Where is the ultimate basis of authority and the supreme motive of duty? To be sure, there is an annual representative worship of Heaven on the part of the Chinese Emperor, in which he takes the place of his people and is their official substitute in rendering homage to that indefinite entity which is called Heaven and stands for God. The people as a whole assume an attitude of unconcern and irresponsibility towards the Supreme Power. In fact, the attempt on the part of a Chinese subject to offer public worship to Shangti, in accordance with the prescribed ritual, would be counted an act of high treason. There is among the masses no intelligent recognition of authority. There is no motive which is not, in the last analysis, resolved into self-interest, and

1 Legge, "Christianity and Confucianism Compared,” p. 12.

2 "The evidence we have to offer is that of experience. We find that Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism have not made the corpse live, but only garlanded it with flowers. There are good points and teachings in these religions, but they are simply precepts without living power to raise the people. The educated Confucianist is ignorant, proud, and conceited. He only knows what Confucius taught (and does not practise it), and what Confucius did not teach is not knowledge. Go to a Buddhist temple and question the priest. He knows little or nothing of his own religion, cannot interpret the prayers he chants or read the books of his own creed, but leads an idle, vicious life. Like priest, like people. These religions have not lifted a single burden or borne a single sorrow. They have plunged the people into hopeless night as regards the future life, and have given no power to overcome sin in the present one."-Rev. Joseph S. Adams (A. B. M. U.), Hankow, China.

there is a conspicuous lack of moral accountability. Man is a law unto himself; but as this has never satisfied the intuitive demands of the moral nature, a substantially polytheistic substitute has been found in the ancestral worship of China, and also in the prevalent superstitions of nature-worship.1

We note, too, the excessive overloading and overdoing of the ethical code of duty with supplemental precepts and concessions representative either of expediency, weakness, or folly. On the one hand, is undue laxity; on the other, over-stringency. The rights and interests of the individual are slighted in deference to the State and the family. Excessive power is conceded to rulers and parents. Reverence for ancestors develops into idolatrous worship. The living, on the other hand, especially women and the weaker members of the family, are regarded as inferior, and treated with an undue assumption of power; hence the forced betrothal of children, the evils of polygamy, infanticide, or the heartless committal of girls to a life of misery. The practical outcome of this human adjustment of details reveals a marked absence of the delicacy, the wisdom, the tenderness, the considerateness, and the justice of the Christian spirit. Confucianism stumbles and blunders so hopelessly in the practical application of its code that the issue, so far from securing the happiness and welfare of its followers, with a benignant guardianship of the rights of the helpless and the dependent, has perpetuated the historic shortcomings of Chinese society. We cannot but note also the absence of altruism and the lack of a spirit of sacrifice in social life. There is little appreciation of man as man. Selfishness dominates the whole attitude of the Confucianist, not only towards humanity, but towards his own environment, and often towards even his own family. There is a notable absence of a personal example for guidance and comparison. Confucius himself, according to his own statements, was imperfect.2 The literature which Confucianism has put forth is destitute of spiritual power and magnetic inspiration. It is cold, and powerless to move and quicken and vivify the soul. The practical outcome of Confucianism fails to realize even its own ideal. While there are exceptional characters, and men of amiable and gra

1 "All the gods of China," writes the Rev. Arthur H. Smith, "may be said to have been dead men, and by the rite of ancestral worship it may be affirmed that, in a sense, all the dead men of China are gods. . . . There can be no doubt whatever that as a nation the Chinese are polytheistic. There is also the worship of nature. Temples to the gods of wind, thunder, stars, sun, and moon abound. Any kind of a divinity which seems adapted to exert a favorable influence in any given direction will be patronized.”

2 Legge, "Christianity and Confucianism Compared," p. 31. ·

cious characteristics in the ranks of its followers, yet they are manifestly not the average product of the system. As a man among men the Confucianist is lacking in moral sincerity, in the altruistic purpose, in humility and the spirit of sacrificial service. As a religionist he is either polytheistic or agnostic.1

The emptiness of Confucianism appears in its annihilation of a divine personality as a source of authority, its undue estimate of the moral power of ethical conceptions, its homage to rule and precept as alone sufficient guides to society. It has exalted ethics as in themselves the personification of authority and an all-sufficient motive. It has perverted them by accommodating interpretations, accretions, and misapplications, until they have led on to idolatry, and become the teachers of half-truths, or practical reversals of their original ideals. Its sign of failure is its exaltation of self as the interpreter and exponent of moral obligation. It, therefore, lacks the authority, the motive, the wisdom, and the personal touch of Christianity. The divine personality is in total eclipse; the human personality stands alone and helpless as its own master.

We find, therefore, that the crucial defect of Confucianism as a social force is its impoverishment of the personality, its non-recognition of its needs. It is a religion of shortcomings, of partial truths, of half-power, of undefined responsibility. As a code, while excellent so far as it goes, it becomes in the end narrowed, distorted, misdirected, and misshapen. Its practical result, as revealed in the social history of China, is an imperfectly developed, partially cultured, feebly inspired,

The contribution of Confucianism to society is an impoverished personality.

1 Smith, "Chinese Characteristics," p. 316.

2 "One of the ablest Oriental scholars has said that China has the best moral creed outside of the inspired code. Scattered throughout the voluminous writings of recognized authority are profound utterances of high ethical value, applicable to every class, from emperor and prince to magistrate and scholar, trader and laborer. Millions daily study these books, in which rulers are exhorted and admonished to adhere to justice and righteousness in dealing with the people; and no nation on the earth knows better than the Chinese that evil has an evil recompense, and good has a good recompense.' But what do the facts disclose as to the ethical fruit of these wise admonitions? China stands forth to-day as one of the most conspicuous examples of the utter worthlessness of mere natural ethics to elevate and purify a nation. They know, but they practise not. The power of the seen and tangible outweighs all considerations when balanced against the possibilities of future compensation. Scores of sayings may be produced from their classics in which prince and people are urged to justice and propriety, and yet there is not on earth a more corrupt set of rulers than those who to-day hold power in this vast empire.”—Rev. Albert A. Fulton (P. B. F. M. N.), Canton, China.

"I see the results of Confucianism, perhaps the best human system of ethics the world has had, after a trial on a large scale for two millenniums, and, after this long

morally blinded, and socially moribund humanity. The human reason has taken a gigantic leap in its own strength, but it has fallen short, and the result is Confucianism. It is the great historic illustration of the failure of a human ethical code, with no acknowledged sovereignty back of it, no constraining love in it, interpreted and applied by the imperfect wisdom and the moral weakness of man.

Hinduism and its social record.

Let us turn now to Hinduism and scrutinize its record as a social stimulus and help to mankind. It was born in a process of natureworship; it was nursed in pantheism; and it has matured into stupendous ceremonialism and a colossal system of idolatry. The better divinities of its earlier history have been superseded by evil ones. It has developed in its downward trend the most tyrannical and overshadowing sacerdotalism in the religious history of the world. The priestly caste has never assumed such masterful supremacy over the mysteries of religion and the life of men as has been revealed in the triumph of the Brahman. This has been its spiritual and philosophical history for two thousand years. Buddhism at length attempted its impossible rôle of reform, but Brahmanism held its own, and the modern era of Hinduism began. It has since grown by absorption, accretion, and expansion into the most gigantic and debasing parody of true religion in existence. Into its Pantheon have come the most monstrous representations of Deity that the human mind has conceived. The thirty-three gods of the Vedas have grown to hundreds of millions. Siva, Durga, Rama, Krishna, and Kali have taken their places at once of honor and shame in the temples of Hinduism. Truly its last state is worse than its first. With Krishna, Siva, and his supposed wife Sakti, and a multitude of other divinities, have developed the nameless features of Hindu worship, the orgies of its festivals, and the moral taint of its most sacred places. "The worship of Siva, of Vishnu, and the other popular deities," writes Professor Max Müller, "is of the same, nay, in many cases of a more degraded and savage character than the worship of Jupiter, Apollo, and Minerva; it belongs to a stratum of thought which is long buried beneath our feet; it may live on, like the lion and the tiger, but the mere air of free thought and civilized life will extinguish it." In its principles and practices it represents at once the religious

trial, China, like the woman in the Gospels, is only growing worse. Is it not fair to infer that her case is hopeless apart from Christianity? But Christianity can cure all her ills, and it will.”—Rev. Chauncey Goodrich, D.D. (A. B. C. F. M.), Tungcho, near Peking, China.

1 "Lecture on Missions," p. 47.