{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_25792/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_25792","id":"gutenberg_25792","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25792","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Natural theology","Religions"],"text":"Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Sam W. and the\nOnline Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net\n(This file was made using scans of public domain works\nfrom the University of Michigan Digital Libraries.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Note\n\nGreek has been transliterated in this version of the e-text, and is\nsurrounded by + symbols, +like this+.\n\n\n\n\n                    THE\n           SYMPATHY OF RELIGIONS.\n\n\n                AN ADDRESS,\n  DELIVERED AT HORTICULTURAL HALL, BOSTON,\n             February 6, 1870.\n\n\n                     BY\n         THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON.\n\n\n                   BOSTON:\n        _REPRINTED FROM THE RADICAL._\n        OFFICE, 25 BROMFIELD STREET.\n                    1871.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SYMPATHY OF RELIGIONS.\n\nBY THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON.\n\n\nOur true religious life begins when we discover that there is an Inner\nLight, not infallible but invaluable, which \"lighteth every man that\ncometh into the world.\" Then we have something to steer by; and it is\nchiefly this, and not an anchor, that we need. The human soul, like\nany other noble vessel, was not built to be anchored, but to sail. An\nanchorage may, indeed, be at times a temporary need, in order to make\nsome special repairs, or to take fresh cargo in; yet the natural\ndestiny of both ship and soul is not the harbor, but the ocean; to cut\nwith even keel the vast and beautiful expanse; to pass from island on\nto island of more than Indian balm, or to continents fairer than\nColumbus won; or, best of all, steering close to the wind, to extract\nmotive power from the greatest obstacles. Men must forget the eternity\nthrough which they have yet to sail, when they talk of anchoring here\nupon this bank and shoal of time. It would be a tragedy to see the\nshipping of the world whitening the seas no more, and idly riding at\nanchor in Atlantic ports; but it would be more tragic to see a world\nof souls fascinated into a fatal repose and renouncing their destiny\nof motion.\n\nAnd as with individuals, so with communities. The great historic\nreligions of the world are not so many stranded hulks left to perish.\nThe best of them are all in motion. All over the world the divine\ninfluence moves men. There is a sympathy in religions, and this\nsympathy is shown alike in their origin, their records, and their\nprogress. Men are ceasing to disbelieve, and learning to believe more.\nI have worshiped in an Evangelical church when thousands rose to their\nfeet at the motion of one hand. I have worshiped in a Roman Catholic\nchurch when the lifting of one finger broke the motionless multitude\ninto twinkling motion, till the magic sign was made, and all was still\nonce more. But I never for an instant have supposed that this\nconcentrated moment of devotion was more holy or more beautiful than\nwhen one cry from a minaret hushes a Mohammedan city to prayer, or\nwhen, at sunset, the low invocation, \"Oh! the gem in the lotus--oh!\nthe gem in the lotus,\" goes murmuring, like the cooing of many doves,\nacross the vast surface of Thibet. True, \"the gem in the lotus\" means\nnothing to us, but it means as much to the angels as \"the Lamb of\nGod,\" for it is a symbol of aspiration.\n\nEvery year brings new knowledge of the religions of the world, and\nevery step in knowledge brings out the sympathy between them. They all\nshow the same aim, the same symbols, the same forms, the same\nweaknesses, the same aspirations. Looking at these points of unity, we\nmight say there is but one religion under many forms, whose essential\ncreed is the Fatherhood of God, and the Brotherhood of Man,--disguised\nby corruptions, symbolized by mythologies, ennobled by virtues,\ndegraded by vices, but still the same. Or if, passing to a closer\nanalysis, we observe the shades of difference, we shall find in these\nvarying faiths the several instruments which perform what Cudworth\ncalls \"the Symphony of Religions.\" And though some may stir like\ndrums, and others soothe like flutes, and others like violins command\nthe whole range of softness and of strength, yet they are all alike\ninstruments, and nothing in any one of them is so wondrous as the\ngreat laws of sound which equally control them all.\n\n\"Amid so much war and contest and variety of opinion,\" said Maximus\nTyrius, \"you will find one consenting conviction in every land, that\nthere is one God, the King and Father of all.\" \"God being one,\" said\nAristotle, \"only receives various names from the various\nmanifestations we perceive.\" \"Sovereign God,\" said Cleanthes, in that\nsublime prayer which Paul quoted, \"whom men invoke under many names,\nand who rulest alone, ... it is to thee that all nations should\naddress themselves, for we all are thy children.\" So Origen, the\nChristian Father, frankly says that no man can be blamed for calling\nGod's name in Egyptian, nor in Scythian, nor in such other language as\nhe best knows.[A]\n\nTo say that different races worship different Gods, is like saying\nthat they are warmed by different suns. The names differ, but the sun\nis the same, and so is God. As there is but one source of light and\nwarmth, so there is but one source of religion. To this all nations\ntestify alike. We have yet but a part of our Holy Bible. The time will\ncome when, as in the middle ages, all pious books will be called\nsacred scriptures, _Scripturae Sacrae_. From the most remote portions of\nthe earth, from the Vedas and the Sagas, from Plato and Zoroaster,\nConfucius and Mohammed, from the Emperor Marcus Antoninus and the\nslave Epictetus, from the learned Alexandrians and the ignorant Galla\nnegroes, there will be gathered hymns and prayers and maxims in which\nevery religious soul may unite,--the magnificent liturgy of the human\nrace.\n\nThe greatest of modern scholars, Von Humboldt, asserted in middle life\nand repeated the assertion in old age, that \"all positive religions\ncontain three distinct parts. First, a code of morals, very fine, and\nnearly the same in all. Second, a geological dream, and, third, a myth\nor historical novelette, which last becomes the most important of\nall.\" And though this observation may be somewhat roughly stated, its\nessential truth is seen when we compare the different religions of the\nworld side by side. With such startling points of similarity, where is\nthe difference? The main difference lies here, that each fills some\nblank space in its creed with the name of a different teacher. For\ninstance, the Oriental Parsee wears a fine white garment, bound around\nhim with a certain knot; and whenever this knot is undone, at morning\nor night, he repeats the four main points of his creed, which are as\nfollows:--\n\n\"To believe in one God, and hope for mercy from him only.\"\n\n\"To believe in a future state of existence.\"\n\n\"To do as you would be done by.\"\n\nThus far the Parsee keeps on the universal ground of religion. Then he\ndrops into the language of his sect and adds,--\n\n\"To believe in Zoroaster as lawgiver, and to hold his writings\nsacred.\"\n\nThe creed thus furnishes a formula for all religions. It might be\nprinted in blank like a circular, leaving only the closing name to be\nfilled in.[B] For Zoroaster read Christ, and you have Christianity;\nread Buddha, and you have Buddhism; read Mohammed, and you have\nMohammedanism. Each of these, in short, is Natural Religion _plus_ an\nindividual name. It is by insisting on that _plus_ that each religion\nstops short of being universal.\n\nIn this religion of the human race, thus variously disguised, we find\neverywhere the same leading features. The same great doctrines, good\nor bad,--regeneration, predestination, atonement, the future life, the\nfinal judgment, the Divine Reason or Logos, and the Trinity. The same\nreligious institutions,--monks, missionaries, priests, and pilgrims.\nThe same ritual,--prayers, liturgies, sacrifices, sermons, hymns. The\nsame implements,--frankincense, candles, holy water, relics, amulets,\nvotive offerings. The same symbols,--the cross, the ball, the\ntriangle, the serpent, the all-seeing eye, the halo of rays, the tree\nof life. The same saints, angels, and martyrs. The same holiness\nattached to particular cities, rivers, and mountains. The same\nprophecies and miracles,--the dead restored and evil spirits cast out.\nThe self-same holy days; for Easter and Christmas were kept as spring\nand autumn festivals, centuries before our era, by Egyptians,\nPersians, Saxons, Romans. The same artistic designs, since the mother\nand child stand depicted, not only in the temples of Europe, but in\nthose of Etruria and Arabia, Egypt and Thibet. In ancient Christian\nart, the evangelists were represented with the same heads of eagles,\noxen, and lions, upon which we gaze with amazement in Egyptian tombs.\nNay, the very sects and subdivisions of all historic religions have\nbeen the same, and each supplies us with mystic and rationalist,\nformalist and philanthropist, ascetic and epicurean. The simple fact\nis, that all these things are as indigenous as grass and mosses; they\nspring up in every soil, and only the microscope can tell them apart.\n\nAnd, as all these inevitably recur, so comes back again and again the\nidea of incarnation,--the Divine Man. Here, too, all religions\nsympathize, and, with slight modifications, each is the copy of the\nother. As in the dim robing-rooms of foreign churches are kept rich\nstores of sacred vestments, ready to be thrown over every successive\ngeneration of priests, so the world has kept in memory the same\nstately traditions to decorate each new Messiah. He is predicted by\nprophecy, hailed by sages, born of a virgin, attended by miracle,\nborne to heaven without tasting death, and with promise of return.\nZoroaster and Confucius have no human father. Osiris is the Son of\nGod, he is called the Revealer of Life and Light; he first teaches one\nchosen race; he then goes with his apostles to teach the Gentiles,\nconquering the world by peace; he is slain by evil powers; after death\nhe descends into hell, then rises again, and presides at the last\njudgment of all mankind: those who call upon his name shall be saved.\nBuddha is born of a virgin; his name means the Word, the Logos, but he\nis known more tenderly as the Saviour of Man; he embarrasses his\nteachers, when a child, by his understanding and his answers; he is\ntempted in the wilderness, when older; he goes with his apostles to\nredeem the world; he abolishes caste and cruelty, and teaches\nforgiveness; he receives among his followers outcasts whom Pharisaic\npride despises, and he only says, \"My law is a law of mercy to all.\"\nSlain by enemies, he descends into hell, rising without tasting death,\nand still lives to make intercession for man.\n\nThese are the recognized properties of religious tradition; the\nbeautiful garments belong not to the individual, but the race. It is\nthe drawback on all human greatness that it makes itself deified. Even\nof Jesus it was said sincerely by the Platonic philosopher Porphyry,\n\"That noble soul, who has ascended into heaven, has by a certain\nfatality become an occasion of error.\" The inequality of gifts is a\nproblem not yet solved, and there is always a craving for some miracle\nto explain it. Men set up their sublime representatives as so many\nspiritual athletes, and measure them. \"See, this one is six inches\ntaller; those six inches prove him divine.\" But because men surpass\nus, or surpass everybody, shall we hold them separate from the race?\nConstruct the race as you will, somebody must stand at the head, in\nvirtue as in intellect. Shall we deify Shakespeare? Because we may\nbegin upon his treasury of wisdom almost before we enjoy any other\nbook, and can hold to it longer, and read it all our lives, from those\nearnest moments when we demand the very core of thought, down to\nmoments of sickness and sadness when nothing else captivates; because\nwe may go the rounds of all literature, and grow surfeited with every\nother great author, and learn a dozen languages and a score of\nphilosophical systems, and travel the wide world over, and come back\nto Shakespeare at length, fresh as ever, and begin at the beginning of\nhis infinite meanings once more,--are we therefore to consider him as\nseparated from mortality? Are we to raise him to the heavens, as in\nthe magnificent eulogium of Keats, who heads creation with \"things\nreal, as sun, stars, and passages of Shakespeare\"? Or are we to erect\ninto a creed the bold words I once heard an enthusiast soberly say,\n\"that it is impossible to think of Shakespeare as a man\"? Or shall we\nreverently own, that, as man's humility first bids him separate\nhimself from these his great superiors, so his faith and hope bring\nhim back to them and renew the tie. It paralyzes my intellect if I\ndoubt whether Shakespeare was a man; it paralyzes my whole spiritual\nnature if I doubt whether Jesus was.\n\nTherefore I believe that all religion is natural, all revealed. What\nfaith in humanity springs up, what trust in God, when one recognizes\nthe sympathy of religions! Every race believes in a Creator and\nGovernor of the world, in whom devout souls recognize a Father also.\nEvery race believes in immortality. Every race recognizes in its\nreligious precepts the brotherhood of man. The whole gigantic system\nof caste in Hindostan has grown up in defiance of the Vedas, which are\nnow being invoked to abolish them. The Heetopades of Vishnu Sarman\nforbid caste. \"Is this one of our tribe or a stranger? is the\ncalculation of the narrow-minded; but, to those of a noble\ndisposition, the earth itself is but one family.\" \"What is religion?\"\nsays elsewhere the same book, and answers, \"Tenderness toward all\ncreatures.\" \"He is my beloved of whom mankind are not afraid and who\nof mankind is not afraid,\" says the Bhagvat Geeta. \"Kesava is pleased\nwith him who does good to others, ... who is always desirous of the\nwelfare of all creatures,\" says the Vishnu Purana. In Confucius it is\nwritten, \"My doctrine is simple and easy to understand;\" and his chief\ndisciple adds, \"It consists only in having the heart right and in\nloving one's neighbor as one's self.\" When he was asked, \"Is there one\nword which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life?\" he\nanswered, \"Is not 'Reciprocity' such a word? What you wish done to\nyourself, do to others.\" By some translators the rule is given in a\nnegative form, in which it is also found in the Jewish Talmud (Rabbi\nHillel), \"Do not to another what thou wouldst not he should do to\nthee; this is the sum of the law.\" So Thales, when asked for a rule of\nlife, taught, \"That which thou blamest in another, do not thyself.\"\n\"Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,\" said the Hebrew book of\nLeviticus. Iamblichus tells us that Pythagoras taught \"the love of all\nto all.\" \"To live is not to live for one's self alone, let us help one\nanother,\" said the Greek dramatist Menander; and the Roman dramatist\nTerence, following him, brought down the applause of the whole theatre\nby the saying, \"I am a man; I count nothing human foreign to me.\"\n\"Give bread to a stranger,\" said Quintilian, \"in the name of the\nuniversal brotherhood which binds together all men under the common\nfather of nature.\" \"What good man will look on any suffering as\nforeign to himself?\" said the Latin satirist Juvenal. \"This sympathy\nis what distinguishes us from brutes,\" he adds. The poet Lucan\npredicted a time when warlike weapons should be laid aside, and all\nmen love one another. \"Nature has inclined us to love men,\" said\nCicero, \"and this is the foundation of the law.\" He also described\nhis favorite virtue of justice as \"devoting itself wholly to the good\nof others.\" Seneca said, \"We are members of one great body, Nature\nplanted in us a mutual love, and fitted us for a social life. We must\nconsider that we were born for the good of the whole.\" \"Love mankind,\"\nwrote Marcus Antoninus, summing it all up in two words; while the\nloving soul of Epictetus extended the sphere of mutual affection\nbeyond this earth, holding that \"the universe is but one great city,\nfull of beloved ones, divine and human, by nature endeared to each\nother.\"[C]\n\nThis sympathy of religions extends even to the loftiest virtues,--the\nforgiveness of injuries, the love of enemies and the overcoming of\nevil with good. \"The wise man,\" said the Chinese Lao-tse, \"avenges his\ninjuries with benefits.\" \"Hatred,\" says a Buddhist sacred book, the\nDhammapada, \"does not cease by hatred at any time; hatred ceases by\nlove; this is the eternal rule.\" \"To overcome evil with good is good,\nand to resist evil by evil is evil,\" says a Mohammedan manual of\nethics. \"Turn not away from a sinner, but look on him with\ncompassion,\" says Saadi's Gulistan. \"If thine enemy hunger, give him\nbread to eat; if he thirst, give him water to drink,\" said the Hebrew\nproverb. \"He who commits injustice is ever made more wretched than he\nwho suffers it,\" said Plato, and adds, \"It is never right to return an\ninjury.\" \"No one will dare maintain,\" said Aristotle, \"that it is\nbetter to do injustice than to bear it.\" \"We should do good to our\nenemy,\" said Cleobulus, \"and make him our friend.\" \"Speak not evil to\na friend, nor even to an enemy,\" said Pittacus, one of the Seven Wise\nMen. \"It is more beautiful,\" said Valerius Maximus, \"to overcome\ninjury by the power of kindness than to oppose to it the obstinacy of\nhatred.\" Maximus Tyrius has a special chapter on the treatment of\ninjuries, and concludes: \"If he who injures does wrong, he who returns\nthe injury does equally wrong.\" Plutarch, in his essay, \"How to profit\nby our enemies,\" bids us sympathize with them in affliction and aid\ntheir needs. \"A philosopher, when smitten, must love those who smite\nhim, as if he were the father, the brother, of all men,\" said\nEpictetus. \"It is peculiar to man,\" said Marcus Antoninus, \"to love\neven those who do wrong.... Ask thyself daily to how many ill-minded\npersons thou hast shown a kind disposition.\" He compares the wise and\nhumane soul to a spring of pure water which blesses even him who\ncurses it; and the Oriental story likens such a soul to the\nsandal-wood tree, which imparts its fragrance even to the axe that\ncuts it down.[D]\n\nHow it cheers and enlarges us to hear of these great thoughts and\nknow that the Divine has never been without a witness on earth! How it\nmust sadden the soul to disbelieve them. Worse yet to be in a position\nwhere one has to hope that they may not be correctly reported,--that\none by one they may be explained away. A prosecuting attorney once\ntold me that the most painful part of his position was that he had to\nhope that every man he prosecuted would be proved a villain. What is\nthe painful circumstance in Mrs. Stowe's Byron controversy? That she\nis obliged to hope that the character of a sister woman, hitherto\nstainless, may be hopelessly blackened. But what is this to their\nposition who are bound to hope that the character of humanity will be\nblackened by wholesale, who are compelled to resist every atom of\nlight that history reveals. For instance, as the great character of\nBuddha has come out from the darkness, within fifty years, how these\nreluctant people have struggled against it, still desiring to escape.\n\"Save us, O God!\" they have seemed to say, \"from the distress of\nbelieving that so many years ago there was a sublime human life.\" Show\nsuch persons that the great religious ideas and maxims are as old as\nliterature; and how they resist the knowledge! \"Surely it is not so\nbad as that,\" they say. \"Is there not a possibility of a\nmistranslation? Let us see the text, explore the lexicon; is there no\nlabor, no toil, by which we can convince ourselves that there is a\nmistake? Anything rather than believe that there is a light which\nlighteth every man that cometh into the world.\"\n\nFor this purpose the very facts of history must be suppressed or\nexplained away. Sir George Mackenzie, in his \"Travels in Iceland,\"\nsays that the clergy prevented till 1630, with \"mistaken zeal,\" the\npublication of the Scandinavian Eddas. Huc, the Roman Catholic\nMissionary, described in such truthful colors the religious influence\nof Buddhism in Thibet that his book was put in the _index\nexpurgatorius_ at Rome. Balmes, a learned Roman Catholic writer,\ndeclares that \"Christianity is stripped of a portion of its honors\" if\nwe trace back any high standard of female purity to the ancient\nGermans; and so he coolly sets aside as \"poetical\" the plain\nstatements of the accurate Tacitus. If we are to believe the accounts\ngiven of the Jewish Essenes by Josephus, De Quincey thinks, the claims\nmade by Christianity are annihilated. \"If Essenism could make good its\npretensions, there, at one blow, would be an end of Christianity,\nwhich, in that case, is not only superseded as an idle repetition of a\nreligious system already published, but as a criminal plagiarism. Nor\ncan the wit of man evade the conclusion.\" He accordingly attempts to\nexplain away the testimony of Josephus.[E]\n\nAnd what makes this exclusiveness the more repulsive is its\nmodernness. Paul himself quoted from the sublime hymn of Cleanthes to\nprove to the Greeks that they too recognized the Fatherhood of God.\nThe early Christian apologists, living face to face with the elder\nreligions, made no exclusive claims. Tertullian declared the soul to\nbe an older authority than prophecy, and its voice the gift of God\nfrom the beginning. Justin Martyr said, \"Those who live according to\nReason are Christians, though you may call them atheists.... Such\namong the Greeks were Socrates and Heraclitus and the rest. They who\nhave made or do make Reason (Logos) their rule of life are Christians\nand men without fear and trembling.\" \"The same God,\" said Clement, \"to\nwhom we owe the Old and New Testaments gave also to the Greeks their\nGreek philosophy by which the Almighty is glorified among the Greeks.\"\nLactantius declared that the ancient philosophers \"attained the full\ntruth and the whole mystery of religion.\" \"One would suppose,\" said\nMinucius Felix, \"either that the Christians were philosophers, or the\nphilosophers Christians.\" \"What is now called the Christian religion,\"\nsaid Augustine, \"has existed among the ancients, and was not absent\nfrom the beginning of the human race, until Christ came in the flesh;\nfrom which time the true religion, which existed already, began to be\ncalled Christian.\" Jerome said that \"the knowledge of God was present\nby nature in all, nor was there any one born without God, or who had\nnot in himself the seeds of all virtues.\"[F]\n\nHow few modern sects reach even this point of impartiality! The usual\ncourse of theologians is to deny, and to deny with fury, that any such\nsympathy of religions exists. \"There never was a time,\" says a\ndistinguished European preacher, \"when there did not exist an infinite\ngulf between the ideas of the ancients and the ideas of Christianity.\nThere is an end of Christianity if men agree in thinking the\ncontrary.\" And an eminent Unitarian preacher in America, Rev. A. P.\nPeabody, says, \"If the truths of Christianity are intuitive and\nself-evident, how is it that they formed no part of any man's\nconsciousness till the advent of Christ?\" How can any one look history\nin the face, how can any man open even the dictionary of any ancient\nlanguage, and yet say this? What word sums up the highest Christian\nvirtue if not _philanthropy_? And yet the word is a Greek word, and\nwas used in the same sense before Christendom existed.[G]\n\nFortunately there have always been men whose larger minds could adapt\nthemselves to the truth instead of narrowing the truth to them. In\nWilliam Penn's \"No Cross No Crown,\" one-half the pages are devoted to\nthe religious testimony of Christians, and one-half to that of the\nnon-Christian world. The writings of the most learned of English\nCatholics, Digby, are a treasure-house of ancient religion, and the\nconflict between the bigot and the scholar makes him deliciously\ninconsistent. He states a doctrine, illustrates it from the schoolmen\nor the fathers, proudly claims it as being monopolized by the\nChristian church, and ends by citing a parallel passage from Plato or\nAEschylus! \"The ancient poets,\" he declares, \"seem never to have\nconceived the idea of a spirit of resignation which would sanctify\ncalamity;\" and accordingly he quotes Aristotle's assertion, that\n\"suffering becomes beautiful when any one bears great calamities with\ncheerfulness, not through insensibility, but through greatness of\nmind.\" \"There is not a passage in the classics,\" he declares, \"which\nrecognizes the beauty of holiness and Christian mildness;\" and in the\nnext breath he remarks, that Homer's description of Patroclus\nfurnishes \"language which might convey an idea of that mildness of\nmanner which belonged to men in Christian ages.\" And he closes his\neloquent picture of the faith of the middle ages in immortality by\nattributing to the monks and friars the dying language of Socrates,\nthat \"a man who has spent his life in the study of philosophy ought to\ntake courage in his death, and to be full of hope that he is about to\npossess the greatest good that can be obtained, which will be in his\npossession as soon as he dies;\" and much more of that serene and\nsublime wisdom. Yet all this is done in a manner so absolutely free\nfrom sophistry, the conflict between the scholar and the churchman is\nso innocent and transparent, that one forgives it in Digby. In most\nwriters on these subjects there is greater bigotry, without the\nlearning which in his case makes it endurable, because it supplies\nthe means for its own correction.[H]\n\nAnd, if it is thus hard to do historical justice, it is far harder to\nlook with candor upon contemporary religions. Thus the Jesuit Father\nRipa thought that Satan had created the Buddhist religion on purpose\nto bewilder the Christian church. There we see a creed possessing more\nvotaries than any in the world, numbering nearly one-third of the\nhuman race. Its traditions go back to a founder whose record is\nstainless and sublime. It has the doctrine of the Real Presence, the\nMadonna and Child, the invocation of the dead, monasteries and\npilgrimages, celibacy and tonsure, relics, rosaries, and holy water.\nWherever it has spread, it has broken down the barrier of caste. It\nteaches that all men are brethren, and makes them prove it by their\nacts; it diffuses gentleness and self-sacrificing benevolence. \"It has\nbecome,\" as Neander admits, \"to many tribes of people a means of\ntransition from the wildest barbarism to semi-civilization.\" Tennent,\nliving amid the lowest form of it in Ceylon, says that its code of\nmorals is \"second only to that of Christianity itself,\" and enjoins\n\"every conceivable virtue and excellence.\" It is coming among us,\nrepresented by many of the Chinese, and a San-Francisco merchant, a\nChristian of the Episcopal Church, told me that, on conversing with\ntheir educated men, he found in them a religious faith quite as\nenlightened as his own. Shall we not rejoice in this consoling\ndiscovery? \"Yes,\" said the simple-hearted Abbe Huc: so he published\nhis account of Buddhism, and saw it excommunicated. \"No!\" said Father\nRipa, \"it is the invention of the devil!\"[I]\n\nWith a steady wave of progress Mohammedanism is sweeping through\nAfrica, where Christianity scarcely advances a step. Wherever\nMohammedanism reaches, schools and libraries are established,\ngambling and drunkenness cease, theft and falsehood diminish, polygamy\nis limited, woman begins to be elevated and has property rights\nguaranteed; and, instead of witnessing human sacrifices, you see the\ncottager reading the Koran at her door, like the Christian cottager in\nCowper's description. \"Its gradual extension,\" says an eye-witness,\n\"is gradually but surely modifying the negro.... Within the last half\ncentury the humanizing influence of the Koran is acknowledged by all\nwho are acquainted with the interior tribes.\"[J] So in India,\nMohammedanism makes converts by thousands (according to Col. Sleeman,\nthan whom there can be no more intelligent authority) where\nChristianity makes but a handful; and this, he testifies, because in\nMohammedanism there is no spirit of caste, while Christians have a\ncaste of their own, and will not put converts on an equality. Do we\nrejoice in this great work of progress? No! one would think we were\nstill in the time of the crusades by the way we ignore the\nprovidential value of Mohammedanism.\n\nThe one unpardonable sin is exclusiveness. Any form of religion is\nendangered when we bring it to the test of facts; for none on earth\ncan bear that test. There never existed a person, nor a book, nor an\ninstitution, which did not share the merits and the drawbacks of its\nrivals. Granting all that can be established as to the debt of the\nworld to the very best dispensation, the fact still remains, that\nthere is not a single maxim, nor idea, nor application, nor triumph,\nthat any single religion can claim as exclusively its own. Neither\nfaith, nor love, nor truth, nor disinterestedness, nor forgiveness,\nnor patience, nor peace, nor equality, nor education, nor missionary\neffort, nor prayer, nor honesty, nor the sentiment of brotherhood, nor\nreverence for woman, nor the spirit of humility, nor the fact of\nmartyrdom, nor any other good thing, is monopolized by any one or any\nhalf dozen forms of faith. All religions recognize, more or less\ndistinctly, these principles; all do something to exemplify, something\nto dishonor them. Travelers find virtue in a seeming minority in all\nother countries, and forget that they have left it in a minority at\nhome. A Hindoo girl, astonished at the humanity of a British officer\ntoward her father, declared her surprise that any one could display so\nmuch kindness who did not believe in the god Vishnu. Gladwin, in his\n\"Persian Classics,\" narrates a scene which occurred in his presence\nbetween a Jew and a Mohammedan. The Mohammedan said in wrath, \"If this\ndeed of conveyance is not authentic, may God cause me to die a Jew.\"\nThe Jew said, \"I make my oath on the Pentateuch, and if I swear\nfalsely I am a Mohammedan like you.\"\n\nWhat religion stands highest in moral results if not Christianity? Yet\nthe slave-trader belongs to Christendom as well as the saint. If we\nsay that Christendom was not truly represented by the slaves in the\nhold of John Newton's slave-ship, but only by the prayers which he\nread every day, as he narrates, in the cabin,--then we must admit that\nBuddhism is not to be judged merely by the prostrations before Fo, but\nby the learning of its lamaseries and the beneficence of its people.\nThe reformed Brahmoes of India complain that Christian nations force\nalcoholic drinks on their nation, despite their efforts; and the\ngreater humanity of Hindoos towards animals has been, according to Dr.\nHedge, a serious embarrassment to our missionaries. So men interrupt\nthe missionaries in China, according to Coffin's late book, by asking\nthem why, if their doctrines be true, Christian nations forced opium\non an unwilling emperor, who refused to the last to receive money from\nthe traffic? What a history has been our treatment of the American\nIndians? \"Instead of virtues,\" said Cadwallader Colden, writing as\nearly as 1727, \"we have taught them vices that they were entirely free\nfrom before that time.\" The delegation from the Society of Friends\nreported last year that an Indian chief brought a young Indian before\na white commissioner to give evidence, and the commissioner hesitated\na little in receiving a part of the testimony, when the chief said\nwith great emphasis, \"Oh! you may believe what he says: he tells the\ntruth: _he has never seen a white man before_!\" In Southey's Wesley\nthere is an account of an Indian whom Wesley met in Georgia, and who\nthus summed up his objections to Christianity: \"Christian much drunk!\nChristian beat man! Christian tell lies! Devil Christian! Me no\nChristian!\"[K] What then? All other religions show the same disparity\nbetween belief and practice, and each is safe till it tries to exclude\nthe rest. Test each sect by its best or its worst as you will, by its\nhigh-water mark of virtue or its low-water mark of vice. But falsehood\nbegins when you measure the ebb of any other religion against the\nflood-tide of your own.\n\nThere is a noble and a base side to every history. The same religion\nvaries in different soils. Christianity is not the same in England and\nin Italy; in Armenia and in Ethiopia; in the Protestant and Catholic\ncantons of Switzerland; in Massachusetts, in Georgia, and in Utah.\nNeither is Buddhism the same in China, in Thibet and in Ceylon; nor\nMohammedanism in Turkey and in Persia. We have no right to pluck the\nbest fruit from one tree, the worst from another, and then say that\nthe tree is known by its fruits. I say again, Christianity has, on the\nwhole, produced the highest results of all, in manners, in arts, in\nenergy. Yet when Christianity had been five centuries in the world,\nthe world's only hope seemed to be in the superior strength and purity\nof pagan races. \"Can we wonder,\" wrote Salvian (A.D. 400), \"if our\nlands have been given over to the barbarians by God? since that which\nwe have polluted by our profligacy the barbarians have cleansed by\ntheir chastity.\"[L] At the end of its first thousand years,\nChristianity could only show Europe at its lowest ebb of civilization,\nin a state which Guizot calls \"death by the extinction of every\nfaculty.\" The barbarians had only deteriorated since their conversion;\nthe great empires were falling to pieces; and the only bright spot in\nEurope was Mohammedan Spain, whose universities taught all Christendom\nscience, as its knights taught chivalry. Even at the end of fifteen\nhundred years, the Turks, having conquered successively Jerusalem and\nConstantinople, seemed altogether the most powerful nation of the\nworld; their empire was compared to the Roman empire; they were\ngaining all the time. You will find everywhere, in Luther's\n\"Table-talk\" for instance, how weak Christendom seemed against them in\nthe middle of the sixteenth century; and Lord Bacon, yet later,\ndescribes them in his \"Essays\" as the only warlike nation in Europe,\nexcept the Spaniards. But the art of printing had been discovered, and\nthat other new world, America; the study of Greek literature was\nreviving the intellect of Europe, and the tide had begun to turn. For\nfour hundred years it has been safe for Christendom to be boastful,\nbut, if at any time during the fifteen hundred years previous the\ncomparison had been made, the boasting would have been the other way.\nIt is unsafe to claim a monopoly of merit on the basis of facts that\ncover four centuries out of nineteen. Let us not be misled by a hasty\nvanity, lest some new incursion of barbarians teach us, as it taught\nthe early Christians, to be humble.\n\nWe see what Christianity has done for Europe; but we do not remember\nhow much Europe has done for Christianity. Take away the influence of\nrace and climate; take away Greek literature and Mohammedan chivalry\nand the art of printing; set the decline of Christianity in Asia and\nAfrica against its gain in Europe and America,--and whatever\nsuperiority may be left is not enough on which to base exclusive\nclaims.[M] The recent scientific advances of the age are a brilliant\ntheme for the rhetorician; but those who make these advances are the\nlast men to ascribe them to the influence of any exclusive religion.\n\nIndeed it is only very lately that the claim of superiority in\ncivilization and the arts of life has been made in behalf of\nChristianity. Down to the time of the Reformation it was usual to\ncontrast the intellectual and practical superiority of the heathen\nwith the purely spiritual claims of the church. \"The church has always\nbeen accustomed,\" says the Roman Catholic Digby, \"to see genius and\nlearning in the ranks opposed to her.\" \"From the beginning of the\nworld,\" said Luther, \"there have always been among the heathens higher\nand rarer people, of greater and more exalted understanding, more\nexcellent diligence and skill in all arts, than among Christians, or\nthe people of God.\" \"Do we excel in intellect, in learning, in decency\nof morals?\" said Melancthon. \"By no means. But we excel in the true\nknowledge and worship and adoration of God.\"[N]\n\nHistorically, of course, we are Christians, and can enjoy the\nadvantage which that better training has given, just as the favored\nson of a king may enjoy his special advantages and yet admit that the\nless favored are equally sons. The name of Christianity only ceases to\nexcite respect when it is used to represent any false or exclusive\nclaims, or when it takes the place of the older and grander words,\n\"Religion\" and \"Virtue.\" When we fully comprehend the sympathy of\nreligions we shall deal with other faiths on equal terms. We shall\ncease trying to free men from one superstition by inviting them into\nanother. The true missionaries are the men inside each religion who\nhave outgrown its limitations. But no Christian missionary has ever\nyet consented to meet the men of other religions upon the common\nground of Theism. In Bishop Heber's time, the Hindoo reformer Swaamee\nNarain was teaching purity and peace, the unity of God, and the\nabolition of castes. Many thousands of men followed his teachings, and\nwhole villages and districts were raised from the worst immorality by\nhis labors, as the Bishop himself bears witness. But the good Bishop\nseems to have despaired of him as soon as Swaamee Narain refused\nconversion to Christianity, making the objection that God was not\nincarnated in one man, but in many. Then came Ram Mohun Roy, forty\nyears ago, and argued from the Vedas against idolatry, caste, and the\nburning of widows. He also refused to be called a Christian, and the\nmissionaries denounced him. Now comes Keshub Chunder Sen, with his\ngenerous utterances: \"We profess the universal and absolute religion,\nwhose cardinal doctrines are the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood\nof Man, and which accepts the truths of all scriptures, and honors the\nprophets of all nations.\" The movement reaches thousands whom no\nforeign influence could touch; yet the Methodist missionaries denounce\nit in the name of Christ, and even the little Unitarian mission opens\nagainst it a battery of a single gun. It is the same with our\ntreatment of the Jews. According to Bayard Taylor, Christendom\nconverts annually three or four Jews in Jerusalem, at a cost of\n$20,000 each. Nothing has been more criticised in the course of the\nFree Religious Association than its admission of Jews as equals on its\nplatform; and yet the reformed Jews in America have already gone in\nadvance of the most liberal Christian sects in their width of\nreligious sympathy. \"The happiness of man,\" says Rabbi Wise, in\nspeaking for them, \"depends on no creed and no book; it depends on the\ndominion of truth, which is the Redeemer and Savior, the Messiah and\nthe King of Glory.\"[O]\n\nIt is our happiness to live in a time when all religions are at last\noutgrowing their mythologies, and emancipated men are stretching out\ntheir hands to share together \"the luxury of a religion that does not\ndegrade.\" The progressive Brahmoes of India, the Jewish leaders in\nAmerica, the Free Religious Association among ourselves, are teaching\nessentially the same principles, seeking the same ends. The Jewish\ncongregations in Baltimore were the first to contribute for the\neducation of the freedmen; the Buddhist Temple, in San Francisco, was\nthe first edifice of that city draped in mourning after the murder of\nPresident Lincoln; the Parsees of the East sent contributions to the\nSanitary Commission. The great religions of the world are but larger\nsects; they come together, like the lesser sects, for works of\nbenevolence; they share the same aspirations, and every step in the\nprogress of each brings it nearer to all the rest. For us, the door\nout of superstition and sin may be called Christianity; that is an\nhistorical name only, the accident of a birthplace. But other nations\nfind other outlets; they must pass through their own doors, not\nthrough ours; and all will come at last upon the broad ground of God's\nproviding, which bears no man's name. The reign of heaven on earth\nwill not be called the Kingdom of Christ nor of Buddha,--it will be\ncalled the Church of God, or the Commonwealth of Man. I do not wish to\nbelong to a religion only, but to _the_ religion; it must not include\nless than the piety of the world.\n\nIf one insists on being exclusive, where shall he find a home? What\nhold has any Protestant sect among us on a thoughtful mind? They are\ntoo little, too new, too inconsistent, too feeble. What are these\nchildren of a day compared with that magnificent Church of Rome, which\ncounts its years by centuries, and its votaries by millions, and its\nmartyrs by myriads; with kings for confessors and nations for\nconverts; carrying to all the earth one Lord, one faith, one baptism,\nand claiming for itself no less title than the Catholic, the\nUniversal? Yet in conversing with Catholics one is again repelled by\nthe extreme juvenility, and modernness, and scanty numbers of their\nchurch. It is the superb elder brother of our little sects, doubtless,\nand seems to have most of the family fortune. But the whole fortune\nis so small! and even the elder brother is so young! Even the\nRomanist ignores traditions more vast, antiquity more remote, a\nliterature of piety more grand. His temple suffocates: give us a\nshrine still vaster; something than this Catholicism more catholic;\nnot the Church of Rome, but of God and Man; a Pantheon, not a\nParthenon; the true _semper, ubique, et ab omnibus_, the Religion of\nthe Ages, Natural Religion.\n\nI was once in a foreign cathedral when, after the three days of\nmourning, in Holy Week, came the final day of Hallelujah. The great\nchurch had looked dim and sad, with the innumerable windows closely\ncurtained, since the moment when the symbolical bier of Jesus was\nborne to its symbolical tomb beneath the High Altar, while the three\nmystic candles blazed above it. There had been agony and beating of\ncheeks in the darkness, while ghostly processions moved through the\naisles, and fearful transparencies were unrolled from the pulpit. The\npriests kneeled in gorgeous robes, chanting, with their heads resting\non the altar steps; the multitude hung expectant on their words.\nSuddenly burst forth a new chant, \"Gloria in Excelsis!\" In that\ninstant every curtain was rolled aside, the cathedral was bathed in\nglory, the organs clashed, the bells chimed, flowers were thrown from\nthe galleries, little birds were let loose, friends embraced and\ngreeted one another, and we looked down upon a tumultuous sea of\nfaces, all floating in a sunlit haze. And yet, I thought, the whole of\nthis sublime transformation consisted in letting in the light of day!\nThese priests and attendants, each stationed at his post, had only\nremoved the darkness they themselves had made. Unveil these darkened\nwindows, but remove also these darkening walls; the temple itself is\nbut a lingering shadow of that gloom. Instead of its coarse and\nstifling incense, give us God's pure air, and teach us that the\nbroadest religion is the best.\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[A] This is Cudworth's interpretation, but he has rather strained the\npassage, which must be that beginning, +Ouden oun oimai diapherein+\n(Adv. Celsum, v.). The passages from Aristotle and Cleanthes are in\nStobaeus. Compare Maximus Tyrius, Diss. I.: +Theos heis panton basileus\nkai pater+.\n\n[B] Compare Augustine, De Vera Relig., c. iv.: \"Paucis mutatis verbis\natque sententiis Christiani fierent.\" The Parsee creed is given as\nabove in a valuable article in Martin's Colonial Magazine, No. 18.\n\n[C] See Vishnu Sarman (tr. by Johnson), pp. 16, 28. Bhagvat Geeta (tr.\nby Wilkins), ch. 12. Vishnu Purana (tr. by Wilson), p. 291. Confucius,\nLun-yu (tr. by Pauthier), ch. iv. Sec. 16. Also Davis' Chinese, ii. 50.\n[Legge's Confucian Analects, xv. 23, gives the negative form.] Thales,\nin Diogenes Laertius, B. I., Sec. 36: +Pos an arista kai dikaiotata\nbiosaimen? ean ha tois allois epitimomen, hautoi me dromen+. Stobaeus\nreads instead (c. 43), +hosa nemeseis ton plesion, hautos me poiei+.\nLeviticus xix. 18. Iamblichus de Pythag. vita, c. 16 and 33: +Philian\nde diaphanestata panton pros hapantas Pythagoras paredoke+. Terence,\nHeaut. I., 1, 25: \"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.\"\nQuintilian, Declamations, quoted by Denis. Juvenal, Sat. xv.\n140-142:--\n\n          \"Quis enim bonus ...\n    Ulla aliena sibi credat mala?\"\n\nLucan, Pharsalia, I. 60, 61:--\n\n    \"Tunc genus humanum positis sibi consulat armis\n    Inque vicem gens omnis amet.\"\n\nCicero, de Legibus i. 15: \"Nam haec nascuntur ex eo, quia natura\npropensi sumus ad diligendos homines, quod fundamentum juris est.\"\nAlso de Republica, iii. 7, 7 (fragment): \"Quae virtus, praeter\nceteras, tota se ad alienas porrigit utilitates et explicat.\" Marcus\nAntoninus, vii, 31: +Phileson ton anthropinon genos+. Epictetus, B.\nIII., c. xxiv.: +Hoti ho kosmos houtos mia polis esti ... panta de\nphilon mesta, proton men Theon, eita kai anthropon, physei pros\nallelois okeiomenon+.\n\n[D] Dhammapada (tr. by Max Mueller), in Rogers' Buddhagosha's Parables.\nAkhlak-i-Jalaly (tr. by Thompson), p. 441. Saadi's Gulistan (tr. by\nRoss), p. 240; (tr. by Gladwin, Am. ed.), p. 209. Proverbs xxv. 21.\nPlato, Gorgias, Sec. 78: +Aei ton adikounta tou adikoumenou athlioteron\neinai+. Crito, Sec. 10: +Hos oudepote orthos echontos oute tou adikein\noute tou antadikein+. Cleobulus in Diog. Laertius, B. I., Sec. 91: +Elege\nte ton philon dein euergetein, hopos e mallon philos. ton de echthron,\nphilon poiein+. Pittacus in Diog. Laertius, B. I., Sec. 78: +Philon me\nlegein kakos, alla mede echthron+. Val. Maximus, iv. 2, 4: \"Quia\nspeciosius aliquanto injuriae beneficiis vincuntur quam mutui odii\npertinacia pensantur.\" Max. Tyrius, Diss. II.: +Kai men ei ho adikon\nkakos poiei, ho antipoion kakos ouden etton poiei kakos, kan\namynetai+. Plutarch's Morals (tr. by Goodwin, I., 293). Epictetus, B.\nIV., c. 23: +Dairesthai dei auton, hos onon, kai dairomenon philein\nautous tous dairontas, hos patera panton, hos adelphon+. Marcus\nAntoninus, Medit. v. 31. vii. 22: +Idion anthropon philon kai tous\nptaiontas.... Eis hosous de agnomonas eugnomon egenes+.\n\n[E] Balmes, Protestantism and Catholicity, c. xxvii. and note.\nMackenzie's Iceland, p. 26. De Quincey, Autobiographical Sketches, p.\n17, and Essay on the Essenes. The condemnation of Huc's book is\nmentioned by Max Mueller, Chips, &c., I., 187.\n\n[F] \"Nec hoc ullis Mosis libris debent. Ante anima quam prophetia.\nAnimae enim a primordio conscientia Dei dos est.\"--_Tertullian_, _adv.\nMarcion_, 1, 10.\n\n+Hoi meta Logou biosantes christianoi eisi, kan atheoi enomisthesan,\nhoion en Hellesi men Sokrates kai Herakleitos kai hoi homoioi autois,\nk. t. l.+--_Justin Martyr_, _Apol._ i. 46.\n\n+Pros de kai hoti ho autos theos amphoin tain diathekain choregos, ho\nkai tes Hellenikes philosophias doter tois Hellesin, di' hes ho\npantokrator par' Hellesi doxazetai, parestesen, delon de\nkanthende.+--_Clem. Alex. Strom._, VI. v. 42.\n\n\"Totam igitur veritatem et omne divinae religionis arcanum philosophi\nattigerunt.\"--_Lactantius_, _Inst._ viii. 7.\n\n\"Ut quivis arbitretur, aut nunc Christianos philosophos esse, aut\nphilosophos fuisse jam tunc Christianos.\"--_Minucius Felix_,\n_Octavius_, c. xx.\n\n\"Res ipsa, quae nunc religio Christiana nuncupatur, erat apud antiquos,\nnec defuit ab initio generis humani, quousque Christus veniret in\ncarnem, unde vera religio, quae jam erat, coepit appellari\nChristiana.\"--_Augustine_, _Retr._, i. 13.\n\n\"Natura omnibus Dei inesse notitiam, nec quemquam sine Deo nasci, et\nnon habere in se semina sapientiae et justitiae reliquarumque\nvirtutum.\"--_Hieron._, _Comm. in Gal._, I., 1, 15.\n\n[G] +Ego de phoboumai me hypo philanthropias doko autois ho ti per\necho ekkechymenos panti andri legein.+--_Plato_, _Euthyphron_, Sec. 3.\n\n\"Quodque a Graecis +philanthropia+ dicitur, et significat dexteritatem\nquandam benevolentiamque erga omnes homines promiscuam.\"--_Aulus\nGellius_, B. XIII., c. xvi. 1.\n\nHow much more frank and scholarlike are the admissions of Dean Milman:\n\"If we were to glean from the later Jewish writings, from the\nbeautiful aphorisms of other Oriental nations, which we cannot fairly\ntrace to Christian sources, and from the Platonic and Stoic philosophy\ntheir more striking precepts, we might find, perhaps, a counterpart to\nalmost all the moral sayings of Jesus.\"--_Hist. Christianity_, B. I.,\nc. iv., Sec. 3.\n\n[H] Digby's Ages of Faith, II., 174, 178, 287-289, &c. Digby's\ninconsistent method has ample precedent in the early Christian\napologists. Tertullian, for instance, glorifies the Christian martyrs,\nand then, to show that they are not foolish or desperate men, cites\nthe precedents of Regulus, Zeno, Mutius Scaevola, and many others\n(Apol. c. 50)!\n\n[I] Compare Neander (Am. tr.), I., 450. Huc's Thibet, II., 50.\nTennent's Christianity in Ceylon, pp. 219, 220.\n\n[J] Capt. Canot, pp. 153, 180, 181. Wilson's Western Africa, 75, 79,\n92. Richardson's Great Desert, II., 63, 129. Johnstone's Abyssinia,\nI., 267; Allen's Niger Expedition, I., 383. Du Chaillu, Ashango Land,\nxiii., 129. Barth, _passim_, especially (I., 310): \"That continual\nstruggle, which always continuing further and further, seems destined\nto overpower the nations at the very equator, if Christianity does not\npresently step in to dispute the ground with it.\" He says \"that a\ngreat part of the Berbers of the desert were once Christians, and that\nthey afterwards changed their religion and adopted Islam\" (I., 197,\n198). He represents the slave merchants of the interior as complaining\nthat the Mohammedans of Tunis have abolished slavery, but that\nChristians still continue it (I., 465). \"It is difficult to decide how\na Christian government is to deal with these countries, where none but\nMohammedans maintain any sort of government\" (II., 196). \"There is a\nvital principle in Islam, which has only to be brought out by a\nreformer to accomplish great things\" (I., 164).\n\nReade, in his Savage Africa, discusses the subject fully in a closing\nchapter, and concludes thus: \"Mohammed, a servant of God, redeemed the\neastern world. His followers are now redeeming Africa.... Let us aid\nthe Mohammedans in their great work, the redemption of Africa.... In\nevery Mohammedan town there is a public school and a public library.\"\nHe complains that Christianity utterly fails to check theft, but\nMohammedanism stops it entirely (pp. 135, 579, English ed.).\n\nFor Asiatic Mohammedanism see Sleeman's Recollections, II., 164, and\ncompare Tennent's Christianity in Ceylon, p. 330, and Max Mueller's\nChips from a German Workshop, II., 351. The London Spectator, in\nApril, 1869, stated that \"Mohammedanism gains thousands of converts\nevery year,\" and thus described the activity of its organization, the\nstatement being condensed in the Boston Journal: \"Of all these\nsocieties, the largest, the most powerful, the most widely diffused,\nis the Mohammedan population. Everywhere it has towns, villages,\ntemples, places within which no infidel foot ever is or can be set.\nIts missionaries wander everywhere, keeping up the flame of\nIslam,--the hope that the day is coming, is at hand, when the white\ncurs shall pass away, and the splendid throne which Timour won for the\nfaithful shall again be theirs. They have their own papers, their own\nmessengers, their own mail carriers, and they trust no other.\nRepeatedly, before the telegraph was established, their agents\noutstripped the fastest couriers the government could employ. The\ngovernment express was carried by Mussulmans, who allowed the private\nmessengers to get on a few hours ahead. Every dervish, moollah, or\nmissionary, is a secret agent. This organization, which has always\nexisted, has of late been drawn closer, partly as the result of their\ngreat mutiny, which taught the priests their hold over the soldiery,\npartly by the expiration of the 'century of expiation,' and partly by\nthe marvelous revival of the Puritan element in Mohammedanism itself.\"\n\n[K] See Southey's Wesley, chap. III. Report of Joint Delegation of the\nSociety of Friends, 1869. Hedge's Primeval World of Hebrew Tradition,\np. 83. Coffin's New Way Round the World, pp. 270, 308, 361. Colden's\nHistory of the Five Indian Nations (dedication). He says also, \"We\nhave reason to be ashamed that those infidels, by our conversation and\nneighborhood, are become worse than they were before they knew us.\" It\nappears from this book (as from other witnesses), that one of the\nworst crimes now practiced by the Indians has sprung up since that\nday, being apparently stimulated by the brutalities practiced by\nwhites towards Indian women. Colden says, \"I have been assured that\nthere is not an instance of their offering the least violence to the\nchastity of any woman that was their captive\" (Vol. I., p. 9, 3d ed.).\nCompare Parkman's Pontiac, II., 236.\n\n[L] \"Cum ea quae Romani polluerant fornicatione, nunc mundent barbari\ncastitate.\"--_Salvian de Gubern. Dei._ ed. 1623, p. 254, quoted in\nGilly's Vigilantius, p. 360.\n\n[M] \"Neither history nor more recent experience can furnish any\nexample of the long retention of pure Christianity by a people\nthemselves rude and unenlightened. In all the nations of Europe,\nembracing every period since the second century, Christianity must be\nregarded as having taken the hue and complexion of the social state\nwith which it was incorporated, presenting itself unsullied,\ncontaminated, or corrupted, in sympathy with the enlightenment or\nignorance or debasement of those by whom it had been originally\nembraced. The rapid and universal degeneracy of the early Asiatic\nchurches is associated with the decline of education and the\nintellectual decay of the communities among whom they were\nestablished.\"--_Tennent's Christianity in Ceylon_, p. 273. For the\ninfluence of Mohammedanism on the revival of letters in Europe, see\nAndres, Origine di ogni litteratura. Jourdain, Recherches critiques\nsur les traductions latines d'Aristote. Schmoelders, Ecoles\nphilosophiques entre les Arabes. Forster, Mohammedanism Unveiled.\nUrquhart, Pillars of Hercules. Lecky's Rationalism, II., 284.\n\n[N] \"Quid igitur nos antecellimus? Num ingenio, doctrina, morum\nmoderatione illos superamus? Nequaquam. Sed vera Dei agnitione,\ninvocatione et celebratione praestamus.\"--_Melancthon_, quoted by\nFeuerbach, Essence of Christianity (Eng. tr.) p. 284. He also cites\nthe passage from Luther.\n\n[O] Rabbi Wise's remarks may be found in the Report of the Free\nReligious Association for 1869, p. 118. For Swaamee Narain, see\nHeber's Journal, II., 109-121 (Am. ed.). For Ram Mohun Roy, see his\ntranslation of the Sama Veda (Calcutta, 1816), his two tracts on the\nburning of widows (Calcutta, 1818, 1820), and other pamphlets. Victor\nJacquemont wrote of him from Calcutta in 1830, \"Il n'est pas Chretien,\nquoi qu'on en dise.... Les honnetes Anglais l'execrent parce que,\ndisent-ils, c'est un affreux deiste.\"--_Letters_, I., 288.\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Note\n\nThe following amendments have been made:\n\n    Page 4--Budhhism amended to Buddhism--\"... read Buddha,\n    and you have Buddhism; ...\"\n\n    Page 4, footnote B--valuble amended to valuable--\"The\n    Parsee creed is given as above in a valuable article\n    ...\"\n\n    Page 9, footnote D--omitted closing bracket added--\"...\n    (tr. by Goodwin, I., 293).\"\n\n    Page 13--omitted opening quote added (cross-checked\n    against a different edition)--\"... description of\n    Patroclus furnishes \"language which might convey ...\"\"\n\n    Page 15, footnote J--Mohamedanism amended to\n    Mohammedanism--\"... fails to check theft, but\n    Mohammedanism stops it entirely ...\"\n\n    Page 15, footnote J--s amended to is--\"... is at hand,\n    when the white curs shall pass away, ...\"\n\n    Page 20--omitted closing quote added (cross-checked\n    against a different edition)--\"\"... has always\n    been accustomed,\" says the Roman Catholic Digby, ...\"\n\n    Page 23--gorgeeous amended to gorgeous--\"The priests\n    kneeled in gorgeous robes, ...\"\n\nAccent errors in the Greek text have been repaired without note. The\nfollowing amendments have also been made:\n\n    Page 9, footnote D--ton amended to tou--\"+Aei ton\n    adikounta tou adikoumenou athlioteron ...+\"\n\n    Page 9, footnote D--antadykein amended to\n    antadikein--\"+... tou adikein oute tou antadikein+\"\n\n    Page 9, footnote D--Slege amended to Elege--\"+Elege te\n    ton philon dein euergetein, ...+\"\n\n    Page 12, footnote G--to amended to ti--\"+...\n    philanthropias doko autois ho ti per echo ...+\"","title":"The Sympathy of Religions","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":9376}