ÀҾ˹éÒ˹ѧÊ×Í
PDF
ePub

Instead of choosing those articles which are truly taught by Christ, he chooses those which his own mind suggests to him. Thus he perverts the doctrines of Christ, and in consequence deserves not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but to be banished from the world by death. Moreover, the heretic is an apostate, a traitor who may be forced to pay the vow which he has once taken. The extreme rigour of this sophistical argumentation can only be understood in connection with its historical surroundings. It presupposes a Church which not only regards itself as the sole possessor of divine truth, but whose cohesion and power depend upon a strict adherence to its doctrines. Nor was it a religious. motive only that induced Christian sovereigns to persecute heretics. Certain heresies, as Manichæism and Donatism, were expressly declared to affect the common welfare;* and the Frankish kings treated heretics not only as rebels against the Church, but as traitors to the State, as confederates of hostile Visigoths or Burgundians or Lombards."

3

Whilst intolerance is a characteristic of all monotheistic religions which attribute human passions and emotions to their godhead, polytheism is by nature tolerant. A god who is always used to share with other gods the worship of his believers cannot be a very jealous god. The pious Hennepin was struck by the fact that Red Indians were "incapable of taking away any person's life out of hatred to his religion." Among the natives of the African Gold and Slave Coasts, though a man must show outward respect for the gods so as not to provoke calamities, he may worship many gods or none, just as he pleases. "There is perfect liberty of thought in matters of religion. ... At this stage, man tolerates any form of religion that tolerates others; and as he thinks it perfectly

[blocks in formation]

natural that different people should worship different gods, he does not attempt to force his own personal opinions upon anyone, or to establish conformity of ideas." On the Slave Coast even a sacrilege committed by a European is usually regarded with indifference, as the gods of a country are supposed to be concerned about the actions of the people of that country only. "The characteristics of Natural Religion," says Sir Alfred Lyall, "the conditions of its existence as we see it in India, are complete liberty and material tolerance; there is no monopoly either of divine powers or even of sacerdotal privilege." In China the hatred of foreigners has not its root in religion. The Catholics residing there were left undisturbed until they began to meddle with the civil and social institutions. of the country; and the difficulty in persuading the Chinese to embrace Christianity is said by a missionary to be due to their notion that one religion is as good as another provided that it has a good moral code. Among the early Greeks and Romans it was a principle that the religion of the State should be the religion of the people, as its welfare was supposed to depend upon a strict observance of the established cult; but the gods cared for external worship rather than for the beliefs of their worshippers, and evidently took little notice even of expressed opinions. Philosophers openly despised the very rites which they both defended and practised; and religion was more a pretext than a real motive for the persecutions of men like Anaxagoras, Protagoras, Socrates, and Aristotle." So also the measures by which the Romans in earlier times repressed the introduction of new religions were largely suggested by worldly considerations; "they grew out of that intense national spirit which sacrificed every other

Ellis, Yoruba-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast, p. 295. See also Idem, Ewe-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast, p. 81; Monrad, Skildring af Guinea-Kysten, p. 28; Kubary, Die Verbrechen und das Strafverfahren auf den Pelau-Inseln,' in Original-Mittheil. aus d. ethnol. Abtheil, d. königl. Museen zu Berlin, i. 90.

2 Ellis, Ewe-speaking Peoples, p. 81. 3 Lyall, Natural Religion in India, P. 52.

4 Davis, China, ii. 7. Cf. Edkins, op. cit. p. 178.

5 Edkins, op. cit. p. 75.

6 See Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten Griechen, ii. 24 sqq.

interest to the State, and resisted every form of innovation, whether secular or religious, that could impair the unity of the national type, and dissolve the discipline which the predominance of the military spirit and the stern government of the Republic had formed." It has also been sufficiently proved that the persecutions of the Christians during the pagan Empire sprang from motives quite different from religious intolerance. Liberty of worship was a general principle of the Imperial rule. That it was denied the Christians was due to their own aggressiveness, as also to political suspicion. They grossly insulted the pagan cult, denouncing it as the worship of demons, and every calamity which fell upon the Empire was in consequence regarded by the populace as the righteous vengeance of the offended gods. Their proselytism disturbed the peace of families and towns. Their secret meetings aroused suspicion of political danger; and this suspicion was increased by the doctrines they professed. They considered the Roman Empire a manifestation of Antichrist, they looked forward with longing to its destruction, and many of them refused to take part in its defence. The greatest and best among the pagans spoke of the Christians as "enemies," or "haters of the human race." "

2

The same difference in toleration between monotheistic and polytheistic religions shows itself in their different attitudes towards witchcraft. A monotheistic religion is not necessarily averse from magic; its god may be supposed to have created magical as well as natural energy, and also to have given mankind permission to utilise it in a proper manner. Both Christianity in its earlier phases and Muhammedanism are full of magical practices expressly sanctioned by their theology-for instance, the use made of sacred words and of the relics of saints. But besides this sort of magic there is another kind-witchcraft, in the narrow sense of the term,-which is ascribed to the

Lecky, History of European Morals, i. 403. Cf. Dio Cassius, Historia Romana, lii. 36.

Lecky, op. cit. i. 408 sqq. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 346 sqq. See also supra, i. 345 sq.; ii. 178 sq.

1

In Rome, also, what was deemed harmless magic was left undisturbed, whereas, according to the Law of the Twelve Tables,' he who affects another by magical arts or with poisonous drugs" is to be put to death; and during the Empire persons were severely persecuted for political astrology or divination practised with a view to discovering the successors to the throne.2 Plato writes in his Laws': "He who seems to be the sort of man who injures others by magic knots or enchantments or incantations or any of the like practices, if he be a prophet or divine, let him die; and, if not being a prophet, he be convicted of witchcraft, as in the previous case, let the court fix what he ought to pay or suffer." As Mr. Lecky justly remarks, both in Greece and Rome the measures taken against witchcraft seem to have been almost entirely free from religious fanaticism, the magician being punished because he injured man and not because he offended God. Sometimes we find even among a polytheistic people that sorcery is particularly opposed by its priesthood; but the reason for this is no doubt hatred of rivals rather than religious zeal. Miss Kingsley, however, does not think that the dislike of witchcraft in West Africa at large has originally anything to do with the priesthood."

3

5

The religious intolerance which has accompanied the rise of monotheism is, as we have just observed, the result of the nature attributed to its godhead. But the evolution of religion does not end with the triumph of a jealous and irritable heavenly despot. There is a later stage where men believe in a god or supernatural power which is absolutely free from all human weakness, and in such a religion intolerance has no place. It has been said that the tolerant spirit of Buddhism is due to religious

[blocks in formation]

7

Kingsley, West African Studies, p. 135 sq.

7 Hardy, Eastern Monachism, p. 412. Monier-Williams, Buddhism, p. 126. Waddell, Buddhism of Tibet, p. 568. Edkins, Religion in China, p. 127. Gutzlaff, Sketch of Chinese History, i. 70. Forbes, British Burma, p. 322 sq.

indifference, but the original cause of it seems to be the absence of a personal god; and the increasing tolerance of modern Christianity is undoubtedly connected with the more ethical view it takes of the Deity when compared with the opinions of earlier ages. It should be remembered, however, that religious toleration does not mean passive indifference with regard to dissenting religious ideas. The tolerant man may be a great propagandist. He may do his utmost to eradicate, by means of persuasion, what he considers to be a false belief. He may even resort to stronger measures against those who do mischief in the name of their religion. But he does not persecute anybody for the sake of his faith ; nor does he believe in an intolerant and persecuting god.

Supernatural beings, according to the belief of many races, desire to be worshipped not only because they depend upon human care for their subsistence or comfort, but because worship is an act of homage. We have seen that sacrifice, after losing its original significance, still survives as a reverent offering. So also prayer is frequently a tribute to the self-regarding pride of the god to whom it is addressed. A supplication is an act of humility, more or less flattering to the person appealed to and especially gratifying where, as in the case of a god, the granting of the request entails no deprivation or loss, but on the contrary is rewarded by the worshipper. Moreover, the request is very commonly accompanied by reverential epithets or words of eulogy; and praise, nay even flattery, is just as pleasant to superhuman as to human ears. Gods are addressed as great or mighty, as lords or kings, as fathers or grandfathers. A prayer of the ancient Peruvians began with the following words :"O conquering Viracocha! Ever present Viracocha! Thou art in the ends of the earth without equal! "s

1 Forbes, op. cit. p. 322. Cf. Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures on National Religions and Universal Religions, p. 290.

2 See Brinton, Religions of Primitive

Peoples, p. 105.

3

3 de Molina, 'Fables and Rites of the Yncas,' in Narratives of the Rites and Laws of the Yncas, p. 33.

« ¡è͹˹éÒ´Óà¹Ô¹¡ÒõèÍ
 »