« AnkstesnisTęsti »
located at Shanghai, and J. Stub- the College are also cheered by the bert, M.D., to be located at Nan- fact of a dozen of the leading king. The reports from the several students having come forward for stations showed slow but marked prayers, professed faith in Christ, progress. All are suffering from and given in their names to be the want of adequate foreign help, probationers in the Church. The Ningpo and Hang how being left Church Missionary Society has been with only one foreign missionary at reinforced by the return of Rev. J. each place, and Soochow with none R. Wolfe and wife, and the addition at all. The Report of the Press of Rev. J. Martin and Miss E. A. sbewed 14,929,000 pages as printed Goldie. for the British and Foreign Bible Society, 7,234,550 for the American YANGCHOW.-The American MethoBible Society, and 2,573,000 pages dist Episcopal Mission have occupied of tracts, &c., printed by the Press the handsome buildings erected in from its own funds. After adjourn that city some few years ago by ment, but before the final separation, the Inland Mission ; and Dr. E. P. came a letter from the Secretary in MacFarlane, formerly of the Church N. Y., informing the Mission that of Scotland Mission, Ichang, has the Board hoped to reinforce them commenced medical work in conduring the coming year to the extent nection with the above Mission, of three or four men. Not the least enjoyable of the proceedings was the KIUKIANG.-Mr. W.J. Hunnex, lato musical entertainment at the house of the Inland Mission, has entered of Mr. Fitch, and the monthly mis- the service of the American Methosionary conference at the house of dist Episcopal Mission,and is stationMr. Farnham. The former was by ed at Kiukiang. and for the members of the mission only, the latter, being more general, WACHANG.-Mr. H. Sowerby, late called forth larger numbers and was of the Inland Mission, entered the a very enjoyable and profitable oc- service of the American Episcopal casion. With 751 Church members Mission in February and is to be ander its care, 125 boarding 449 stationed at Wuchang: day scholars the mission enters upon the coming year with renewed zeal TIENTSIN.-The first meeting of the and confidence.
Tientsin Missionary Association was
held at the residence of the Rev. W.. Foochow.—The Home Church of F. Walker, on the 23rd January last, the American Methodist Mission has when a constitution was adopted and taken favorable action on the re. an Executive Committee appointed, commendations sent them concern- -Rev. L. W. Pilcher secretary. ing the Foochow Anglo-Chinese After these necessary preliminaries College. It has been decided to were completed Mr. Pilcher read a send out two more men, and $7,000 paper on Christianity and Chinese have been voted for the Theological Architecture.” In the discussion School. Those in connection with which followed the majority of the
spoakers took the opposite view to of the Canadian Presbyterian Misthat expressed in the paper. sion, returned to Tai-wan fu, after
an absence of two years.
Rev. D. Formosa.—On the 19th December, Smith, left in January for a visit Rev. Dr. Mackay, wife and child, home.
Notices of Recent Publications.
American Oriental Society. Proceedings at New Haven, Conn., October 26th,
1881. This Society is composed of dis- obtained by him in Peking. To each tinguished scholars and others who picture is added a short description are interested in Eastern countries. of tribe. The translations of several It holds semi-annual meetings at of these descriptions were read. which papers are read on subjects The paper by Prof. Whitney dispertaining to these lands. It will cusses a point connected with all interest many of the readers of the systems of idolatry. The worship Recorder to know that at the meet- of an idol implies that it is regarding in October, 1881, Prof. S. W. ed by the worshiper as omniscient, Williams, LL.D., was inducted into omnipresent or as possesing the atoffice of President of the Society tributes of a god. It is one of the to which he had been previously alsurdities of idolatry that there elected. The
papers which were read can be a plurality of such beings. at the last meeting of the Society We copy "in extensio” the suinwere as follows:-1. Notice of F. mary of this paper :Delitzsch's views as to the alleged We have long been accustomed to class site of Eden, by Prof. C. H. Toy, of religions as monotheistic and polytheistic,
according as they recognize the existence Cambridge. 2. On non-dipthongal of one personal God or of a plurality of e and o in Sanskrit, by Prof. Maurice such, and to call pantheistic a faith which,
rejecting the personality of a Creator, Bloomfield, of Baltimore, M.A. 3. accepts the creation itself as divine, or On the Aboriginal Miao-tsz' Tribes holds everything to be God. The last of
these is the one least definite in characters, of South-western China, with Re- and confessedly latest in the order of marks on the Nestorian Tablet of Si- development; nor bas it any popular or
ethuic value; it is essentially a philosophic ngan fu, by Prof. S. Wells Williams, creed, and limited to the class of philosoof New Haven. 4. On the so-called phers. The other two, monotheism and Henotheism of the Veda, by Prof. polytheism, divide between them the whole
great mass of the world's religions. As W. D. Whitney, of New Haven. to which of the two is the earlier, and The third and fourth papers are
foundation of the other, opinions are, and
will doubtless long or always remain, on subjects that interest readers in divided, in accordance with the views China. Prof. Williams exhibited
taken respecting the origin and first his
tory of the human race. But it does not forty water-colour paintings of fi- appear doubtful that they will settle down gures of as many tribes of Miao-tsz' into two forms : either man and his first
conditions of life are a miraculous crea. by a Chinese artist. They were tion, and monotheism a miraculous com.
tion between the two, nor any rivalry between them or other gods. This is a most important feature in the religion of the Veda, and has never been taken into consideration by those who have written on the history of ancient polytheism." In his later works, where he first introduces and reiterates and urges the special name henotheism, Müller's doctrine assumes this form: (Lect. on Sc. of Rel., p. 141) that a henotheistic religion "represents each deity as independent of all the rest, as the only deity present in the mind of the worshipper at the time of his worship and prayer," this character being "very prominent in the religion of the Vedic poet; and finally (Or. and Growth of Rel., lect. vi.), that henotheism is "a worship of single gods," and that polytheism is "a worship of many deities which together formn one divine polity, under the control of one supreme god."
munication to him, a revelation; or, if he is a product of secondary causes, of develop ment, and had to acquire his knowledge of the divine and his relations to it in the same way with the rest of his knowledge, namely by observation and reflection, then polytheism is necessarily antecedent to menotheism; it is simply inconceivable that the case should be otherwise-nor can we avoid allowing everywhere a yet earlier stage which does not even deserve the name of religion, which is only superstition.
Nearly all the religions of men are polytheistic; monotheisms are the rare exception: namely-1. The Hebrew monotheism, with its continuators, a. Chris tianity, and b. Mohammedanism; and 2. the Persian monotheism, or Zoroastrianism (so far as this does not deserve rather to be called a dualism): the former apparently has behind it a general Semitic polytheism; the latter certainly grows out of the Aryan or Indo-Iranian belief in many gods. That they should be isolated products of the natural development of human insight is entirely in harmony with other parts of human history: thus, for example, all races have devised instruments, but few have reduced the metals to service, and the subjugation of steam is unique; all races have acquired language, but few have invented writing: indeed, all the highest elements of civilization arise at single points, and are passed from one community to another.
A single author, of much influencenamely, M. Müller-has recently endeavored to introduce a new member, with a name, into this classification: he calls it henotheism (or kathenotheism), 'the worship of one god at a time,' as we may render it. The germ of his doctrine is to be found in his History of Ancient Sauskrit Literature; where, after speaking of the various gods of the Veda, he says (p. 532, 1st ed., 1859): “When these individual gods are invoked, they are not conceived as limited by the power of others, as superior or inferior in rank. Each god is to the mind of the supplicant as good as all [i. e. as any of ?] the gods. He is felt at the time as a real divinity-as supreme and absolute, in spite of the necessary limitations which, to our mind, a plurality of gods must entail on every single god. All the rest disappear for a moment from the vision of the poet, and he only who is to fulfil their desires stands in full light before the eyes of the worshippers." And later (p. 526), after quotation of specimens: "When Agni, the lord of fire, is addressed by the poet, he is spoken of as the first god, not inferior even to Indra. While Agni is invoked, Indra is forgotten; there is no competi
As regards the fundamental facts of Vedic worship, Müller's statements so exaggerate their peculiarity as to convey, it is believed, a wholly wrong impression. It is very far from being true in any general way that the worship of one Vedic god excludes the rest from the worshipper's sight; on the contrary, no religion brings its gods into more frequent and varied juxtaposition and combination. The different offices and spheres of each are in constant contemplation. They are addressed in pairs: Indra-Agni, Indra-Varuna, MitraVaruna, Heaven and Earth, Dawn and Night, and a great many more. They are grouped in sets: the Adityas, the Maruts, and so on. They are divided into gods of the heaven, of the atmosphere, of the earth. And they are summed up as "all the gods" (viqve devās), and worshipped as a body. Only, in the case of one or two gods often, and of a few others occasionally (and of many others not at all), the worshipper ascribes to the object of his worship attributes which might seem to belong to a sole god: never, indeed, calling him sole god, but extolling him as chief and mightiest of the gods, maker of heaven and earth, father of gods and men, and so on. This fact had been often enough noticed before Müller, but no one had had any difficulty in explaining it as a natural exaggeration, committed in the fervor of devotion. And it is in fact nothing else. This is evidenced by its purely occasional or even sporadic character, and by its distribution to its various objects. The office of Agni, as the fire, the god on earth, mediator and bearer of the sacrifice to the other gods, is as distinct as anything in Vedic religion, and the mass of his innumerable hymns are full of it; but he, in a few rare cases, is exalted by the ascription of more general and unlimited
attributes. The exaggerations of the worship of Soma are unsurpassed, and a whole Book (the ninth) of the Rig Veda is permeated with them: yet it is never forgot. ten that, after all, soma is only a drink, being purified for Indra and Indra's worshippers. The same exaltation forms a larger element in the worship of Indra, as, in fact, Indra comes nearest to the character of chief god, and in the later development of the religion actually attains in a certain subordinate way that character: but still, only as primus inter pares. These are typical cases. There is never a denial, never even an ignoring, of other and many other gods, but only a lifting up of the one actually in hand. And a plenty of evidence beside to the same effect is to be found. Such spurning of all limits in exalting the subject of glorification, such neglect of proportion and consistency, is throughout characteristic of the Hiudu mind. The AtharvaVeda praises (xi. 6) even the uchista, 'the remnant of the offering,' in a manner to make it almost supreme divinity: all sacrifices are in and through it, all gods and demigods are born of it, and so on; and its extollation of kāla, ‘time' (xix. 53, 54), is hardly inferior. And later, in epic story, every hero is smothered in laudatory epithets and ascriptions of attributes, till all individuality is lost; every king is master of the earth; every sage does penauce by thousands of years, acquires unlimited power, makes the gods tremble, and threatens the equilibrium of the universe.
But this is exceptional only in its degree. No polytheist anywhere ever made an exact distribution of his worship to all the divinities acknowledged by him. Circumstances of every kind give his devotion special direction: as locality, occupation, family tradition, chance preference. Conspicuous among "benotheists" is that assembly which "with one voice about the space of two hours cried out Great is Diana of the Ephesians!"-all other gods "disappeared for a moment from its vision." The devout Catholic, even, to no small extent, has his patron saint, his image or apparition of the Virgin, as recipient of his principal homage. If thus neither monotheism nor a monocratically ordered polytheism can repress this tendency, what exaggeration of it are we not justified in expecting where such restraints are wanting? And most of all, among a people so little submissive to checks upon a soaring imagination as the Indians?
Agni-worshippers and Varuna-worship pers and so on. The Vedic cultus includes and acknowledges all the gods together. Its spirit is absolutely that of the verse, curiously quoted by Müller among his proof-texts of henotheism: "Among you, O gods, there is none that is small, none that is young; you all are great indeed." That is to say, there are an indefinite number of individual (Müller prefers to call them "single") gods, independent, equal in godhood; and hence, each in turn capable of being exalted without stint. No one of them even arrives at supremacy in the later development of Indian religion; for that the name Vishnu is Vedic appears to be a circumstance of no moment. But, also according to the general tendencies of developing polytheism, there come to be supreme gods in the more modern period: Vishnu, to a part of the nation; Civa, to another part; Brahman, to the eclectics and harmonizers. The whole people is divided into sects, each setting at the head of the universe and specially worshipping one of these, or even one of their minor forms, as Krishna, Jagannatha, Durgā, Rāma.
Now it is to these later forms of Hindu religion, and to their correspondents elsewhere, that Müller would fain restrict the name of polytheism, To believe in many gods and in no one as of essentially superior rank to the rest is, according to him, to be a henotheist; to believe in one supreme god, with many others that are more or less clearly his underlings and ministers, is to be a polytheist! It seems sufficiently evident that, if the division and nomenclature were to be retained at all, the name would have to be exchanged. A pure and normal polytheism is that which is presented to us in the Veda; it is the primitive condition of polytheism, as yet comparatively undisturbed by theosophic reflection; when the necessity of order and gradation and a central govern. ing authority makes itself felt, there has been taken a step in the direction of monotheism; a step that must be taken before monotheism is possible, although it may, and generally does, fail to lead to such a result.
It may be claimed, then, that henotheism, as defined and named by its inven. tor, is a blunder, being founded on an erroneous apprehension of facts, and really implying the reverse of what it is used to designate. To say of the Vedic religion that it is not polytheistic but henotheistic, is to mislead the unlearned public with a juggle of words. The name and the idea cannot be too rigorously excluded from all discussions of the history of religionsIt is believed that they are in fact ignored by the best authorities.
The exaggeration of the Vedic poets never tends to the denial of multiple divinity, to the distinct enthronement of one god above the rest, or to a division of the people into Indra-worshippers and
Report of the Second Annual Convention of the American Inter-Seminary
Missionary Alliance. Held in Allegheny City, Pa., U.S.A., October 27-30,
1881. Pittsburgh, Pa., Nevio Brothers, 1881. The first convention of this Alliance owing to the influence of the diswas held October, 1880. The Alo cussions at the first and second liance is composed of the students conventions. There were some two in the various theological semi- hundred and fifty students present Daries in the U.S.A. The students at the last meeting. They were all of forty six seminaries connected greatly interested and benefited by with fifteen denominations are con- the discussion. They carried much nected with it. In these semi- of the interest of meeting to their naries there are over fifteen hundred respective seminaries. This Report, students; of this number some four which gives in full the papers
which hundred will finish their studies were read and the addresses which and go forth as Ministers of the were made and which has been Gospel next May. This shows how widely distributed is well calculatvery intimately this alliance is con- ed to deepen the impression and nected with the foreign missionary extend the influence of this last work. It presents the reasons why session of the Alliance. We wish the Alliance should have a promi- the Report a wide circulation and nent place in the sympathies and for the Alliance ever increasing inprayers of missionaries and all the fluence. The harvest is everywhere friends of missions. It is from the waiting the coming of the laborers. young men connected with this Al. God is saying to bis Churchi by his liance that we must look for mis- Providence in preparing the way, sionaries to comes from the United as well as in the last Conimand to States. Of those who left these his disciples ; “Go ye into all the seminaries last year, fifteen out of world and preach the Gospel to every hundred went as foreign mis every creature.” And we welcome sionaries. It is expected that a every plan which is adapted to enlist larger proportion of those who com- the sympathies and energies of the plete their studies in April, 1882, Church and her Ministry in this will go abroad. This result is largely great work of the Church.
The China Review: for November December, 1881. This number hardly sustains the of Ningpo. The remarks of Mr. well-established reputation of this Giles will not carry much weight journal. The first article is by Mr, with those who are acquainted with H. A. Giles, on the New Testament the character and attainments of in Chinese. The writer notices the those who were engaged in the version by the late distinguished preparation of these versions. Those Chinese scholar the Rey. W. H. lowever, who are interested in the Medhurst, D.D., and others; and revision of the Sacred Scriptures the one by the Rev. J. Goddard. 'will carefully consider auch noccara