THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST IN JAPAN.
By B. O. Wade
Paul wrote that in the last days men would be “traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.” That the existing conditions in the ecclesiastical, social, and political circles of Japan meet this description should be apparent to the most casual observer. It is only necessary to cull a few facts from the abundance of evidence on hand to show that the policy that turned the United States from her original declarations is being pursued in Japan. For thus it is written: She shall say “to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast.” In this homage to the papacy the United States will not be alone. Concerning “many of the leading events of modern Japanese history,” a prominent leader declares, “It would not be boasting to say that the missionary has been no insignificant factor.” “It was a missionary that God raised up to interpret for Commodore Perry;” and from such arguments prayer-meetings have been held, councils called, and committees appointed to wait on the government, and to say that “in separating religion from all schools receiving privileges from the state, the government was striking a blow on the mouth of those who knew Japan better, and had been here longer, than many of those in high positions or offices; and who, more than any other, secured the Treaty Revision.” The result was that the government adhered to the principle that it was under no obligation to favor graduates of mission schools who desired to compete with those of the state institutions. Here the matter was dropped, the mission schools feeling greatly insulted, and the government being not a little plagued by the world’s criticism. This skirmish was scarcely over when the entire nation was stirred by the “Law of Religions,” originally intended to secure favor for Buddhism, but ultimately requiring Buddhist capital to defeat it, and prevent Christianity from securing “the benefits of the odds in its handicap race with Buddhism.” The bill was defeated February 18, 1900, by one hundred and twenty-one votes against one hundred. “The prevailing idea of those who voted against the bill, appears to have been that, in view of the importance of the matter contained therein, it would be advisable to keep the question open for twelve months more.” It was generally regretted that the explanation of the bill “was not intrusted to a more competent official, for then some of the wavering members would undoubtedly have been gained over to vote for it.” The law as a whole was supported by the press. The prevailing idea in the bill was the adjustment of all disputes in ecclesiastical circles by a “Religious Council” appointed by the government. It is believed “that a similar measure in a simpler form will be introduced at the next session of the Diet,” by which time the present investigation may have healed the wounds of the hurt ones, and the money question have been buried. The end to be gained by all this, as brought out by an editorial and “An Inconsistency” in some of the magazines and dailies, as well as by the teaching of the ages, is the “Sabbath and Society.” One important consideration in this agitation is the absence of the “civil” plea, it being advocated that the government should act as a parental and leading factor in the readjustment and development of a moral standard. A movement, regarded as the “greatest desideratum of the moment, for the purpose of national evangelization on a large scale,” is also on foot, and requires only twenty thousand dollars to start it on the run. The Catholic press, in summing up the educational, church, and state problems, maintains “that in Europe and America the attempt to divest education of all religious elements has failed,” and the only method for an adjustment of differences is “to bow to the church that distinguishes between truth and error.” In a book of two hundred and ten pages it discusses the state question, affirming that “genuine morality is the sole basis of national prosperity,” and “that nothing can take the place of a religion whose truth has been conclusively proved as a foundation for everything to rest on.” To meet and expose this whole system, God, in his love, has prepared a message, and intrusted it to men for proclamation. What is that message? You tell. Who are the people? You tell. Socrates said: “That man is idle who can undertake anything better than he is now doing.” Are you idle? B. O. WADE.