The Future of China by Editor

Pacific Press Publishing Association · Mountain View, California · Aug 13, 1912

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 39, No. 31.

The Future of China

By Editor

"Church and State Religion"

ONE of the great questions in the new republic of China is, Shall China have a state religion, and what shall it be? One of the periodicals which promises to become a leading journal is the "Republican Advocate of China," published weekly at Shanghai, the second number of which, June 15, has come to us. Among the questions discussed is the one above stated. The editor tells us that a large number of replies have been received, on all sides of the question. He prints three characteristic ones: one from the Rev. C. Spurgeon Medhurst, who advocates a state religion. The letter clearly shows that the writer does not understand the real questions at issue, and it contains very little of the American principle of separation of church and state. He declares that the American republic was founded by devout Christians, to whom state and religion were synonymous.

But state and religion were so far from being synonymous that the fathers of the American republic felt that it was absolutely necessary to place in the fundamental law the prohibition that Congress should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, and to declare that no religious test should ever be required of any citizen. But this writer argues that "circumstances in China are different. . . . The government dare not ignore the strength to be derived from the agreement of many minds, such as religion only supplies. To specify the nature of this state religion is more difficult. Personally, I believe China will only become a strong nation as she becomes a Christian nation, yet I should oppose the state recognition of Christianity." But it might be answered, If one is going to demand a state religion, why not take the best religion there is? Of course to him who understands it, there can be no true union of Christianity with the state; it is only a form of religion with the state that could be effected. Christianity is life, and not a matter of human law. This writer would have such a state religion with no other definition than "God is love," or "Love is God," with the ethics of the Golden Rule,—a sort of namby-pamby religion that would please nobody.

Another reply comes from "Gualterio," whom some may recognize as one of our own correspondents, Mr. W. E. Gillis. He states it this way:

"Should China have a state religion?" is the most vital issue now confronting the nation. To answer in the affirmative means to support a policy that puts a premium on hypocrisy and stultifies the mission of true religion. Should China have a state religion? — Never! The experiences of history forbid it. The voice of reason says No!"

"Gualterio" then refers to the various classes of government, — the divine right of kings, the old pagan form; and the second class, the papal dominations of Europe for 1,260 years, and the loss of millions of lives to witness to its deplorable régime. "The United States of America is a luminous example of the third class. Conceived and brought forth as the offspring of those who fled the persecutions of church domination in Europe, the government was launched with an entire divorce of church and state. That the result has been preeminently satisfactory is amply evidenced by the expansion of territory and people, education and wealth, in the brief period of 136 years. Here is proof that freedom in religion, as in labor, has the same inspiration of hope."

The third reply printed is from Mr. John Duroch, of the General China Tract Society, Hankow:

"I do not think there can possibly be two answers to the question which you have propounded to your readers. China should not have a state religion, and therefore there is no need to consider what that religion should be. In this respect China is no different from any other nation. No nation can have a state religion without discriminating against those of its people who are conscientiously opposed to that religion. You can have a state system of education, because all the people will accept the same system of secular instruction. These and such other functions as taxation, representation, etc., are properly within the control of the state. Religion is a personal matter, an affair of the individual conscience, and as such is absolutely above and beyond the control of the state. I am a Christian, but am firmly convinced that the worst thing China could do for Christianity would be to make that the state religion of China."

This is most excellent. They are brave, noble words, and we earnestly hope that such sentiments as that will prevail in the new republic. They have worked out satisfactorily in America, sad tho it is that there are now zealous men endeavoring to overthrow them. W.