having the better things, might thereby become helpers in making the many perfect.

A very close and vital relation is here recognized between morals and religion. Some races have been known, it is asserted, in whose religion there was no ethical element. But this assertion is open to question. If it be true, these related facts should also be noted:

(1) Those races were very low in primitive life.

(2) Their religion was crude and formal.

(3) As time passed, this so-called non-ethical religion tended to become ethical.6

It is also asserted occasionally that morality exists or may exist apart from religion. If this be true one may be justified in the conclusion that this socalled morality is of a very fragmentary and incomplete sort. Both reason and history seem to lead to the conclusion that complete morality begins and ends in religion, and that true religion must incorporate morality as a sine qua non. The records of human experience certainly show that whenever and wherever morals and religion have been divorced both have suffered.

The most remarkable thing about the great ethical systems of the world, Christian and non-Christian, is to be found not in their differences but in their wonderful and fundamental agreements. The differences, unfortunately, have too often been the things emphasized, while the essential content has

6. See Myers's History as Past Ethics, pages 45, 46.

been overlooked or minimized. But even so, the various distinctive qualities of the great religions would well comport in a single character, giving it harmony, balance, and strength. The Chinese emphasized filial obedience and reverence for superiors; the Japanese emphasized patriotic loyalty; the Buddhists emphasized the duty of seeking knowledge and of universal benevolence; the Persians emphasized the virtues of truth and industry; the Jews recognized the voice of Jehovah and received from him the Decalogue, which teaches duty to God and man. Which of these great and good principles shall we ignore or set aside?

Not one. We endeavor to comprehend and emphasize them all in the exalted principle of love— love to God and love to man.

What is the significance of all this? Not any depreciation, surely, of any great system of teaching. Is it not rather the general fitness and validity of moral law? Does it not lead to the conviction that all moral codes are derived from the same great source? Does it not agree with the teaching that all nations are of one blood? Does it not point to the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man? And is not our thesis, that humanity is good rather than bad, and always has been so, consistent with it all?

This is no challenge to theological controversy. It is not to be construed as a declaration in any sense that humanity alone can make humanity perfect. But it is a forthright declaration of confidence

in human nature and human destiny. It is deemed a foundation for optimism and effort in working toward the solution of all our great civic and social problems, local, national, and international.

It must have been some such uplifting principle as this that inspired the words of Mr. Lloyd-George at Westminster on January 21, 1922:

"You talk of programs. There is one urgent program, one urgent item of a program. Let us inscribe it on our banners: 'Peace on earth and good will among men.'

"I am an optimist; I believe in my fellow-men made in the image of God, and that if you will bring them together to talk quietly reason prevails. Come face to face, and I have profound conviction and faith in the ultimate reason of man."

CHAPTER V

SOME GREAT TEACHERS OF ETHICS

"What greater or better gift can we offer the republic than to teach and instruct our youth?"

-Cicero.

Great teachers of ethics (good citizenship) have stood forth among men in all ages of civilization. We shall try in this chapter to learn the names and a few of the distinctive tenets of some of these great teachers.

1. CONFUCIUS

Confucius was the most famous of all the sages of China. His name, as we write it, is a Latinized form of the Chinese Kungfutze. He was born about the year 551 B. C., in the province that is now called Shantung, and died in or about the year 478. Thus he was a contemporary of Queen Esther, who saved the Jews in Persia, and of Miltiades, who commanded the Greeks in the battle of Marathon.

Confucius at the age of three, it is said, lost his father; but he was most carefully educated by his mother, being trained in accordance with the highest ideals of China. When he was twenty-two his great life work began. From that time until his death he was a teacher, traveling often from place to place. The work of those fifty years made for him a place of honor in the world. He taught ethics and politics

rather than religion, and was a conserver rather than a reformer. Through the influence of Confucius and his successors filial obedience, reverence for superiors, respect for ancient custom, and a consistent avoidance of extremes became controlling principles with the Chinese.

Some of the particular maxims of Confucius are these:

Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is death of the mind.

Riches and honor are what men desire; yet, except in accordance with right, they should not be enjoyed; poverty and degradation are what men dread; yet, except in accordance with right, they should not be avoided.

What the superior man seeks is in himself; what the small man seeks is in others.

The foundtaion of all good is the virtue of individual men.

Confucius also set forth the Golden Rule in the following negative form: What ye would not that others should do unto you, do ye not unto them.

2. BUDDHA

Buddha was the greatest teacher of ethics and religion in ancient India, and was almost exactly contemporary with Confucius, the Chinese sage. Unlike Confucius, Buddha was an avowed reformer. Born a prince, his name was Siddhartha. His fam