268 



REV. F. STORPvS TURNER, B.A., ON MENCIUS. 



clearly to trace the doctrines he held and his methods of applying 

 them. I will not refer to his political doctrines, or the methods he 

 followed in his endeavour to reform rulers and courts, but his 

 doctrine of God is remarkable. The books which Confucius 

 edited and passed on, the great books which commonly bear his 

 name, were not, as is well known, written by him. These same 

 books, which Mencius made the foundation of his teaching, were 

 pervaded with high monotheism. Indeed, China presents a 

 striking illustration of the falsity of that teaching so rife in 

 modern days that the religious condition of ancient men was that 

 of fetishism or polytheism. China to-day abounds in idols, but 

 the idolatry we see there is a degradation and a debasement of 

 the conception of God which is found in all the ancient literature 

 of the land. All the great attributes of the Jehovah of the Old 

 Testament are found to be the attributes of Shang-ti, the Supreme 

 JRuler of ancient China. 



Mencius' doctrine of man has also been very clearly set forth in 

 the paper. The reader of the writings of Mencius would conclude that 

 the Ideal Man was one who dwelt in love, who lived with propriety > 

 who walked in righteousness, who, when he rose to office, practised 

 his principles for the people's good, but, if disappointed in reaching 

 office, practised his principles for himself alone. He was one who 

 could not be led by riches and honour into a life of dissipation, 

 SjJid who could not be made to swerve from the right by poverty or 

 low estate : one who could not even be forced by want from the 

 qualities of greatness ; he was an Ideal Man. The nature of man 

 he held to be good ; the tendencies of man's nature were towards 

 goodness ; the constituents of his nature were benevolence, 

 righteousness, propriety and wisdom. Men have these four 

 principles just as they have four limbs. But the writer of the 

 paper has shown us that if we interpret these things naturally 

 and literally we misunderstand the teaching of Mencius, just as 

 in our own day if we interpret the doctrine of " total depravity " 

 literally it would be contradicted by common-sense ; for if men 

 were totally depraved they could not possibly get worse and 

 worse. What is really meant by the doctrine is that there is 

 not a single faculty of man's nature or power of his mind 

 which has not ])een exercised in wrong-doing, so that in this 

 sense his nature is totally depraved ; and Mencius was only 



