The Pulpit Commentary — Genesis — Section 32

independent confinnntion of that which in this argument ho.a been derived eimply from the Scripture history of man, viz. that human law, in order to bo the baeie of nntional life, 11111st be thll nssertion of principles of the Divine order which rnnn'e nature, 11s n whole, recognises. I prefer to use the languagll of another BB Bn inde- J1C'n<lcnt testimony to this truth: Following Bunsen, as our latest and probably most trustworthy guide, 11 let us liRten to one or two of the utteranco~ of these sacred books which bear most closely on the point which concerns us. This is from the Shi-King: "' 'fhe opinion and judgment of Heaven is learned (reveals itself) through thll opinion and judgment of our people. Heaven's approval and disapproval (is recog- nised) through the approval and disappro,al of our people. An intimnto relation subsists between the upper and lower world. Oh, how careful should those be who goYern countries I ' " ~propos_ of this remarkable specimen of antediluvian(?) politics, Bunsen relates an mterestmg anecdote of our own day. Gutzlaff told him, he says, that II when, nfter the peace of Nankin, in 1845, the Emperor of China felt himself impelled t.o refuse his assent to the execution of that treaty by which the Tartar·. city of Canton was to be opened to foreigners, he justified hie repudiation by this great maxim of the sacred books. .And ' the voice of the people is the voice of God ' resounded once more through the whole empire. When the emperor's edict was publishc<l, and everywhere formed the subject of discussion, it was said to Gutzlaff by patriotic Chinese : ' That maxim of our sacred books is well known to us, it is our watchword ; ' but this was a new thing to us, that the Mandshee emperor should publicly appeal to this sacred text of the Scriptures, which testifies against himself,'.' Dy what qualifications our primeval ancestors-if such they were-guarded this pro- found but perilous maxim against the false interpretations which it has received, and still receives, amongst ourselves, we are not informed. But it surely is o. Btriking instance of the co11.sen.BU8 of mankind in their anthropological ci:mceptions, that .a maxim which embodies so much, both of the truth and all the fafoehood of modern politics, should have been familiar to the ears of what there is reason to believe was the oldest civilised community. * * * * In a subsequent passage he thus sums up their wisdom: "If we sum up the whole, we find one thought continually recurring in the works of all those sages, as the root-idea of the ancient system, n.nd we may express it thus :-There is a law which governs the .All in nature and in man, and this one law is reasonable. Thus, indeed, it had been said by Meng-Zo, the renowned successor of Confucius, in the fourth century before our era, ' He who knows his own nature, and that of all things, knows what heaven is; for heaven is, indeed, the inward essence and the vital energy· of all things.' This thought is the dowry of the Chinese intellect in the general history of man; the coru:eption of a Kosmos in, not above, the various objects, which, how- ever, attains personality only in the human min.d. Man's life is to be orderly, ljkE;I that of nature ; the spi,ere of this life in which_ the Chinese recognise so111etlung Divine is that of the family; the bond between parents and children is to ,him the m;st sacred of all bonds." In these two conceptions-of the dignity of the person on the one hand, and the sacredness of paternal authority and filial obe- dience on the other-we have the secret of that marvellous length of days which, notwithstanding all their fa.ultB, has been granted to this strange people. * * * * Letit it should be supposed that the view which I have here presented rests on a single authority, it may be proper that I should_ mention that to whatever extent Baron Bunsen's view of the autochthonous character of the Chinese may be peculiar, his opinion on the point with which we are concerned .is _the oonimon opinion. .All are agreed that the history of Confucius is the most faithful ~xpres- £ion of the national minJ, and that that teaching was based on the revelat10ns_ of our common nature. " I teach you nothing," he says, "but .what you might learn yuurselves. viz. the observance of tho three fundamental laws ·of relation between sovereign 'and subj<2:ct, father and child, husband and wife ; a~d the five e~pital virtues, Wliversal charity, impartial justice, conformity to r·eremomes and cstnbh~hed asagee, rectitude of heart and min<l, and pure since1i1y." 1 1 Lo1imer'e 'Institutes of Law,' pp. ! 'l, 91,  INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCil. XIX