Buddhism and Christianity: A Parallel and a ContrastScott, Archibald
Religion
Buddhism and Christianity: A Parallel and a Contrast
Scott, Archibald
Buddhism -- Relations -- Christianity; Christianity and other religions -- Buddhism
The conversion of the most of Eastern Asia was the work of the Northern
or more corrupt Buddhism. Southern Buddhism, like the orthodox Eastern
Church, which contented itself with its evangelistic achievements among
the Goths, and its Nestorian missions, soon exhausted its propagative
force. The introduction of the religion into Burma, Siam, and the
adjacent kingdoms, may be said to sum up its triumphs. Northern
Buddhism, on the other hand, ran from the beginning of our era a course
of unchecked triumphs. In the close of the fourth century it spread from
China to Corea, and in the sixth it reached Japan. Previous to this it
entered the isolated regions of Tibet, more welcomed than resisted by
the demonolatrous inhabitants on account of the adulterated form in
which it presented itself. There, after a struggle for some two
centuries, it succeeded, about the period when Islam was beginning its
conquests elsewhere, in securing strong royal support. After
experiencing for many generations the vicissitudes of popularity and
persecution, the conquests of Genghiz, and the strong favour of Kublai,
his greatest successor, established its hierarchy as supreme, and in
spite of changes of dynasty, it has there dominated the whole relations
of life in a manner like unto, but to an extent far beyond, the wildest
dreams of Rome’s most ambitious Pope.[339]
It thus appears that Buddhism in the second period of its history, and
after it had succeeded in winning the support of powerful kings, reached
its furthest extension and achieved its grandest conquests.
Christianity, on the other hand, was more rapidly diffused in the
primitive than in the subsequent ages. Tested by its intensive hold upon
the nations, it had only nominally converted the Roman Empire by the end
of the fourth century. Gibbon’s estimate of the number of Christians
within it, is acknowledged by friendly authorities,[340] like Bishop
Lightfoot, to err if at all on the side of excess. During the reign of
Constantine, probably not a twentieth of the whole population of the
Empire were Christians, even by profession. After this period, no doubt,
the proportion must have greatly increased, for the barbarous hordes
that poured downwards in successive deluges over the South were
converted so suddenly and so silently that “scarce a legend remains to
tell the tale.” In regard, however, to the conversion of heathen Europe,
it is a mistake to suppose that the missionaries had only to come, and
see, and conquer. The conversion of England by the Roman monks, and of
Ireland, Scotland, and Wales by Oriental and, it is said, Arian
missionaries, cannot be said to have been accomplished before the close
of the seventh century. Afterwards, the conversion of Central and
Northern Germany occupied the Celtic and British missionaries for two
centuries. The conversion of the Scandinavians, beginning in the ninth,
could not be said to have been effected till the middle of the eleventh
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account