development
when the common individual counts for nothing, the only possible
conception of the authority of law is that it proceeds from a superior
being--the highest ruler. And in order to secure the full advantage of
authority, the supreme ruler must be raised to the highest possible
pinnacle, must be apotheosized. That national laws should be the
product of the unvalued units which compose the nation was unthinkable
in an age when the worth of the individual was utterly unrecognized.
The apotheosis of the Emperor was neither an unintelligible nor an
unreasonable practice. But now that an individualistic, democratic
organization of society has been introduced resting on a principle
diametrically opposed to that of apotheosis, a struggle of most
profound importance has been inaugurated. Does moral or even national
authority really reside in the Emperor? The school-teachers are
finding great difficulty in teaching morality as based exclusively on
the Imperial Edict. The politicians of Japan are not content with
leaving all political and state authority to the Emperor. Not long ago
(June, 1898), for the first time in Japan, a Cabinet acknowledging
responsibility to a political party took the place of one
acknowledging responsibility only, to the Emperor. For this end the
politicians have been working since the first meeting of the national
Diet. Which principle is to succeed, apotheosis and absolute Imperial
sovereignty, or individualism with democratic sovereignty? The two
cannot permanently live together. The struggle is sure to be intense,
for the question of authority, both political and moral, is inevitably
involved.
The parallel between Japanese and Roman apotheosis is interesting. I
can present it no better than by quoting from that valuable
contribution to social and moral problems, "The Genesis of the Social
Conscience," by Prof. H.S. Nash: "Yet Rome with all her greatness
could not outgrow the tribal principle.... We find something that
reveals a fundamental fault in the whole system. It is the apotheosis
of the Emperors. The process of apotheosis was something far deeper
than servility in the subject conspiring with vanity in the ruler. It
was a necessity of the state. There was no means of insuring the
existence of the state except religion. In the worship of the Caesars
the Empire reverenced its own law. There was no other way in which
pagan Rome could guarantee the gains she had made for civilization.
Y
|