o amount to a revolution. During two hundred and fifty years
Christianity was strictly forbidden on pain of extreme penalties. In
1872 the edict against Christianity was removed, free preaching was
allowed, and for a time it seemed as if the whole nation would become
Christian in a few decades; even non-Christians urged that
Christianity be made the state religion. What an amazing volte-face!
Religious liberty is now guaranteed by the constitution promulgated in
1888. There are those who assert that until Christianity invaded
Japan, religious freedom was perfect; persecutions were unknown. This
is a mistake. When Buddhism came to Japan, admission was first sought
from the authorities, and for a time was refused. When various sects
arose, persecutions were severe. We have seen how belief in
Christianity was forbidden under pain of death for more than two
hundred and fifty years. Under this edict, many thousand Japanese
Christians and over two hundred European missionaries were put to
death. Yet, on the whole, it may be said that Old Japan enjoyed no
little religious freedom. Indeed, the same man might worship freely
at all the shrines and temples in the land. To this day multitudes
have never asked themselves whether they are Shinto or Buddhist or
Confucianist. The reason for this religious eclecticism was the
fractional character of the old religions; they supplemented each
other. There was no collision between them in doctrine or in morals.
The religious freedom was, therefore, not one of principle but of
indifference. As Rome was tolerant of all religions which made no
exclusive claims, but fiercely persecuted Christianity, so Japan was
tolerant of the two religions that found their way into her territory
because they made no claims of exclusiveness. But a religion that
demanded the giving up of rivals was feared and forbidden.

New Japan, however, following Anglo-Saxon example, has definitely
adopted religious freedom as a principle. First tacitly allowed after
the abolition of the edict against Christianity in 1872, it was later
publicly guaranteed by the constitution promulgated in 1888. Since
that date there has been perfect religious liberty for the individual.

Yet this statement must be carefully guarded. If we may judge from
some recent decrees of the Educational Department, it would appear
that a large and powerful section of the nation is still ignorant of
the real nature and significance of "religious libe