of a religion having such characteristics to a social order in which “individualism” is the dominant principle, have not yet been widely recognized by writers on sociology.  These practices of the Protestant churches are, nevertheless, of inestimable value in the upbuilding both of the individual and of society.  And Japan needs these elements at the earliest possible date in order to supplement the new order of society which is being established.  Without them it is a question whether in the long run this new order may not prove a step downward rather than upward.

This completes our detailed study of Japanese moral characteristics as revealed alike in their ideals and their practices.  Let us now seek for some general statement of the facts and conclusions thus far reached.  It has become clear that Japanese moralists have placed the emphasis of their ethical thinking on loyalty; subordinated to this has been filial piety.  These two principles have been the pivotal points of Japanese ethics.  All other virtues flowed out of them, and were intimately dependent upon them.  These virtues are especially fitted to upbuild and to maintain the feudal order of society.  They are essentially communal virtues.  The first group, depending on and growing out of loyalty, was concerned with the maintenance of the larger communal unity, formerly the tribe, and now the nation.  The virtues connected with the second principle—­filial piety—­were concerned with the maintenance of the smaller unit of society—–­ the family.  Righteousness and duty, of which much was made by Japanese moralists, consisted in the observance of these two ideals.

The morality of individualism was largely wanting.  From this lack sprang the main defects of the moral ideal and of the actual practice.  The chief sins of Old Japan—­and, as a matter of fact, of all the heathen world, as graphically depicted by Mr. Dennis in his great work on “Christian Missions and Social Progress”—­were sins of omission and commission against the individual.  The rights of inferiors practically received no consideration at the hands of the moralists.  In the Japanese conception of righteousness and duty, the rights and value of the individual, as such, whatever his social standing or sex, were not included.

One class of defects in the Japanese moral ideal arose out of the feudal order itself, namely, its scorn of trade.  Trade had no vital relation to the communal unity; hence it found and developed no moral sanctions for its guidance.  The West conceives of business deceit as concerned not only with the integrity of the community, but also with the rights of the individual.  The moral ideals and sanctions for business honesty are therefore doubly strong with us.  The old order of Japan was in no way dependent for its integrity on business honor and honesty, and, as we have seen, individuals, as such, were not thought to have inherent rights.  Under such conditions, it is difficult to conceive how universal moral ideals and sanctions for business relations could be developed and maintained.