MR. HARE HONGI'S "STRIKING THEORY."

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 896, 16 August 1910, Page 8

MR. HARE HONGI'S "STRIKING THEORY."

Sir,—l have no wish to prolong' the controversy regarding Jlr. Hare Hongi's theory that the Christian story was known to the ancient Maoris. In any caso,, a detailed reply to Mr. Hongi s last two articles is unnecessary, inasmuch as in the main they consist of a mere repotitijn of iiis "pxrallels/'.'with a -few explanations and embellishments, with thn result that tie last stato is worse than the first, for one cannot now tell exactly how much is Maori legend and how much is Mr. Hcngi's interpretation. Jlr. Hongi appears to resent my criticism of Inn method of measurement. Dy generations, torgetting that 1 based my remarks as to the wide limits of possible variation on facts admitted by himself. He now places, all his tickets on the one measuring rod tbut serves his purpose best and ignores the others. 1 must remind him that by shutting his eyes to difficulties he does not remove them.

Mr. Hongi has not met my point as to the .enormous'difference from the historical poiut of view between a fluid myth which hns been handed down by word of mouth for somo 2000 years (according to Jlr. Hougi) without u scrap of literature, and the early Christian writings which carry us right back to the very contemporaries of Christ. For instance, some of St. Paul's epistles were written while many of the first disciples were still alive,' and tho higher critics tell us that St. Mark's gospel gives us the recollections of St. Peter hjmself.. But we can go even further back, for a careful analysis of the Gospels by modern methods shows that St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. Matthew have embodied in their writings a.lost document (generally called "Q"). proving that "Q" was already an authority when they wrote. Thus we have documentary authority for the historicity of tho "Founder of Christianity which carries us right back to the Primitive Palestinian Church.

The theory propounded by Mi'.- Hongl that both Christ and Tawhuki were solar heroes is opposed' (as far as the Founder of Christianity is concerned) to the almost unanimous verdict of the most advanced modern critical ■ scholarship. Mr. Hongi, has not dealt with this point. Ihere are far more striking' "parallels' , in other ancient religions than thoso In Maori mythology. The ' former,, do not consist of mere verbal, coincidences, but 'include such fundamental doctrines as the . Trinity, the creation, the Incarnation, sin,, sacrifice, and atonement, thn Resurrection, Baptism and Communion. Modern authorities on comparative religion tell us/that- these ideas have arisen independently at various times and in various parts of the world. If this is so, why should Maori "parallels" require a different and special explanation?. -

Mr. Hongi has made no attempt to suggest: a probable connecting link between the ancient' Maoris and the first, generation of Palestinian Christians. Some connection is necessary to support his theory that, the Gospel.story was known to the Maoris. ■ ,

Another difficulty which. Mr. Hongi has made no attempt to meet is this: The Gospel story resulted in the foundation of ono of the greatest institutions in the worlds history—the, Church; and 'has moulded the ethical' development of the greatest and most progressive Icivilisation the world has ever seen. The Tawhaki legend, on the other hand; has been barren of result. If both have a common origin, how is this fact to bo explained? i Mr. Hongi' has not overcome the very crucial objection to his theory to be found in the fact that the Tawhaki legend taken as a whole is utterly dissimilar to the Gospel account of the life of the Founder of Christianity. Isolated arid superficial verbal similarities, cannot make Up for this, fundamental ■ dissimilarity. Until the 1 above, and many other difficulties, have been satisfactorily explained, it cannot bo said that even the foundations of Mr. Hongi's "striking : theory" have been well and truly laid; —I am., etc., . ■ ■.. . . '■ " CRITIC.