Although never explicitly stated, a Darwinian distinction between the “high” and “more evolved” Christians and their “lower” Asian counterparts persisted throughout the duration of the Parliament. One delegate, Mr. B.B. Nagarkar, engaged with this idea quite clearly in his address at the Parliament. Speaking about British colonization in India, Nagarkar said that the weak social institutions of India left it susceptible to English rule. He expresses mixed feelings about Britain’s presence in India. On one hand, he says that the transfer of power has “taken away our [Indian citizens’] liberty”. However, on the other hand, he admits that English presence in Indian life has brought “knowledge and enlightenment”, suggesting that India has benefited from their “more civilized” European counterparts. But, there is a catch to Nagarkar’s point, because he claims that there is a limit to what India needs to learn. He says that while the West might be able to teach India about politics, economics and technology, one thing it does not need a lesson in is religion and spirituality. While he believes that Indians are in desperate need of certain social reforms, when it comes to religious belief, India is far more rich than the West.

Perhaps even more important, the Parliament promised specific developments for different peoples. Many of the delegates’ final words demonstrate the political prowess with which they viewed the Parliament. For example, in his closing speech, Mr. Hirai of the Japanese Buddhist delegation believed that the Parliament signified a “step towards the ideal goal […] the realization of international justice.” This would have been a reference to the unequal treaties that the United States imposed on Japan in 1858 that, to an extent, undermined Japanese sovereignty. Several delegates from the Japanese cohort made explicit reference to these treaties in their speeches they presented throughout the course of the Parliament.

Similarly, the Honorable Pung Kwang Yu made reference to the unequal treatment of Chinese laborers living in the United States in his closing remarks. He wrote, “I have a favor to ask of all the religious people of America, and that is that they will treat, hereafter, all my countrymen just as they have treated me”. As First Secretary of the Chinese Legation in Washington D.C., his obligations rested in assuring the fair treatment of his people, and he clearly uses the prominence of the Parliament as a way to fulfill his obligations.

For some, such as Anagarika Dharmapala, their goal for the Parliament was simply to bring their religious traditions to the attention of a Western audience. The opening statement in his concluding remarks reads, “This Congress of Religions has achieved a stupendous work in bringing before you the representatives of the religions and philosophies of the East.” And for others, like Swami Vivekananda, in addition to the Parliament being a stage for which to speak on the religious doctrines of Hinduism, it was also an opportunity to promote unity. He writes, “Much has been said of the common ground of religious unity… If anyone here hopes that his unity will come by the triumph of one of these religions and the destruction of the others, to him I say: ‘Brother, yours is an impossible hope.’”

Finally, the Parliament concluded with the triumphant singing of the Hallelujah chorus.