清末礼法之争，是19世纪末20世纪初，清政府为了挽救其统治而不得不发生变法修律过程中的历史事件。争论的双方分别是以沈家本、杨度为代表的 “法治派”和以张之洞、劳乃宣为代表的“礼教派”。清末礼法之争表面看来是一场简单的政治争论，但实质上，应以西方法律的原则为主，还是以封建礼教为主的制度新律更有利于清王朝的统治，是自明中叶以来中西文化冲突的延续。在清末修律过程中，围绕修律的指导原则，保守派和激进派产生了严重的意见分歧。保守派主张 “中体西用”，坚持礼、法不分;而激进派则主张以国家主义代替旧律的家族主义原则，主张礼、法分离。作为一场特定的历史事件，清末礼法之争随着清朝的灭亡而结束了，但它的历史意义和价值,是永远值得我们去探讨、分析和借鉴的。

The debate between feudal ethics and law in the late Qing Dynasty was a historical event in the process of law amending which was carried out by the Qing government to get over its crisis from the end of 19th century to the beginning of 20th century. The two controversial parties are "School of Law"represented by Shen Jiaben and Yang Du and "School of Feudal Ethics"represented by Zhang Zhidong and Lao Naixuan.The debate between feudal ethics and law appears to be a simple political dispute, but this dispute on adopting whether western legal principle or feudal ethical codes as foundation to making new law would be of greater benefit to the dominion of Qing dynasty is actually a continuance of the conflict of Sino-Western culture. In the process of law amending,"School of Law"and "School of Feudal Ethics"argue furiously on the principle which is based on when amending law.The conservative party claims "taking the Chinese culture and ideology as the main body and the western culture and ideology as an assistance",and persists in the combination of courtesy and law;the radical party asserts to replace familistic principle of old law with nationalistic principle, and sticks to separating law from courtesy. As a special historical event, the courtesy law battle ended with the fall of Qing Dynasty, but its historical value deserves our discussion, analysis and use for reference forever.