| Author | Message | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1564 Registered: 10-2002  |
Hi everyone, Recently at a Christian bookstore here in Osaka I picked up a used copy of a book I had never heard of, The Two Empires in Japan by John M.L. Young. I am astounded at what I've learned in this book. A record of what had happened during the Second World War with the church in Japan was something I only knew scattered details about, but this fills in the gap for me more than I could have imagined, detailing not only the church's incredible apostasy during the war but the road that led there from the late 1800s and early 1900s through steadily increasing compromises with idolatry. I really want to write about it in a logical and easy-to-understand way, but there is so much I fear that the size of the task might make me never get started, so instead, as much as possible I'm going to write about things as they come along. The lessons gained from this hauntingly apply not only to Christianity Japan, but have a haunting parallel to Adventism, and also send a warning to Christianity in America as well to continually distinguish between what is God's and what is Caesar's. I'll begin in the next post. Feel free to peg any questions as I go along! Bless you in Jesus, Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1565 Registered: 10-2002 |
There were several problems that led to the massive Christian apostasy prior to and during the Second World War. In short, 1) As mentioned above, when the first generation of 19th century Japanese Christians died off, the second generation began to accept liberal modern criticism beliefs from Europe, thus eroding the backbone of the church's foundation on Biblical truth 2) These ideas gained hold in part because of a nationalistic sentiment in Japan, a spirit of wanting to be independent from foreign help, to be unique, do it ourselves, etc. 3) Many people in Japan became Christians simply because of the superior technology of the west 4) Many also simply transferred Bushido (samurai ethics) and Buddhist beliefs to Christianity 5) Christian missionaries took a "gentle" attitude towards confronting idolatry, preferring instead to let things work themselves out and not clash too hard with the local culture 6) Many missionaries and Japanese converts focused almost exclusively on by-product fruits of the West's Christianity (i.g., civilization, democracy, etc.) instead of on the Gospel This last quote speaks to me on two levels, one as an American, and one as a Former-Adventist. Firstly, this sounds a warning to me because there is often such great confusion in the States about the country being blessed by God, His land, devoted to Him, covenanted to Him, etc. As a result there are hordes of Christians who look(ed) upon the current President as if he were "God's man" and as if everything his party recommended was the Christian's way. While America does have many blessings, often these blessings came at the expense of other peoples (most clearly against Native Americans and Africans) and with great propaganda (the Spanish-American war, and almost every other war was significantly triggered by stirring up the public's "righteous indignation"). But the obvious error which this quote points out is the blending of Christianity with a certain civilization. Christianity is meant to transcend cultures, lands and borders. Mistaking "better civilization" for "Christianity" is a very common mistake in the United States. The Gospel flag becomes entwined with the nation's flag, and seem inseparable. Thus the Gospel becomes less distinguishable from national policy/politicians/parties, and compromises are made (the full counsel of God is not preached) in order to "further the cause" of the party which is thought to be the most Christian. There is a fear of speaking out on that which is unpopular, particularly when "progress" seems to be happening. It brings to mind John 6 when people began to follow Jesus more and more, and He turned around and said things that offended them, seemingly purposefully choosing words that would drive them away. "Progress" in His eyes is depth, not numbers. Making "progress" while glossing over a few things or ignoring them (such as bad points our "party" is making or little bits of propaganda we would rather not look at) is not healthy. The example of WWII Japanese Christianity is hauntingly relevant. Secondly, this haunts me about Adventism. Young wrote that, This reminds me of the approach of many (even myself at times) towards many Adventists. There often seem to be two extremes -- one, a hard-nosed camp that wants instant recognition of the falseness of Adventist doctrines, and at the other end a "love and Jesus" camp that says the right things, but says them out of timing and in such a way as to skirt away from any uncomfortable confrontation, hoping that the SDA doctrines would "fall off later" because many SDAs seem so thirsty for grace. The power of the "ancestral idolatry" (SDA heritage) is not discerned or is ignored. While there are indeed times God doesn't want us to rush, and while He always wants us to be loving, sometimes "love" means saying the things you don't want to say. Things that would be uncomfortable, things that might make you lose the affection of someone you love, but things which nonetheless need to be said because He loves people (even wandering ones) so much it is a sin to remain silent and not tell them. However, we must speak to them in passion, in His love for them. That's all for today. More to come as soon as I can write. Bless you all in Jesus! Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1566 Registered: 10-2002 |
P.S. What I've learned in reading this book is going to explain a lot of the "why" of that article I wrote in last year's May/June Proclamation about the Buddhist altar, and how such an obvious concession to idolatry could be made by so many Christians here. There were steps made by the church (in harmony with the points above) which I hadn't realized laid the foundation for that many years ago. These steps have a very real parallel in Adventism as well. | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 398 Registered: 11-2007 |
That book sounds fascinating!! I'm reading Jeremiah. Sounds a bit similar! =)
I needed to hear that. Thanks! p.s. I see it's out of print! You can just send it my way when you're finished! ha. Looks like you found a treasure. (Message edited by 8thday on August 18, 2008) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 8593 Registered: 12-2003  |
Ramone, thank you! What thought-provoking quotes. I really concur with your conclusions re: culture and Adventism. So insightful. I look forward to more of your reactions... Colleen | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1567 Registered: 10-2002 |
Just in case anyone was wondering, I should mention briefly what I mean by the "apostasy" of the church in Japan during the years running up to World War II until it was finished (and then some beyond, but more on that later). At its culmination, all denominations (including Catholic) had to register with the government and become part of the Nihon Kirisuto Kyodan, the "United Church". They clipped out modern confessions and denominational differences and settled on the Apostles' Creed as their only creed, however, with careful modifications where it referred to Christ's Lordship, God-ship, and second coming. More on this later. Churches had a 5-minute bowing ceremony towards Tokyo and the Emperor at the beginning of each service. Church leaders and representatives went to Shinto shrines, including the famous Meiji Shrine in Tokyo, and to Ise Shrine way out in Mie Prefecture. Ise Shrine is the holiest shrine in Shinto, the abode of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu, who is supposed to be the direct ancestor of the emperor. Indeed, when the Kyodan (United Church) was formed, the moderator at the meeting of denominations afterward went to Ise Shrine to report the formation of the new church to the Sun Goddess. At other ceremonies, edicts the emperor wrote were bowed down to, and his portrait was bowed down to. At some churches pictures of Christ were covered up so that the Lord could not gaze upon the picture of the emperor. Hymnbooks were edited or purged of things mentioning the Lord's lordship, being the King of kings, things relating to every knee bowing before Him, and His second coming. Some hymns such as "Onward Christian Soldiers" and "A Mighty Fortress" were removed altogether. Pastors, missionaries, missions and Christians who resisted were given great pressure by the government to compromise. As mentioned, because the laying of the foundation in the second generation of Christians in the late 1800s was not done with clear denunciation of all forms of idolatry, standing firm in Christ was something most of the church was not ready to do. Most Christians at that point had grown up with compromise. More on this in a moment. Those who resisted were interrogated by the police. Many were jailed. The churches of pastors who resisted were often mixed then with compromising churches. Faithful Christians would then often purposefully arrive late at church so as to miss the obligatory emperor-bowing part at the beginning. Most tragically, faithful Christians and churches found themselves pressured not only by the military government and Shinto nationalists, but they also found great pressure from compromising churches. Sometimes the denunciations from fellow "Christians" were just as bad or worse. Leaders and apologists of the Kyodan wrote materials explaining the superiority of Japanese Christianity and how it improved and corrected problems in Western Christianity (such as denominationalism, etc.). The "Kingdom of Christ" was meshed with the Empire of Japan (hence the title of the book, "The Two Empires" -- because truly they are NOT one!), so that the spreading of the Japanese Empire was said to be in actuality the spreading of the Kingdom of Christ. The government pressured and the churches tried to accomodate the government and Shinto ideology as much as possible. One incident the author relates in 1938 is astounding: ***** I should insert now that there is a big lesson to be noticed here: There are times when governments or institutions will give you pressure to compromise, threatening your well-being, livelihood or your very life. The message comes through that if you just compromise on this one thing, "accomodate us here", then you (or your livelihood, etc.) will be protected. What happens, however, is more like taking out a loan from a mafia loan-shark: it keeps gathering interest and you keep having to pay more than you bargained for. Having accommodated them once, they don't stop but ask for something else later on (sometimes sooner than later). And it goes on, and on, and on, until you're doing something that would've been unimaginable to you at the beginning. But the way that you rationalized it from the first step, "I'm doing it for our well-being" (etc.), this sustains you and makes the next compromise possible. This is the way of the "man-pleasing spirit" in the world. You try to please "man" so you bend over backwards for him. But he is not satisfied and asks for more. In trying to accomodate him, you enter into a battle that you cannot win, and put ultimate satisfaction in his hands instead of in yours (or let alone in God's!). ***** How did this great apostasy happen? How was it that entire groups of Christians, entire churches, entire denominations and their leaders participated in brazen idolatry? As mentioned before above, there were several factors that contributed to a weakening of the foundation of Christianity in Japan. Add onto this the rising tide of nationalism in Japan and several smaller wars with China and Russia that preceded World War II. (It should be noted that WWII in Japan is often referred to as "The Thirteen Years War" because for them it started after the 1931 fabricated "Manchurian Incident" and the Japanese invasion of China). Christianity had been becoming more and more popular in the late 1800s, and this worried the Shinto nationalists who had restored the Emperor to power in 1868 (he had been seriously sidelined for several hundred years -- it's a long story). Young writes: The government claimed that the ceremonies were purely political and patriotic, but the Rescript itself referred to the ancient gods of Japan and their descendants, the "divine emperors". Other obviously religious phrases included saying that the Imperial Throne was "coeval with heaven and earth" and that "the Way here set forth is ... infallible in all ages and true in all places." Ten years after the Rescript debuted, the government divided a department and created two to handle these things -- the Bureau of State Shrines (Shinto) and the Bureau of Religions. Shinto was thus placed outside (or above) "religion". It was taken out of the realm of "religions" and was seen as culture, patriotism, etc. A missionary in occupied Manchuria wrote in 1940, One other thing should be pointed out before I continue and apply this to our situations today. The author of the book, John M.L. Young, wrote that "The Rescript declares loyalty to the Emperor to be the highest motive for virtuous living." ***** To apply these things, let's sum up: 1) The Shinto nationalists in the leaders of the nation felt that the Emperor was the only true bond that held the nation together 2) They felt the Emperor was the foundation of morality and virtuous living 3) They made the Imperial Rescript on Education in part because of the rising popularity of Christianity which could not help but eventually erode faith in the ancestral gods of Shintoism 4) They believed Japan was founded, protected and provided for by these ancestral gods. 5) Not as a matter of "religion", but as a matter of patriotism and faithfulness to their leader(s), they instituted legislation that demanded all educational institutions recognize the patriotic/moral claims of the Shintoist/Emperor system ***** This speaks to me of many Christians in the United States who see the foundation of America the same way that the Japanese nationalists saw Shinto and the Emperor as the foundation of Japan. Like the Japanese, they believe laws must be based on Christianity and that courts and classrooms must overtly recognize this. Without an official and "national" recognition of Christianity as the foundation of America, it is feared that there will be no morality and virtuous living. And like the Japanese nationalists, there are many in America who likewise believe that the United States was founded, protected and provided for by the Lord. I won't spend too much time explaining why each of these observations are wrong among so many misguided Christians in the United States. But I will simply mention that America was indeed founded by Christians, but also was founded by deists (such as Thomas Jefferson who literally took scissors to cut out the miracles from his New Testament), atheists (Thomas Paine), high-ranking pentagram-wearing freemasons (George Washington), and slave-traders. I don't judge each of these people or their intentions, however, I can't blindly say that the formation of the USA was completely godly, either. The exaggeration of the "Boston Massacre" was a particularly good example of early propaganda manipulated to arouse righteous indignation among the population. The comment made by the missionary to Manchuria is relevant here: The stroke of a magistrate saying that such and such is so does not actually make it so. Declaring that the nation is "One nation under God" does not mean that the nation is actually surrendered to God, founded by Him, or operated "in His way". Putting "In God We Trust" on money does not mean that the people actually do trust in God (indeed, as American history shows, we have a habit of taking matters into our own hands, particularly where wars are concerned -- the high amount of radical "militias" training in northern woods is a direct offspring of the first generation of them in the Revolutionary War who set the precedent for them). Putting the Ten Commandments in courthouses does not mean that the people will live by them (Biblically speaking, this would actually arouse more sinful passions), nor that laws will always be in harmony with them (consider the 4th commandment). Having teachers in public schools give prayer before class does not mean that the students (or the teacher) are more godly than if they pray in private. The reverse is probably more true, actually. Prayer is the responsibility of personal motivation, and in families, is the responsibility of parents. Finally there is a parallel to the 19th century habit in Japan of looking at the virtues/fruits/by-products of Christianity in Japan as actually being real spiritual "progress". The United States has been prosperous, has won most of her wars, and has done a lot of amazing things. Yet the "successes" do not mean that God is on her side. They don't mean God is against her, either. But it must be remembered that Babylon had a lot of "successes" as well, as did Greece and Rome. They had great, learned cultures, advancements, technologies, and improved countless civilizations in the world. I have another used book called "Japan on the Upward Trail" by William Axling, that I bought at the same bookstore years ago. It was written in 1923 when Christianity was "succeeding" in Japan so well. It is haunting to hold the book and read it, hearing its positive, glowing tone and appraisal of the improvements in Japan -- in its government, in its social development, and in the many admiring comments made by officials about Christianity. If you didn't know the history that would soon follow, from reading that book you might think that Japan was on the fast-track to becoming Christian. Knowing what would happen in a few years -- indeed, what was actually already happening -- makes merely just holding the book an eerie experience. The true, deep spiritual problems in Japan went almost completely "under the church's radar". In the same way, there are many Christians in the United States that focus on political hot-topics as if these are the deep spiritual problems in the States. They see the nation's "turning away from God" (meaning the removal of professions of being a Christian nation from official places) as being the primary problem. But these are not the deep issues. There are greater things largely going on "under the church's radar". That the nation gets into a war every thirty years (or less) ought to at least raise the church's eyebrows -- and that the church is usually right there next to the band playing the tune. That so many people feel they have "the right" to enacting justice for themselves -- even by violent means -- is another part of the national psyche that should be noticed (and is surely a root of the reason there are so many violent crimes in the United States). Finally, the blurring of "God" and "country" is something that should be setting off alarm bells in the church -- we who "long for a better country, a heavenly one" (Hebrews 11), and are not citizens here (Philippians 3). I want to interject and say that I love Americans, I love the beautiful land, I love parts of its history. I love many of its heroes (particularly Martin Luther King Jr.). However, love of my country is not based on the country being righteous, perfect, correct, noble, or even good. I think that if our love is based on being blind to bad things, then it is a fragile and dangerous kind of love, and one that does not have the power to generate much of the fruit it longs for. Here in this section I've spoken of problems in the USA, particularly among Christians, because of parallels I've noticed with Japanese history in the last two centuries. That there are many good things to be said of Americans and Christian Americans is something I firmly believe, but I do not feel the need to mention such things at the moment in order to "balance" the negatives. Often feeling a need to mention "good things" arises so as to unconsciously minimize the badness of the bad, so as not to have to face it for what it is and give it the necessary attention and treatment it deserves so that it can be corrected. ***** For the Adventism parallel, I will re-state the summary points above and make comments after them: 1) The Shinto nationalists in the leaders of the nation felt that the Emperor was the only true bond that held the nation together. Adventist apologists -- both liberal and conservative -- feel that the "heritage" of Adventism is the only true bond which holds the denomination together. Although 1844 was a complete error in the sight of God and the Bible, it is seen as being essential to the church -- if not for its accuracy and truth, then for its necessity to be the "bond" that holds everyone together. 2) They felt the Emperor was the foundation of morality and virtuous living. In the same way, Adventist apologists feel that "Adventism" (and/or the Law, the Sabbath, etc.) are the true fount of moral, virtuous living. This is especially apparent in the instant reaction to criticism of Adventist legalism -- apologists will suddenly speak of other denominations as being lawless, having "cheap grace", and so on. Without the foundation of the Law (and Adventism), they feel that the door is left open to every immorality. 3) They made the Imperial Rescript on Education in part because of the rising popularity of Christianity which could not help but eventually erode faith in the ancestral gods of Shintoism. Many conservative backlashes (such as in the early 1980s) and "back-to-EGW" movements are made because grace is seeping into Adventist churches through non-Adventist influences (such as through worship songs, Christian books, etc.). Many scholarly Shintoists saw the contradiction between Christianity and State Shinto more clearly than the churches did. In the same way, many conservative historicist Adventists see the conflict between preaching the gospel of "grace" and Adventism's historical teaching. Moderate and liberal Adventists are used to trying to hold onto both (i.e., compromising both), and so do not see their diametrical opposition as clearly. 4) They believed Japan was founded, protected and provided for by these ancestral gods. Historical Adventism is founded on the idea that it was created and prospered by God. Just like Japan saw itself as a divine nation, a divine race, with a divine leader, so also Adventism sees itself as the "remnant", the one "true church", with a true "messenger" from God. 5) Not as a matter of "religion", but as a matter of patriotism and faithfulness to their leader(s), they instituted legislation that demanded all educational institutions recognize the patriotic/moral claims of the Shintoist/Emperor system. Much pressure to respect and not tamper with or criticize "Adventism" is made simply because it is a matter of patriotism, so to speak. To many (especially in the liberal Adventist camp), whether or not Adventist pioneer claims were "true" or not is almost completely irrelevant. Just like Shinto was seen as not being "religion", so Adventism is not seen by them as being "true (or false)", but rather as something that is not subject to being graded by truth and falsehood. Devotion today to the denomination and continuing heritage is seen as paramount. The other parallel here is how there are periodic surges where Adventist educational institutions must give some kind of pledge to Adventist foundational beliefs, and promote them as being essential for moral/virtuous/salvational living. ***** In conclusion, for today, I'll talk about the effect that this compromise (accomodating the bow to the Imperial Rescript on Education in schools) had on Japanese Christians, and the parallel in Adventism. In Japan, this 1890 concession to the State was the "first bow" that the church made. The impact of this not only led to successive "bows" in the future, but it indoctrinated Christian children with a propensity to compromise and see nothing wrong with it. Young wrote, When I read the last quote, the first thing that popped into my mind was, "Cognitive dissonance." The children were raised with two beliefs that clearly opposed one another, but were taught (by teachers and by parents) that they were not in conflict. Simply put, this taught them to be blind. Even though Shinto shrines had altars, priests, "gods" and purification ceremonies, these things were "not religious", but were a matter of patriotism, duty, loyalty, etc. The most obvious of things became obscured. This, by the way, is why so many Christians in Japan today still struggle to give up their ancestral family altars, as I wrote about in a Proclamation article last year in May... the foundation for this ability to do such a Christ-dishonoring thing had been laid in 1890 and strengthened among Japanese Christians for the next 55 years. That "first bow" in 1890 caused a lot of damage that is still difficult to sort out. The "first bow" of Adventism was 1844. Rather than admit error, rather than submit their pride humbly at the foot of God and His Word, they made God and His Word subject to their experience. And generations of Adventists were raised "bowing down" (so to speak) to Adventist heritage's erroneous claims even though the Bible clearly spoke to the contrary. Growing up with this, Adventist children have been indoctrinated with an attitude which sees no problem between the two. Adventism's "first bow" of 1844 set a pattern, a precedent, that led to more bows and the trapping of successive generations in blindness. In Japan, nationalistic sentiment and loyalty to Japan's "heritage" prevailed over Biblical truth. In Adventism, the sentiment of Millerism/1844 was likewise held higher than Biblical truth. More to come in the following days! Bless you in Jesus, our only cure! Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1568 Registered: 10-2002 |
P.S. 8thday, yes, the book seems to be out of print. I'm going to look up the Presbyterian church organization that published it here and see if I can contact them and ask them where I can get more. I can't believe this book isn't more widely known! (Well, maybe it is, I hope!) Thankfully, (Praise God!) we found that a Japanese translation was published (or re-published) in 2005 and is still in print. We bought two copies today. It's firstly for them, so God, thank You! | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 327 Registered: 2-2003  |
Thanks for this, Agapétos, it is really informative. I never knew any of that about Christianity in Japan. The parallel that comes to my mind, is the early Christians refusing to just burn a pinch of incense to the Roman Emperor, which after all is really no big deal, and is just a sign of loyalty to the Empire, because that was the way it would be held together, etc. Of course, they got persecuted for their insistance that Jesus is Lord, so how can Caesar be? God bless, Adrian | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 8597 Registered: 12-2003 |
Thanks, Ramone--how interesting, including your parallels. Colleen | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1569 Registered: 10-2002 |
The odd thing about it is how many missionaries and denominations (even ones based abroad) didn't decry what was happening between the late 1800s up to the war until it was far too late. One illustration is the Roman Catholic church. Originally some bishops in Japan strongly opposed the mandatory Shinto worship. However when the government argued that the Shinto worship was a formality of honoring the emperor as leader of the country, the Vatican issued a statement that said it was not a problem for Catholics to go to the shrines. A recent online article by a Catholic priest brought this to my attention: It's one thing to understand that people might give way under pressure from the government, military authorities, and nationalistic communities. We might expect the issue to be less clear to them, you know? But it is an odd, eerie thing for foreign churches to not recognize the problem, because you'd think that not being immediately under the pressure gives them greater clarity. However, as I type this, I realize that the foreigners' very distance might keep them from seeing the actual situation up close and what's really going on. From their distance they might be liable to believe that what the Japanese government said was more authoritative and a better representation of what was actually happening -- they might've thought that the authorities' words was more "credible" than that from church members or missionaries who might be getting a bit fanatical or paranoid. Additionally, they might politically think that members or local pastors couldn't see the bigger picture of what was more important and didn't have the wisdom to know when to compromise. In the book I'm reading by Young, he pointed out that European liberal criticism also influenced the denominations abroad so that they too did not see much wrong with what Japan's government was demanding of the churches. In Adventism, many people here know what the pressure is like inside -- the worry of losing your job, your friends, family, community, feeling of loyalty and security. It's easy to understand the pressure cooker on someone coming to the truth inside Adventism. The eerie thing (as we all here recognize), is when non-Adventists stand up for Adventism's unbiblical doctrines. Just like the Japanese Church's apostasy got support from abroad, in the same way Adventism's apostasy often gets support "from abroad"... sometimes because Christian churches simply don't know what Adventism is like inside... sometimes because churches believe what official SDA authorities say more than less "credible" members (e.g., Walter Martin) who they think might have an axe to grind... or sometimes because cooperation with the Adventist government or political unity between denominations is seen as more desirable. And other times, it's because like European liberal criticism weakened the foundation in the late 1800s, in the same way today the foundation of Christ is being weakened so that many people cannot actually see anything "wrong" with Adventism's doctrines. ***** Really, I was NOT looking for that parallel! Adrian's comment made me think of how foreign churches sometimes did not speak up about what was happening or even gave support to it. And suddenly THIS popped up! Really, it is ridiculous how many parallels there are, and how well they fit. Lord, help us learn from this, help us hear what You are saying to the Church today, in Jesus' name. In Jesus, Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1570 Registered: 10-2002 |
P.S. to Adrian - I didn't know that about the "pinch of incense." Very interesting. The rationale for it being okay ("a sign of loyalty") is the exact same thing as what happened in Japan. In many countries there are signs of loyalty that can be given which are not a problem (this is "giving to Caesar what is Caesar's"). But in the case of Caesar and in the case of the Japanese Emperor, both were declared to be gods, divinity, or descendants of gods. Thus the acts of burning incense or bowing to them were not a normal honoring of authorities. To bow to one who is declared to be a god is different than bowing to an authority who is recognized simply a man in charge. It's the book-of-Daniel situation repeated. Hence John M.L. Young's quotation of Christ's words on the inside cover of the book, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's." Giving honor to an honor-deserving authority is not a problem. That is giving Caesar his due respect. Caesar has certain civil requirements that are not against God and should be honored. But honoring Caesar as a "god" is not among them. Only God is worthy of being honored as God, for only He truly is God. Giving to Caesar what belongs to God alone is not right. (Message edited by agapetos on August 20, 2008) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 8607 Registered: 12-2003 |
Ramone, I'm finding this fascinating. I was already thinking of those parallels as I was reading the quote you posted above. In fact, there are compromises being made in the church at large. Post-modernism is the modern name for the same sort of blurred boundaries you mentioned in Japan. Whenever people move away from the standard of the word of God, taking its plain meaning as the truth and foundation of reality, these sorts of blurred boundaries begin to happen. As long as someone declares a certain practice to be merely historical or culturally relevant, others believe that to be true. All sorts of spiritual compromise begins to take place when we toy with words and rationalize their clear meanings. Indeed, as Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun. The old heresies and deception just recirculate in new packaging. So interesting and provocative. Colleen | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1571 Registered: 10-2002 |
It's interesting, Colleen, isn't it? This is all technically "history", but it is so incredibly relevant, don't you think? Not merely the particulars of the history, but more than that the spiritual forces that were the undercurrent of the different pressures and events. There is a desire of many to "look forward to the future" instead of examining mistakes in the past (for fear of the shame or giving people unnecessary false-guilt burdens). And if the mistakes are even admitted, the desire is to get the admission overwith and "move on". I'll return to this them in a few posts when I share about the state of the church in Japan after the war. (You can probably already take guesses as to how some/many groups reacted...) ***** I just wrote that there is a fear of examining/admitting mistakes in the past for fear of the shame or giving people unnecessary false-guilt burdens. I was thinking about this the other night on a different subject, which I'll detour to mention here -- the topic of race relations & problems in the United States. I grew up in the white majority because due to my parents' divorce and Adventist influences, I didn't know that I was half-Mexican. I didn't understand the many, many real cultural differences within races in the United States. If someone had even said that there were different "cultures", I probably would've been upset at them and argued that they were being counter-productive and actually prolonging racial problems! I wouldn't understand these things until I moved abroad and myself became a "minority" in Japan, a far-less "multicultural" country. I soon discovered that if I saw a foreigner on the train or someone who looked like me, I would act differently around them. I would smile, nod, maybe strike up a conversation. In fact, there was a feeling of relief just because they were there. Though I hadn't consciously felt "alone" on the train or wherever, when a foreigner came in, some kind of relief would come and I would feel more relaxed. In the States I had sometimes wondered at why African-American strangers would sometimes seem more friendly with each other than with Caucasian strangers. In a way, it seemed racist to me at the time. But now that I am a "minority" here, I understand. After my first year in Japan, I went to a family reunion in Nebraska and remembered being at a shopping mall and noting that there were (at that time) few minorities among the sea of Caucasians. I realized for the first time how uncomfortable they might feel. It is so strange to me to realize that if I heard myself saying these things ten years ago, I would've argued the other way. Growing up in the majority, it's easier to believe the "melting pot" idea. In fact, part of me wanted to believe the melting-pot idea. When people mentioned problems in race relations (or differences between races), I may have acknowledged problems briefly, but would quickly rush to aiming "forward" to the melting-pot. Though I never would've admitted it at the time, bringing up un-resolved issues made me feel a little uncomfortable. Though I myself had no part in slavery, harassment, racial profiling, discrimination, etc., somehow bringing these things up made me feel implicated in them. Ever-so-slightly I might have felt as if I was being accused (sometimes not "ever-so-slightly"!), or that someone wanted me to be perpetually ashamed of what had been done in the past. It's odd to me, in retrospect, that although I had nothing to do with those sins, I was hesitant to fully view them for the faint fear of being implicated in them! How is that possible? I think somehow I was raised with a common majority pride in the melting-pot, in the achievements. Like many, I wasn't happy to have my image of a near-perfect society challenged. It was my pride in that image that I think made me feel implicated when people challenged the image, even though I myself had nothing to do with the sins. The other night I began to finally understand this (feeling accused even though you didn't sin) as being a spiritual result of pride. The spiritual nature of the problem became obvious to me when I realized what happened to my feelings of being implicated or accused after I recognized that there were real and existing problems. After I saw the problems for myself (by becoming a minority myself), I suddenly felt less accused, less responsible, and less implicated! In fact, I felt more relief, more compassion, more love, and a whole lot less fear! The spiritual nature of this pride became manifestly visible to me. It tells you to fear acknolwedging problems that others bring up because somehow if you do, then you will be more ashamed. It makes acknolwedging the problems feel very heavy, when in fact the truth is that in acknolwedging them you will not find heaviness but rather understanding and freedom. (I began to realize this more some months ago after Barack Obama made a speech in which he addressed the "race" issue and problems, and immediately saw support among moderate Caucasian & conservative supportes take a sharp dive... it actually stunned me to realize that this may have happened in large part simply because people were more comfortable not mentioning it, whether there are real legitimate problems or not. Policies and positions aside, I realized that in my mindset ten or fifteen years ago, I would've felt more comfortable with Obama if he said nothing about race than I would if he did say something about race.) What this parallels (but not equals) is the fear of repentance. We fear repenting and turning to God because we think we will be under a heavier burden if we do. Somehow the popular image & pride we've bought into (and/or been raised into) injects us with the same fear as the person has who fears repenting and turning to God. Interesting, this pride! This pride is a liar! -- it makes us feel heavy, weighted accused and responsible when we are not, and blinds us to identifying with the wounded so that further healing and reconciliation can happen. I'll add parenthetically that this teaches us something important: Our emotional attachments on behalf of others or things are just as strong as the things we ourselves are responsible for. For example, being offended because of something someone did to your friend is just as emotionally real as being offended because of something someone did to you. This is why it becomes imperative for us to learn to forgive people for things done to others whom we care about, because even though the offense wasn't committed against us, it was done to someone/something that our heart had embraced, and therefore the heart takes it personally whether we consciously recognize it or not, and unforgiveness lives in us even though the offense wasn't against us personally. This detour I've written here is not wholly unrelated to the major topic here of the last century's Japanese Christian history and it's American & Adventist parallels. This lying spirit of pride goes into action wherever massive offense has happened. It is very visible in right-wing reactions here in Japan when the war is brought up by the left (the left acknolwedges the war and national aggression during it, while the right continues to shy from it and offer "alternate" histories at times). The rightwingers (the "uyoku") feel that to acknowledge the Japanese had been "aggressing" during the war somehow places a yoke or burden of shame and guilt on the present generation. I believe similar feelings exist in Germany among people who deny the Holocaust, and also exist among many in the United States who do not want to acknolwedge the horror caused by the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I don't know if or how this all will connect to the regular subject of the thread here, but I think it is a particularly good thing to recognize this spirit of pride, how it works, how it lies, and how it makes us feel afraid of acknowledging things that would actually bring us healing and freedom. Blessings in Jesus! No shame in Him! Ramone (Message edited by agapetos on August 21, 2008) | ||
| Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2 Post Number: 1580 Registered: 8-2004  |
Wow, thanks for the lesson on pride. Pride is definitely a liar. As if our guilt hides because we do not admit it's there! Another component to compromise, I think, is a lack of trust. When we compromise, it's usually because we fear the consequences if we do not compromise. . . . and for some strange reason we humans to fear ostracization and ridicule even more than physical punishment and death (you ever heard the idea, or thought yourself, "If I were to be persecuted for my faith I would stand firm," while at the same time refusing to speak up as a Christian because your friends at work might laugh?) Now if we fear the consequences of the truth, what are we actually fearing? That people will laugh? That our families may disown us? That our jobs may be in jeopardy? That our government may label us subversives? Probably some or all of the above and more. But what is the core issue? Are we not bought with a price? Is not our Lord and Master still on the throne of the universe? We may think we fear the consequences. When this is the case, I think the reality is that we do not trust that God is big enough, and loving enough, and involved enough to carry us through what He leads us to. I wonder how different history would have been if the Christians in Japan had refused to compromise in those seemingly ordinary years before WWII? I wonder how different history would have been if Christians in America had refused to close their eyes to strange doctrine during our own cultural revolution? I wonder how different the world would be if Christians everywhere sought for God and let Him weed out every compromise, every false standard (for standing firm on the wrong thing is as dangerous as standing for nothing), every cultural blindness. God is to be our Lord and Master, not a useful accessory to getting ahead. God is to be our Lord and Master, not our 'Santa Claus' or 'Good Luck Charm'. Sometimes I stay in 'good enough' situations because I fear that stepping out in faith will bring pain and chaos, but who am I kidding? Every time I've chosen to go ahead and step out of my comfort zone, asking God to work things out for His glory and my best good, God has done marvelous things. Now sometimes things DO get more painful - sometimes even for a long while - but even in the pain, the peace of trusting that God knows what He is doing, and has me safely in his hands is amazing. God did not give us a spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and a sound mind. Lord, keep me in your strong and loving hands this day. Guide my feet. Hold my heart. Let me not be tripped up by pride and false 'security contraptions' designed to keep me trapped in fear and guilt. Be also with each person here on the forum. You know our weakness and our strengths. Give us eyes to see, ears to hear, and a heart to listen. But let us not only absorb and understand: strengthen us, work in and through us. Fulfill in us the plans You have for us. Let us not be hearers only, but doers - led by and walking in Your Spirit. Amen. Blessings, Mary | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1572 Registered: 10-2002 |
As I'm writing this I've just seen the first Olympic heat for the womens 100-meter relay. As an American runner passed the baton onto the runner for the final stretch, it was dropped. The instant look on the first runner's face is heartbreaking. I've just heard that the same thing had also happened with the men's team. "Dropping the baton." It's a phrase that has entered our common English vocabulary. Not continuing with what was passed to you, entrusted to you, and committed to you. It will result in the loss of the race. The American runner had a hard time stopping herself (she was fast!), but immediately she turned around and ran the suprising distance to where the baton had fallen. She picked it up and finished the race. Last, but she finished. Isn't this a prophetic picture of what we are talking about? At times in history, Christians have "dropped the baton." Subsequent generations have come and new races have started (and some have finished). There are lessons from the yesterday's "races" that our runners of today need to know, so that the baton does not get dropped again. Yet there are also some races that are not over, that are still being run today. We can still go back an pick-up the baton. We can't undo the "loss" of time, but we can return to the place where we dropped the baton, pick it up, and complete the race. It will be painful at times to turn around and retrace our steps; it will be humiliating. We will be tempted to think that maybe if we keep running, then our "speed" and the way we run will be so impressive that our baton-drop won't be noticed. After all, it is a "running" event, right? It's about the running and the speed, right? But no, the point is that the baton passes the finish line. Without the baton, the race is run in vain. Olympic watchers groan in sympathy when competitors fall or make a mistake. Yet when the athlete picks him or herself back up and finishes, they are moved and impressed. If we take the honorable cup of shame and admit where we've dropped the baton, if we let go of our pride and return the distance to pick up what we dropped, the world will see. And the world will be moved. We tend to think that we have to maintain a flawless image. Like politcians, we are afraid of admitting error, afraid that it will give our enemies grounds to discredit us further. So we sweep our mistakes under the rug. While some hecklers will indeed surface, we have often misjudged the "Olympic" audience in the world. Many will see and hear. Our veneer of flawlessness will be shattered, but they will be moved by our vulnerability and humility. And what's more, the testimony of truth and love --the Gospel, our baton-- will be picked up from where it was dropped, and it will cross the finish line. And many will see and hear. | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1573 Registered: 10-2002 |
Amen, Mary. The impact of cultural/community pressure in Japan is still felt today, though not in the great force it was a hundred years ago. Yet at the same time much of the responsibility must lie in the teaching of many missionaries that somehow did not prepare them to stand. For various reasons --not wanting to offend, hoping it would work out on its own, not seeing the danger, or focusing elsewhere-- many missionaries and denominations gave their assent to the compromises. Some didn't, but many, many did. This brings me to a new question I haven't considered before: How do we raise up martyrs? And are we raising up martyrs today in our churches? Blessings in Jesus, Ramone | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1574 Registered: 10-2002 |
To continue the story where we left off about Christians in Japan leading up to the Second World War, let's re-cap just a little, quoting points I outlined earlier: It should also be noted that much of the pressure to conform to Shinto was applied because liberal democratic principles were becoming popular during the Taisho era (1912-1926). The reaction of the religious nationalists in the State was to impose and enforce Shinto -- which they believed the country was founded on, protected by and provided for. I noted the parallel that religious Christians in the United States often take the same approach, fearing liberal democracy at times, and attempting to erase the Church-State separation (in recent times the trend among such has been to claim that there never was a separation of Church and State in America). The attempts to impose of religious rites/recognition on people of different or neutral beliefs (prayer in public schools, Ten Commandments in courthouses, etc.) betrays a belief that doing so will cure America's ills (note that stricter legal measures than these did not cure ancient Israel's ills). On the "ancient Israel" note, we need to realize once and for all that imposing worship of God on people does not work. God is after the heart, and He does not want us to beat peoples' hearts into submission. One day He Himself will make every knee bow and tongue confess that Jesus is Lord -- it is not our gospel commission to legislate that day ahead of time. Doing so in history has always been disasterous, hurting the cause of Christ in the long-run to the point where people are still not healed from wounds inflicted a thousand years ago by imposing Christians. ***** For several reasons the church was weak and ill-prepared to deal with this pressure: The theological trend in the late 1800s was liberal Europen criticism, which eroded confidence in the Bible and the uniqueness of Christ and His atoning sacrifice. While similar post-modernism today is an equal danger, I want to carefully suggest that we be careful not to err in the opposite direction. The earlier parallel comes to mind of being zealous for "the God of our [Founding] Fathers" by seeking to claim there is no Church-State separation. It is easy to chastise those who deny the truth. Yet we must be careful that we do not mishandle the truth! Truth-mishandled produces a worse taste to the unbeliever than truth-compromised: Truth-compromised is simply powerless and ineffective, but truth-mishandled is abusive and inflicts wounds leaving a testimony that is not easily forgotten. Like Peter using the sword to "defend Christ", truth-mishandled cuts off the ear of the unbeliever, hampering his ability of to hear "Christ" because of the wounds inflicted "in His name" and "in defense of Him". I would suggest that this is the greatest threat to Christianity in the United States right now. Other threats --postmodernism, liberal criticism theology, "sin" in the nation, erroneous "emergent church" extremes, etc.-- these things are well-known and preached about. But we are blind to our sense of righteousness, our seduction by our political strength, and our inability to learn from the lessons of Israel's history (the failure to stop "sins" and secure righteousness by laws). Like the Pharisees of Christ's time looking at the "sinners" in the nation and the foreign Roman occupation, we easily look at the external as if the things outside were our greatest threat. A Japanese Christian named Masahisa Uemura, following the success of the Russia-Japan war, wrote a warning in an article that would become prophetic not many years later: ***** And so the vast bulk of the churches in Japan gave into the government's pressure... - They visited shrines, - They bowed to the emperor's picture, - They bowed to his educational directives, - They taught their children that this was not a problem - They formed into a "United Church" (the Kyodan), - They re-wrote parts of many hymns and deleted others, - Many of them criticized churches & Chrisitans that stood firm, - Some of them issued writings and statements critical of foreign Christianity, - They officially supported and aided the war effort, - Their top leaders reported major organizational changes to the Sun Goddess at Ise Shrine, - Some gave dissenters' names to the police (resulting in their imprisonment), ...and more. There were some who stood firm, perhaps a hundred who were imprisoned, and at least a few who died in prison. I won't mention their testimonies here, although they are inspiring and they were truly lights in the darkness. One quote will speak volumes. It comes from a missionary who was part of a network of uncompromising churches in Japanese-occupied Manchuria: In the introduction to Young's book, he spoke of Christianity's battle with the Roman Empire and it's emperor-worship through the means of selfless martyrdom. Then he said, Many of us (including myself) like to think that if the situation arises, we would be ready for martyrdom. We at least hope so. Yet the story of the great apostasy of Japanese Christians prior to WWII is a valuable lesson to us on how these things may happen. While some persecutions do arise quickly, this one did not come overnight (perhaps if we look carefully, we'll see that most persuctions may not come overnight, either). Instead it came with slow gradual erosion of the foundation and compromises that happened one at a time, each one seeming to be the last and made for the "benefit" of the gospel, as was thought. Young wrote, "A Compromise with Apostasy." That could be the title of this part of history. Yet as I wrote earlier, that we are alive today and learning from this means that the race is not finished yet. The baton has been dropped, and we're walking back to pick it up. We're getting ready for the next course of this race, perhaps the final leg of it, the home stretch. As has been noted, the fact that foreign churches and church organizations sometimes gave support to the Japanese government's moves indicates that the "compromise with apostasy" did not happen in Japan alone. There were "bows" made abroad, too: not to Shinto deities or leaders, but rather bows to popular opinions, ideas, doubts, and so on that eroded confidence in Jesus Christ and the Scriptures. When the moment of testing came for brethren on the other side of the world, these churches and church organizations aided them in bowing to false gods. I suggested various reasons this was possible earlier, including a likely habit of preferring to trust "official" channels of communication (leaders and government) over the witness of members and "controversial" pastors. To this I will add that I believe there was a strong habit in that day of looking at organizations with more importance than people. This habit of "institutionalization" had people very focused on denominations and large organizations of churches. People in Japan and abroad were not prepared to understand, support, or even know how to support persecuted brethren in a hostile country. Their mode of operation seems to have been structural for so long that they were ill-prepared to see when it was time to abandon the institutions -- indeed, they were not ready to see when the institutions needed to be abandonded because they had been compromised. (It is interesting that this wave of Christianity beginning in the mid to late 1800s was largely denominational -- funded, supported and driven by large denominations; in contrast, the Christian drive after the war was much less denominational, supported instead by smaller missionary "societies". More on this later.) I wrote earlier wondering how we "raise up martyrs", and now I realize that surely one way we raise up martyrs is to thoroughly instill them (and ourselves!) with the truth that God's Church is people, not buildings, not institutions, not organizations. People are God's treasures, and only people will live forever. Part of "laying up our treasures in heaven" means recognizing what is eternal in our daily lives, and this includes recognizing that the ends in persecution situations are people, and that the means of institutions and assets are not eternal and therefore can be let go. ***** I suppose it's appropriate to comment here on a parallel that we as Former Adventists are well-acquainted with: the strong desire to preserve the Adventist instituion. Perhaps this desire more than any other keeps the Adventist institution going today. Many pastors raised in Adventism even have trouble imagining being a pastor without denominational support. Living by faith is often a foreign experience, so to speak. Having been raised to put so much value on the preservation of the SDA institution, is it a wonder that the running of the institution is mostly in the hands of modern-day Sadducees who place more value on the "nation" than on whether or not its sacred texts are actually true or not? Raised in such an environment that puts the "church" (institution) ahead of scriptural consistency and forthright honesty about the "heritage", is it a surprise that simple belief and faith take a back seat? ***** The Shinto government exerted its influence over the church not only in hymnbooks, but also in doctrine. I quoted the whole section above, but what I want to draw attention to in particular is this part: Haven't we recognized this in the Seventh-day Adventist church? Haven't we at times been frustrated because their "fundamental beliefs" are constructed to sound as "Christian" as possible without revealing their inner 'Adventist' meanings? Adventist leadership plays both sides of the coin, attempting to make happy both non-Adventists and fundamentalist Adventists. Words are chosen to satisfy both parties that are actually opposed to one another, just like the Kyodan used orthodox-sounding statements to try to placate the Shinto state and yet remain "Christian" at the same time. ***** This is the end of the "war" section of my notes while reading the book, The Two Empires in Japan by John M.L. Young. Further posts will begin dealing with the aftermath, with what happened in Christianity in the years after the war ended. I should mention that the book was first published in November 1958, and then reprinted in '59, '61, and in 1987. The author wrote an additional preface to the 1987 printing, in which he briefly mentioned recent backwards steps in Japan, and stated: ***** I will end tonight (long past my bedtime) with one final thought for prayerful pondering and searching... I've been writing of a 'apostasy' situation in Japan's history where there was persecution. While there were indeed influences that contributed to the weakening of Japanese Christians' solid foundation, all the same the primary factor must be the pressure that came from government, community, and culture. While the liberal European theology certainly aided this caving-into-persecution, at the same time the fact that many 19th century missionaries did not openly condemn Japanese polytheism certainly was a stronger influence. The first generation of missionaries in the mid-1800s did lay the foundation with much, much less liberal criticism theology. However when such beliefs crept in a generation later, they found easier acceptance I believe largely because there was already pressure to compromise coming from Japanese authorites, peers, and from a personal sense of "Japanese pride" and growing nationalistic sentiment. Hence, the persecution was, I believe, the primary motivating factor in the apostasy. Liberal European theologies seem to have been aids that were readily adopted because they fit already-held sentiments (such as pride, nationalism, desire to avoid pressure, etc.). The parallel here is the way that many cults (Adventism included) become open to accepting unbiblical beliefs (such as the "state of the dead") simply because they've already adopted an internal desire to be separate from Christianity. The desire of the Adventist pioneers to "separate from Babylon [Christianity]" made them more open to questioning Christian doctrines, even ones that were plainly laid out in the Scriptures. Thus the later widespread adoption of unorthodox beliefs is probably largely a result of this Adventist "nationalism" (beginning in the Miller/1844 sentiment). But I digress. My point was that in Japan, persecution was the primary motivating factor in the apostasy. Compromised beliefs were adopted largely in order to placate the persecutors (and in so doing, the persecuted often joined the persecutors). In Adventism, then, I wonder... a spiritual persecution. Is there a spiritual persecution that is a motivating force behind many of Adventism's compromises---the compromises (or departures from orthodoxy) that they've made since the beginning? Like the Japanese Christians cowered before and caved into the pressure from Japanese Shinto nationalists (and their own proud sense of Japanese nationalism), is there a "pressure" that has been in Adventism which continues to move its members to continual compromises between truth and error? Is Adventist "nationalism" --both from peers & institution, and also from internal pride-- a force of persecution against its members and against the Truth (Christ) who is for them and not against them? Lord, I turn this over to You again. I don't know where this all is leading me and those who read, but I pray that You shine through it and teach us what You'd have us learn through it. Teach us to help pick up the baton and carry it forward to completion. In Jesus' name, amen. In Jesus, Ramone (Message edited by agapetos on August 21, 2008) | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 713 Registered: 1-2003  |
Ramone, are any of these issues that you speak of regarding Japan relevant to the modern day establishment of state approved churches in China in the present day. I've not looked into it but the question comes to mind. Richard rtruitt@mac.com . | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 8615 Registered: 12-2003 |
I also thought about the state-approved churches in China as I read your post, Ramone. They now have state-approved Christian churches with state-trained priests. This is so interesting. Great insights, Ramone, and thank you again. Colleen | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1575 Registered: 10-2002 |
Prior to reading this Two Empires book, I talked to a missionary to China a few weeks ago and asked him about this. He said that the registered churches (allowed by state) are good and that freedom is allowed unless you use the pulpit to speak out against the State. He visited some underground churches and spoke of the great rift and grudge between the two groups... the underground churches in particular holding onto animosity toward the registered churches and seeing them as un-genuine. So he actually felt more comfortable and free at the registered church. He also mentioned that underground churches have been having heresies creep in during the last several years. Now, however, having read most of this book about Japan's history, I would like to speak to my missionary friend again (he was raised mostly in Japan) and talk about it. In light of Japan's history, and in light of a rising tide of nationalism in China, I can't help but think that perhaps although the registered churches experience more freedom, a certain "testimony" or "witness" may be missed, especially in the wake of rising "patriotism". That said, the more I hear about things, the more I realize that there is great variation of things in China. Discovering how culturally diverse the nation is (the northwestern part being mostly Muslim) was a surprise to me. Not a "nation", I think, but rather China is an empire. | ||
| Marysroses Registered user Username: Marysroses Post Number: 254 Registered: 4-2007 |
As far as state trained priests and state approved churches, I actually found a recent letter written to the Chinese Church: "In the light of the principles expounded above, the present College of Catholic Bishops of China [42] cannot be recognized as an Episcopal Conference by the Apostolic See: the "clandestine" Bishops, those not recognized by the Government but in communion with the Pope, are not part of it; it includes Bishops who are still illegitimate, and it is governed by statutes that contain elements incompatible with Catholic doctrine." The entire document is here: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20070527_china_en.html At the same time, there have been efforts to reconcile the underground and registered churches. Some 'state' bishops have been legitimized if they met all of the requirements of the Vatican, while some underground bishops who had drifted into heresy have been corrected. | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 1579 Registered: 10-2002 |
Hi everyone, I haven't been able to get to finish writing up notes here, but I did finish reading the book. More and more parallels pop into my head that I don't get to write down all the time... like Japan & Adventism's "isolationism"... or the idea that each has something better/special the rest of the world/church needs... and how in reality it isn't what Adventism/Japan got "right" that is their true message, calling and gift to the world, but rather what they have to offer is lessons learned from what they got wrong. The major stumbling block is pride. But if this pill is swallowed, what blessing it brings! I put up a picture I felt in the Spirit and a message with it: http://art-for-jesus.blogspot.com/2008/09/be-prepared-to-stand.html Hope to continue here soon... May He alone be "right" and all of us be "wrong" so that He is lifted up in the world! In Jesus' name, amen! Bless you in His love! Ramone | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 328 Registered: 2-2003 |
I may not always have commented, but I have enjoyed what you have written about Japan. It is fascinating! As someone who lives in a foreign (to me) country (Hungary - not so foreign as the far east, I'm sure), I appreciate the problems of getting used to a different culture, mentality, etc.! Stick at it, I look forward to more. Adrian |
