Pacifism Among Japanese Non-Church Christians
1. Introduction
2. Japanese Nationalism
3. Non-Church Pacifists
4. The Idea of Peace
5. Footnotes
6. Credit
The Mukyokai, or non-Church Christians, constitute one of the best known Christian movements in Japan. [1] Founded by Uchimura Kanzo * (1861-1930) in reaction to Western denominationalism, this small (about 35,000 adherents) movement is considered to be the most genuine form of Japanese Christianity. The Mukyokai reject all formal Christian institutions, having no sacraments, liturgy, professional clergy, church buildings, national headquarters, or membership rolls. Instead, this non-churchism is based on independent Bible study groups centered on the traditional teacher-disciple (sensei-deshi) relationship. The teachers have no formal training in the Bible, setting up group when inspired to do so; the group thus disintegrates when its teacher dies or retires. Most of these teachers are regularly employed in outside occupations, often as high school teachers or university professors. The Mukyokai movement has attracted members from all social strata in Japan, but it is particularly appealing to the Japanese intelligentsia --scholars, university professors, graduate students, and professionals. The spiritual content of the movement is an original synthesis of the spirit of Christianity with the most genuine ethical tradition of Japan. Thus the basic tenets are justification through the Cross, inner conflict, emphasis on hard work, detachment from mundane things, attitude of non compromise with the world, total loyalty to the Lord, and final victory in another world. These principles constitute the basic spiritual framework within which all problems are considered.
Non-Church Christians are known in Japan particularly for their uncompromising stand against social evils. Because they are not part of a religious institution, they are not concerned with institutional survival during times of turmoil and therefore feel free as individuals to speak out against moral and political corruption. They have maintained their spiritual and theistic perspective against the invading forces of materialism since the Meiji Era. Politically, they consistently opposed Shinto nationalism and Japanese imperialism, often to their great personal cost. During the postwar period the Mukyokai have worked actively for peace in Japan and abroad. This article is focused on the pacifist expressions of this movement as encountered in the Mukyokai literature and in data gathered through field research. To understand this pacifism, we must look first at its prewar context of institutionalized nationalism.
Japanese nationalism was grounded in the belief expounded in the official "National Polity" (Kokutai) that Japan was a divine nation whose Emperor was a living god deserving of the unconditional loyalty of all subjects. [2] This belief was contained in the Imperial Rescript on Education of 1890 and thereby disseminated throughout the new Japanese educational system. The Education Ministry fostered the growth of authoritarianism by its mass indoctrination of the concepts of reverence for the Emperor, subservience to the state, glorification of the military tradition, chauvinism, and aggression as the prerogative of a superior race.
Competing ideologies, such as socialism, communism, democracy, or Christianity, were the subject of constant attack by the government. Christianity was singled out for special suspicion because of its foreign origins and the exclusiveness of its faith. Finally, in 1889 the Department of Education prohibited religious instruction and services in the private schools, which had been the chief proselyting vehicles for foreign missionaries; the prohibition even extended to the attendance of religious services outside the educational setting. This government control over religion was gradually extended to all religious organizations, becoming absolute with the passage of the Religious Bodies Law in 1939. Under the Law, the Minister of Education, acting through governors and local officials, was empowered to exercise close supervision over the organization, personnel, activities, and teachings of all religious bodies in Japan. All religions were required to unite under a single superintendent who could be controlled by the State; with the single exception of the Roman Catholic Church. [3] All denominations were forced into a "United Church of Christ in Japan" (Nihon Kirisuto Kyodan) .
State control over the new religious body was absolute. Any expression or activity which conflicted with Shinto nationalism was eliminated. For example, the Apostles' Creed, which served as the common profession of faith, was changed to delete references to God as "Creator of heaven and earth" and to Christ as one who "shall come to judge the living and the dead," since these expressions contradicted the mythical origin of Japan, as well as the conception of the Imperial Throne as "eternal as heaven and earth." The Hymnal was "reformed" in its content, and certain hymns deleted altogether. The State prescribed all sermon topics, and every religious service was preceded by a five-minute "people's ceremony" consisting of obeisance to the throne and singing the national anthem. [4]
At the outbreak of the Pacific War, the churches were asked to cooperate with the State for the achievement of victory. Members of the various denominations were organized into patriotic associations at the prefect and national levels. The Kyodan collected money for construction of warplanes in the churches and organized the Pastors' Labor Patriotic Groups, composed of pastors under the age of forty-five forced to work in ammunition plants as patriotic examples for their fellow Christians. Local churches held meetings to pray for military victory, to celebrate victories as they occurred, to bid farewell to departing soldiers, and to promote other means of raising national morale. Religious leaders were called upon to visit conquered nations in order to establish, under military sponsorship, religious organizations identical with those existing in Japan.
Early Christian opposition to this type of cooperation gradually gave way in the mid-1930's to compromise and to efforts to syncretize Shintoism and Christianity. In 1936 Ebina Danjo exhorted Japanese Christians to visit the shrines to consider Shinto as the Old Testament, gathering it up into the New Testament. [5] During the war, Kyodan literature proclaimed a syncretic religion known as the Imperial Way of Christianity (Kodo Kirisutokyo), [6] equating service to the Emperor with service to God. Ebisawa Akira, general secretary of the Kyodan, wrote that the establishment of Japan's new order in East Asia coincided admirably with Christian goals:
What, then, is the plan for the long-term reconstruction of Eastern Asia? Its purpose is that of realizing the vision emblazoned on the banner, 'The World One Family' Hakko Icchiu); and that purpose, we must recognize afresh, coincides spontaneously with the fundamental faith of Christianity . . . This is the Christian conception of the Kingdom of Got. The basis of the Japanese spirit also consists in this, and thus, wonderful to relate, it is one with Christianity. Nay, this must indeed be the Great Way of Heaven and Earth. [7]
In the face of this widespread institutional compromise with Shinto militarism, only a few Christian groups, including the Holiness and Seventh Day Adventist Churches, refused to cooperate. Their members were harassed by the authorities and their leaders put on trial. Similarly, when the Korean Christians resisted the new policies and Japanization of their members, they were severely persecuted by the Japanese overlords, and quite a few Korean Christians were executed for refusing to pay homage to Shinto shrines. [8]
In analyzing this institutional compromise with Shinto nationalism, it is important to consider how the churches subjectively defined their historical situation. [9] From the very beginning of Japanese militarism, the Christian Churches had believed that it was an admirable effort to liberate and unify all the Asian nations. They were persuaded that, in view of the world situation, a holy war could be justified by the achievement of a noble goal, i.e., "Greater Asia for Common Prosperity." All the successful military campaigns against China and Russia were seen as extending the values of the superior Japanese civilization to neighboring countries. Thus, the Japanese Christians voluntarily aided in this extension by performing missionary work in the conquered territories, thereby acting on the slogan "Serve the Nation With Religion!"
Only when they realized that public opinion in the Western nations was highly antagonistic to Japan's Asian policies did Japanese Christians become seriously concerned over these new directions. The idea of a conflict with the mother churches from which spiritual and material sustenance had been drawn for many years was appalling, and the Japanese Christians made several attempts to pacify their overseas brethren. In the fall of 1937, a few months after the Sino-Japanese War, thirty prominent Japanese Christians signed an open letter sent to the major Western nations, attempting to justify Japan's action. In the spring of 1941 a special peace mission was dispatched in an attempt to ward off the imminent war between Japan and the Allies.
On the whole, however, the churches welcomed the Religious Bodies Law, since they anticipated that they would receive official support and protection. They rationalized the imposition of shrine worship by arguing that it carried no real religious meaning and was therefore a morally acceptable way of accepting with clean conscience the Shinto ideology. Enthusiastic participation in the war effort became a form of Christian patriotism as well as an evangelical effort in a time of religious and moral crisis. In short, the half century of indoctrination in the Shinto ideology, the gradual accommodation to it, the stimulus of the war psychology, the fear of offending public opinion, and the need to survive as an institution were the major factors in the Kyodan's acquiescence in becoming an instrument of militarism.
The Mukyokai reaction to Shinto nationalism was of an entirely different nature. Lacking formal organization, the non-Church Christians could not be controlled by the State as a single group, nor did they need to take an official position vis-a-vis the government's policies. Each individual was left to confront nationalism according to his own conscience and to his responsibility to God. As a result, the Mukyokai Christians usually opposed militarism in forms ranging from patient tolerance to open attack on the nationalistic ideology and policies.
Uchimura was the first Mukyokai Christian to reject the idolatry of the State openly. The "Lese Majeste Incident" (Uchimura Kanzo Fukeijiken) is famous in Meiji intellectual history; it precipitated bitter controversy and was extensively analyzed in the literature. [10] On January 9, 1891, in conformity with Ministry of Education requirements, the First High School of Tokyo held a special ceremony for the reading of the Imperial Rescript. When the reading had been completed, the assembled faculty and students all bowed deeply to the Imperial document in a manner of obeisance similar to that followed in Buddhist and Shinto services. Since this could be interpreted as an act of idolatry under Christian beliefs, the few Christian faculty members had decided to avoid the issue altogether by staying home that day; Uchimura was the only Christian instructor present. When his turn came to bow to the Rescript, he hesitated and finally made only a short courtesy bow, rather than a deep obeisance as required. [11] This inadequate bow was immediately interpreted as an act of contempt toward the Emperor, and Uchimura was attacked by faculty, students, and the national press. He was vilified as a "traitor," "impious," and an "offender of the Imperial Holiness." His friends deserted him, and the school fired him.
The attacks upon Uchimura expanded to include all Japanese Christians. Inoue Tetsujiro ( 1856-1944), the first Japanese professor of philosophy at Tokyo University, was the chief spokesman for the intellectual opponents of Christianity. He contended that Christianity was, of necessity, opposed to the Rescript in both principle and practice. As a monotheistic religion, Christianity was essentially intolerant and could not coexist with the Rescript, which reflected the traditional Japanese values of loyalty and filial piety. Thus, Inoue argued, Christians could not be loyal subjects of the Emperor --witness the flagrant example of Uchimura. [12] His charges were met with countercharges and touched off a long debate resulting in publication of some thirty books and one hundred articles on the subject Uchimura responded by pointing out that the Emperor had formulated the Rescript on Education not as a guide to worship but to provide guidelines to the Japanese people for the restoration and moral upgrading of the nation. In this context Christianity was perfectly compatible with the spirit of the Rescript, as witnessed every day by the loyalty and hard work of Christians in the service of Japan. [13] Uchimura's opposition to Japanese militarism, however, did not develop until later in his religious career. He had joined with his colleagues in unanimous support of the government at the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese War in 1894, since he felt as a Christian nationalist that God had entrusted Japan with a special mission to bring justice and order to the world. He wrote an essay entitled "Justification of the Korean War" which described Japan's military intervention as a "righteous war." [14] Uchimura argued that there had been few wars in the history of mankind which had been undertaken to bring righteousness on earth; those that were righteous included Gideon's battle against the Midianites, the Greek war against the Persians, and Gustavus Adolphus' resistance against Catholic oppression. He saw the Sino-Japanese war in a similar light as the latter --its purpose was to free the Koreans from Chinese oppression, and to bring them free government, religion, education, and commerce.
However, when the war had ended and Japan did not live up to her promises, Uchimura was acutely embarrassed, especially before his Western colleagues, for whom he had written the "Essay." Japan did not grant Korean independence; in fact, Japan systematically exploited her own commercial interests at the expense of the Korean people. Uchimura commented bitterly upon the turnabout: "A righteous war has turned into a piratic war and the prophet who wrote its 'justification' is now ashamed." [15] His disillusionment turned Uchimura toward pacifism, and on the eve of the Russo-Japanese War (1904-5) he resigned his promising position at the Yorozu Choho (Morning Times) because the paper supported the conflict editorially. Abandoning his successful journalistic career, Uchimura decided to dedicate himself to Bible teaching and to the expression of his moral convictions. Through speeches and writings he deplored the moral corruption of Japanese society, predicting the wrath of God and repeating Jesus' warning to Jerusalem:
O Jerusalem , Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathered her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. [16]
Accordingly Uchimura considered the Great Earthquake of 1923, which destroyed half of Tokyo and almost all of Yokohama, to be God's punishment for the Japanese and a preview of the Day of Judgment. [17]
A second outstanding prophetic figure of the non-Church movement was Fujii Takeshi (1882-1930), the "Jeremiah of Japan." He also saw the similarity between Jerusalem before the advent of Christ and Japan's prevailing moral corruption. He considered himself a Japanese prophet, come to bring the will of God to the nation and to awaken it to its responsibilities. He expressed these sentiments in Seisho yori Mitaru Nihon (Japan in Biblical Perspective), which was published only a few months before his death in 1930. [18] His vision of a Day of Judgment for Japan, from which a new Zion would emerge, was taken up by Yanaihara Tadao (1893-1961), a professor of Tokyo Imperial University who became the leader of the opposition to militarism during the 1930's and 40's. Yanaihara fought the nationalist ideology from the Manchurian Incident (1931) until the end of the Second World War.
Yanaihara had visited Manchuria just prior to the outbreak of hostilities and was convinced that the Japanese had deliberately provoked the Incident, [19] thereby deliberately violating the Washington Treaty of 1932 of nonaggression against China. He saw this violation of international law as a treacherous act destined to call down the punishment of God. His book Minzoku to Heiwa (Race and Peace) analyzed the concepts of nationalism and racial consciousness in terms of their harmful implications when applied within a narrow egoistic framework which disregarded the basic principles of justice toward other nations. [20] When the military extremists succeeded in provoking a second war with China in 1937, Yanaihara responded with an article entitled "Kokka no Riso" (Ideal of a Nation), [21] in which he defined a nation as a group of people living together under principles based on the concept of justice. Justice was to be expressed in terms of mutual recognition of individual rights and international rights; as the spiritual basis of a society, it could not be arbitrarily imposed by leadership from above, but had to be an objective response to the needs of people living in a group. A social order based on justice would naturally be peaceful, and the national ideal would be the realization of justice and peace on both the national and international levels. In their unrestrained greed to create a great Japanese Empire, the militarists were jeopardizing this ideal of a nation, and violating the inalienable rights of other countries as well.
In subsequent books and lecture tours, Yanaihara expanded on this theme, echoing Fujii's prophecies of punishment and destruction for Japan: "Die, O Japan! By dying you shall live a new life!" [22] The authorities responded by banning his books and mounting personal attacks on him and his friends; by 1937 Yanaihara was forced to resign from his university position. He then turned to lecturing and interpreting the Bible in an attempt to help Japan by applying Christian principles at this critical juncture in history.
Yanaihara was eventually joined in his fight against Japanese militarism by Nambara Shigeru (1889- ), also a professor at Tokyo University. In 1942 Nambara published the controversial Kokka to Shukyo (The State and Religion), a critical analysis of the origin and nature of modern nationalism in Germany and Japan. [23] He criticized the Nietzschean theories of racial superiority underlying Nazi authoritarianism and similarly rejected Tanabe's theories of racial dominance and the militaristic state. Tanabe's book Shu no Ronri (The Logic of Species), published in 1930, had attempted a synthesis of German idealism and Oriental pantheism and had rapidly become the basis for a popular ideology. Nambara rejected Tanabe's conception of the state as an absolute and superior entity superseding the reality and freedom of the individual, and he pointed out the numerous evil effects of racial and imperialistic policies based on a false conception of the Japanese race and a distorted view of human history.
Nambara, of course, encountered extreme official hostility, but he succeeded in retaining his job at the University and eventually headed an influential group of intellectuals who were instrumental in persuading the military authorities to request an armistice at the end of the war. He served as President of Tokyo University from 1945 to 1951, when he was succeeded by Yanaihara; the two influential Mukyokai intellectuals succeeded in reconstructing the University on a more democratic basis during the postwar period.
A large number of less well known Mukyokai also expressed their opposition to Japanese imperialism, often paying a high price for their loyalty to their religious beliefs. Suzuki Sukeyoshi was imprisoned for eight months for declaring openly that the war was immoral and therefore Japan was destined for defeat. Masaike Megumu resigned his high school position in protest against the militaristic policies of the government; he published a pacifist book, which was immediately withdrawn from circulation by the authorities, who also fined Masaike severely. Several of the non-Church leaders were imprisoned for refusing to acknowledge the divinity of the Emperor. Perhaps the most famous case of Mukyokai resistance was that of Asami Sensaku (1868-1952), an old friend of Uchimura and owner of a Sapporo bath house. [24] He was arrested in 1943 for his anti-war preaching and subsequently sentenced to three years in prison by the local Procurator. Asami appealed his sentence to the Japanese Supreme Court. Almost eighty years old and seriously ill as a result of his eight months in prison, Asami nevertheless traveled from Sapporo to Tokyo during the height of the American air raids in 1945, in order to defend his religious beliefs and the honor of the Mukyokai. After a long and impartial inquiry, during which Asami was treated with every consideration, the Chief Justice reversed the decision of the Sapporo Court. His ruling contained a real effort to understand the religious mentality and its relationship to the secular State.
Although there is room for argument that there must be some understanding on the part of the accused with respect to the relationship between the national sovereign powers of the several states and Christ's authority when he comes to earth, man's belief is purely intuitive in nature . . . and not subject to purely intellectual understanding. Therefore, . . . it would be a mistake to blame the accused for his insufficient explanation of his own thoughts. [25]
Asami's trial became known as the "Mukyokai Trial" and is recalled with pride by the non-Church Christians as the final victory in their fight against nationalism and the authority of the State over religious beliefs.
The foregoing examples are but a few instances of the widespread Mukyokai opposition to Shinto nationalism. However, it would be misleading to assert that all of the Mukyokai witnessed for their faith in the same way. Some of the non Church Christians simply remained silent, and two of the national leaders even compromised on the subject of the war. (It is said that these flaws in the otherwise solid front of Mukyokai opposition constitute one reason for there being no official history of the movement.) [26]
But these small weaknesses in the Mukyokai opposition do not bear comparison with the outright compromise of the organized churches. As previously noted, the main factor in the Mukyokai independence was its lack of organizational structure. The denominational institutions were preoccupied with administrative and organizational survival, whereas the Mukyokai were free to be responsible for their actions as individuals, and therefore to witness their faith with honesty, integrity, and personal freedom. A second factor in the strength of the Mukyokai opposition could be found in Uchimura's spiritual legacy to his followers. He served as a model of a true patriot and true Christian, and his writings inspired thousands to suffer for their Christian patriotism. Finally, the strong "we feeling" prevalent among the Mukyokai served to unite the group in its faith, reinforce individual members, and encourage adherence to the faith during times of trial.
The idea of peace plays a central role in the Mukyokai people's Weltanschauung, and a considerable amount of literature on the topic has been produced since Uchimura's time. In an attempt to give a unified view of the different aspects considered by the various writers, we may draw the following general theory of peace. [27]
Peace is basically a state of mind which one reaches through intimate contact with God, who forgives man's sins and communicates to him His divine life. Should everybody have such a joyful experience of salvation and life, all men would feel united together in God, and true peace would be achieved in the world without difficulty. The major mistake of politicians in striving for peace is that they overemphasize human power and impose on others their own ideologies exclusively. This approach is still very much the result of a narrow legalistic mentality and it is destined to lead to an endless chain of conflicts. Peace cannot be attained simply by imposing this or that ideology; whatever the nature of an ideology may be, it is always an "ism" which enslaves the minds of the people into a partial and imperfect perspective, and it is intrinsically unable to unify the whole of mankind.
In opposition to these vain efforts of man, Christianity gives any man the true freedom of spirit, the freedom to follow the inspiration of God in everything. It is only in the mutual recognition of this freedom that peace may be finally attained in the world. Christianity has freed man from the slavery of the law and from any ideology which is legalistically imposed on him. The entire history of mankind can be considered as a progressive process of liberation from the law in which Christianity has played a pivotal role. Christianity itself, however, is not an ideology; it is a personal encounter with God; it is salvation and life. And the problem of finding peace is, after all, the problem of finding salvation and life.
Christ, by forgiving our sins and leading us to God, has shown man the way to peace. Thus, the mission of a Christian on this earth is to fight against any form of legalism and lead all men to God, that is, to peace, which is the goal of history. The function of Christianity is precisely to prepare mankind for the advent of the Great Peace, which will be established in full with the Second Coming of Christ.
Consistent with the general theological perspective of history, the social order in any period of history should be a reflection of the ideal order wanted by God and should lead mankind toward a progressive realization of that perfect model. The state is the chief institution whose functions are designed by God to serve the material and spiritual development of mankind. Through it, humanity realizes progressively those moral, juridical, political, and social ideals which are the goal of existence, the meaning of history. Thus, against the political utilitarianism for which the state is merely an organizational, technical institution serving self-ordained interests, the Mukyokai conceives of the state as an institution invested with moral responsibility. It follows that the state should conform to the ideal order if it wants to implement its mission, which is to fulfill human existence in its social life and, through this, to lead man to God. In practice, however, it often happens that the state deviates from its ideal and drags nations down from the level of true human freedom and of respect for human personality; governments abuse their political power and oppress their people with unjust laws, to the detriment of the communities.
Non-Church Christians consistently oppose any policies that could retard the realization of peace in Japan and abroad. Consequently, they oppose the present governmental goals of revising the Constitution and rearming Japan for defensive purposes. They also criticize any celebration of past military exploits --e.g., the Yasukuni Bill to establish a national shrine for war dead of what the Mukyokai consider a "sinful" war. [28] Likewise, the Mukyokai strongly opposed the 1968 governmental decision to restore the observance of the National Foundation Memorial Day (Kigensetsu) on February 11 as a continuation of the cult of Emperor-worship.
In contrast with this latter effort to restore national morale through reviving certain old traditions, the Mukyokai advocate reestablishing the country's spiritual integrity by making spiritual and material reparation to the Asian countries wracked by Japanese imperial expansion. For example, they feel Japan has an imperative duty to pay a satisfactory indemnity to Korea, which was worst affected by the furies of the war, and have severely criticized the government for substituting an economic aid program modeled on American economic imperialism. They see this as a hypocritical camouflaging of economic interests, a new form of exploitation pursued under the guise of international agreements or even charity.
In short, the Mukyokai feel that the universal laws of political morality require Japan to recognize the inalienable rights of other peoples as a prerequisite to a place in the community of nations. Japan must not only fulfill its legal and material obligations, but also dedicate herself as a nation to helping rebuild the prosperity of the less developed countries of the world. [29]
The Mukyokai stress the need for spiritual reparations even more emphatically. Special efforts have been made to improve Japanese-Korean relations, including goodwill trips by the Mukyokai to Korea and Japanese-Korean Peace Conferences. The latter are meetings held in Japan and attended by Mukyokai members from both Japan and Korea, where a small Mukyokai movement also exists; the delegates hold up the painful experiences of the past as bad examples and work toward Christian fellowship though common prayer and discussion of Bible passages. [30]
The Mukyokai principles of Christian pacifism apply equally to other nations. United States intervention in Vietnam has been widely condemned by Mukyokai writers looking to the day when all Asian peoples can control their own destinies. [31]
The pacifist philosophy of the Mukyokai is familiar to the people as hansenron (anti-warism). Its main tenets can be understood only within the Christian context. War is generated by man's unbridled passions and is permitted by God to exist as a punishment for the sins of nations. It is sinful in itself because it involves murder and cruelty. Under no circumstances, not even surprise attack or as a last resort, is war justified. Nonresistance (muteiko shugi) is the logical consequence of a theological perspective which views the universe in all its aspects, good and evil, as the manifestation of God's Providence. True peace and order will be achieved only at the Second Coming of Christ, the final stage in the history of social progress. (This latter tenet of the Second Coming is particularly dear to the Mukyokai and is expressed in times of social crisis with strong prophetic overtones. )
In short, true Christians should oppose war under all circumstances, even though the power to stop war rests in the hands of God alone. The role of pacifism is to prepare the world of the Second Advent of Christ by preaching the gospel of peace and by accepting war as atonement for personal sins and the sins of society. Pacifism transforms the most destructive act of mankind into an instrument of mankind's redemption.
Paradoxically, this type of pacifism does not take the form of conscientious objection, but requires the believer to go to war in much the same manner as Christ going to the Cross to die for the sins of others. The death of a Christian pacifist is a sacrifice of much greater value in the eyes of Go than the death of an individual who believes in war. Conscientious objectors who refuse to obey the will of God by letting others die in their places are cowards. Thus, for example, Uchimura called upon his disciples not to restrict conscription; he argued that evil could be overcome only by good deeds, and that therefore war could be ended only through the deaths of many pacifists sacrificing themselves to atone for the sins of others. He dedicated an article to a young war victim with the words "God waits for thee in Heaven; thy death was not in vain." [32] Similarly, Yanaihara advised young historian conscripts to have faith in the resurrection of the body and in the Second Coming --the former being a sign of personal salvation and the latter of the salvation of society. [33]
The dual expression of Mukyokai pacifism in the form of opposition to war policies but nonresistance in the face of war itself is visible in their willingness to engage in public protests which stop short of any civil disobedience or violence, and simultaneous acceptance of conscription even in the event of an unjust war. [34] It is the paradoxical result of a genial synthesis between Japanese tradition and Christian principles. The extreme emphasis on authority in the Japanese culture has implanted a ready submissiveness in the Japanese people, along with a tendency to see opposition to this authority as a form of visionary heroism which is seldom successful. [35] In the case of the Mukyokai, these cultural characteristics find their most appropriate rationalization in an original Japanese-Christian pacifism, in which the protagonist is an enlightened prophet, alienated from society, whose kerygmatic mission is to witness for Christian values and bring the righteous message of God to the people.
The position of the non-Church Christians is one of perennial conflict. Their uncompromising stand with the world alienates them from the Japanese society; at the same time they are also outcast from institutionalized Christianity in Japan. Thus, they are subject to a double alienation: as Christians they are estranged from their society, and as non-Church Christians they are unwelcome in the community of Japanese Christians. However, their alienation does not constitute a retreat from society; the Mukyokai share an awareness of being a minority, but an elite minority of those who are willing to rise above blind social pressures to put forward new goals for the existing social and cultural system. They see their alienation as an honorable one, since they are dependent on God rather than men, and they feel themselves to be the true spiritual leaders of society. Their approach in fulfilling their mission is kerygmatic, based on the prophetic witnessing of Christian values: Uchimura accurately equated the Old Testament Prophet, the Japanese Puritan, and "the true samurai infused with the Spirit of Christ." [36] In short, a Mukyokai Christian is an individual who wishes to live in this world and take an active role in it, but who does not want to be of the world in order to be able to transform it; he presents himself as a kind of charismatic personality with an outspoken and authoritative message for Japan and the world.