In Opposition to Monarchism (and Christian Nationalism)

It is Saturday morning on May 6 as I am writing this. Perhaps many of you are watching the coronation of King Charles III at this time. I am not, intentionally, for I am among the growing number of people who stand in opposition to monarchies in this modern world. 

Archbishop Welby crowning Charles III 

Opposition to the British Monarchy

“God Save Us from Christian Empire” is the name of a May 4 article by Adam Russell Taylor, the president of Sojourners. (It was because of reading that thought-provoking piece that I decided to write this one.)

According to CNN, the coronation in Westminster Abbey was “a symbolic coming together of the monarchy, church, and state for a religious ritual.” The Archbishop of Canterbury anointed Charles III with oil and placed a heavy crown on his head.

Since the days of Henry VIII, the British monarch has been the supreme head of the Church of England and often referred to as the “defender of the faith.”

Taylor calls attention to the problematical “global legacy” of the British Empire. That legacy “includes centuries of exclusion; racism; and plundering of land, resources, and human beings on nearly every continent—a legacy that is inseparable from both the British monarchy and the church.”

In recent years, Barbados and Jamaica have both announced their intention to sever ties with the British crown. Quoting Taylor again,

In both nations, enslaved people were forcibly brought from Africa and toiled in brutal conditions for hundreds of years, all to the economic benefit of the empire and its sovereigns—just one chapter of a long history of the royal family’s role in financing human enslavement that goes back to Queen Elizabeth I.

This is a large part of my ongoing opposition to the British monarchy—but there are other reasons that I will not mention at this time.

Opposition to the Japanese Monarchy

As Wikipedia accurately explains, the “Japanese monarchy is the oldest continuous hereditary monarchy in the world. The Imperial House recognizes 126 monarchs, beginning with Emperor Jimmu (traditionally dated to 11 February 660 BC), and continuing up to the current emperor, Naruhito.”

I remember well the opposition to the monarchy in Japan when Emperor Showa (Hirohito) died in early January 1989, and his son, Emperor Akihito (the present emperor’s father), ascended to the Chrysanthemum Throne.

Freedom of religion is guaranteed by the current constitution of Japan, which went into effect on May 3, 1947 (and May 3 is now Constitutional Memorial Day, a national holiday). There is no state-sanctioned religion in Japan, and the constitution prohibits any religious group from exercising political power.

Accordingly, Japanese Christians, among others, expressed strong opposition to the enthronement ceremonies of the new Emperor in 1990, which was couched in Shinto rituals.

Part of that criticism was linked to the role of the Emperor in the ruthlessness of Japan in expanding the Japanese Empire in the 20^th century, which was partly modeled after the colonial expansion of the British Empire in the previous centuries.

Opposition to Christian Nationalism in the U.S.

Last week my friend Brian Kaylor, president and editor-in-chief of the Baptist periodical Word&Way, posted an article titled “Coronating Christian Nationalism,” indicating how the coronation of George II was giving Christian nationalism “a global spotlight.”

The U.S. fought the Pacific War in opposition to the Japanese monarchy and the concomitant excesses of the Japanese Empire. The U.S. colonists fought the Revolutionary War against King George III and the British Empire which wanted to rule as much territory as possible in North America.

But now there is a dangerous movement of right-wing Christians and politicians to override the principle of the separation of church and state in the U.S. That would make it more like Great Britain now and like Japan of the 1930s in its union of the nation with State Shinto.

Let’s not go there. It’s too late in the world for a King as a religious leader and national allegiance given to that King as a defender of the faith. I stand with the early religious dissenters to the British monarchy and the state church, men such as John Bunyan and Roger Williams.

What about you?

A Big Day for Japan

Emperor Hirohito of Japan, properly known as Emperor Showa, died in 1989. His successor, Emperor Akihito, is abdicating the Chrysanthemum Throne today, so as of tomorrow, May 1, Japan will have its third Emperor in thirty-one years.

The Last Day of Showa

Emperor Showa died at 6:33 a.m. on January 7, 1989. I remember that morning well, for I was scheduled that morning to give the final paper at the Hayama Missionary Seminar, an interdenominational gathering of missionaries to Japan. The theme of that conference was “Showa, X-Day, and Beyond.”

“Showa” was the name of the era that started when Hirohito became emperor in 1926. So, in Japan I would sometimes give my birth year as Showa 13, and we would sometimes have to indicate that we arrived in Japan for the first time in Showa 41. New Year’s Day in 1989 was the beginning of Showa 64, the longest era in Japanese history.

“X-Day” was the Japanese circumlocution for the day Emperor Hirohito would die--and since he turned 87 years old in 1988 and was not in good health, throughout the last part of that year, X-Day was expected at any time.

It was sobering to present my paper just three hours or so after the Emperor’s death. The title of my paper was “Beyond Showa: Christianity and Japanese Religions.” (A PDF of the entire booklet of that 1989 Hayama Conference papers can be found here.)

A deep concern of Christians in Japan at that time was the possible impact all the Shinto-related enthronement ceremonies might have on Christianity during that year and in the years to come. For good reason, given its close ties to the Pacific War (1941~45), most Japanese Christians were quite critical of the imperial system of Japan--and that is still true now.

The day after the Showa Era ended, the new era, called Heisei, began on January 8, 1989. And now, today (April 30), that era comes to an end.

The Last Day of Heisei

The era names in Japan all are composed of two kanji (Chinese characters). 昭和 (Showa) is generally said to mean “enlightened peace (or harmony).”

平成 (Heisei) means “achieving peace”--and it seemed to be a fitting era name for Japan, which had certainly been a peace-loving, peace-seeking nation since the end of World War II. (The most common Japanese word for peace is 平和、heiwa.).

The new era which begins tomorrow (on May 1) is Reiwa (the kanji is shown in the picture on the right), which is now commonly said to mean “beautiful harmony.” According to Prime Minister Abe, the new name conveys a meaning that “culture is born and nurtured when people’s hearts empathize with each other beautifully.”

Although the “Western calendar” is also used in Japan, the era name is still a part of daily life there, used on coins, drivers' licenses, and official paperwork.

The Ongoing Opposition

Everyone in Japan, however, is not satisfied with the ceremonies surrounding the enthronement of the new emperor. As in 1988-89, many Christians oppose those activities because they are so closely tied to the Shinto religion--and to Japanese exceptionalism.

What in this country is generally called the separation of church and state is also acknowledged in the current (since 1947) Constitution of Japan. But tomorrow’s activities, and those scheduled for October 22, seem to be blatant violations of that principle.

Perhaps even more than in 1989, the enthronement ceremonies for the new emperor may well stir nationalistic (Make Japan Great Again!) sentiment in Japan--and that is the underlying reason for the ongoing opposition to the imperial system and the enthronement ceremonies tomorrow for Emperor Naruhito. 

Japan: 1868, 1945, and Now

It can easily be argued that 1868 and 1945 were the two most significant years in Japanese history. The events of 1945 are widely known, but let’s consider what happened 150 years ago in 1868.

The Significance of the Meiji Restoration

The beginning of Japan goes back to February 11, 660 B.C.E., when Jimmu, a descendant of the sun goddess Amaterasu (according to Shinto mythology), became the first emperor. Even now February 11 is observed as National Foundation Day, a national holiday.

As an island country, Japan long existed with minimal “foreign” influence, developing as a unique country and accepting only what it wanted from near-by Korea and China—and much later from distant European countries.

In the 16^th century, merchants and missionaries from Europe arrived in Japan, but in the 1630s most Westerners and their influence (including Christianity) were expelled and kept out of Japan until the 1850s.

In 1853 American Commodore Matthew Perry and his “black ships” arrived, and soon Japan was forced to open to the West.

Only fifteen years later, the country that had been virtually closed for nearly 220 years made major changes, “modernizing” in order to compete with Western countries as an equal.

The pivotal year was 1868 when drastic domestic changes resulted from what is called the Meiji Restoration.  

In February 1867, 14-year-old Prince Mutsuhito succeeded his father, becoming the 122nd emperor of Japan. Since 1192 Japan had been under the political control of a shogun (military dictator), but in November 1867 the shogun resigned and in January 1868 the new emperor ceremoniously proclaimed the “restoration” of Imperial rule.

Then in April 1868, Emperor Meiji promulgated the “Charter Oath,” which dissolved Japan’s traditional feudal structure and established the legal stage for Japan’s modernization.

Kyoto (meaning “capital") had been the home of the Japanese emperor since 794, but the shogun had resided in Edo Castle since 1603. In September 1868, the Emperor announced that the name of the city Edo was being changed to Tokyo, or “eastern capital.” Emperor Meiji moved there the next year. 

The Rise and Fall of Japan

The modernization/industrialization of Meiji Japan was rapid and thoroughgoing, at least in its outward manifestations. The sweeping changes to become more like the Western (imperial) countries led to increasing expansion of Japanese territory.

Hokkaido, the large northern island of present-day Japan, was consolidated in 1869. Ten years later the Ryukyu Islands (including Okinawa) were annexed. Then at the conclusion of the First Sino-Japanese War in 1895, Taiwan was ceded to Japan.

The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 was the first modern war in which an Asian country defeated a European power—and that war ended with Japan gaining control over Korea, which it fully annexed in 1910. Control over various southeast Asian countries followed.

What in Japan is called the Fifteen-Year War began in 1931, but the Meiji Restoration which had achieved so much for 75 years, came to a tragic end in August 1945. The changes of that fateful year were more dramatic and of more significance than those of 1868.

What about Japan Now?

After Japan’s remarkable recovery from the devastation of World War II and “miraculous” economic growth into a leading country of the world, Japan faces an uncertain future on this 150^th anniversary year of the Meiji Restoration.

Economic conditions have been stagnant for many years now; the population is aging—and declining in number; and now there is understandable anxiety in the land because of the proximity to an unpredictable and potentially destructive North Korea.

Let us hope and pray that 2018 won’t become as significant, and as catastrophic, as 1945.

Once Again: Were the A-Bombs Necessary?

Largely because of the response received to my May article about Harry Truman (see here), I decided to consider once again the question repeatedly raised since the first atomic bombs were dropped: were they necessary for ending the war with Japan?

The Majority Opinion

Undoubtedly, most USAmericans since the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and August 9, 1945, have firmly believed that they were justified.

Moreover, most people in the U.S. seem to think that the bombs were not only necessary but that they also were “good” because of the lives saved.

Thinking Friend Tom Lamkin in North Carolina wrote: “A member of one of my churches had a father on the troop ships on the way to Japan for the invasion when the bombs were dropped. They were called back when news came Japan had surrendered. That was one family glad to see the bombs fall.”

Similarly, local Thinking Friend Joe Barbour said, “I dislike war but we live in a world where anything goes it seems. So as I think of the loss of life that those bombings of the Japanese at home experienced, they saved far more lives than were lost. It had to be a hard decision but [Truman] made it and ended a terrible war.”

These views are in agreement with what ethicist Joseph Fletcher propounds in his book Situation Ethics (1966). He writes about the “agapeic calculus,” which seeks “the greatest amount of neighbor welfare for the largest number of neighbors possible.” (p. 95).
While it is only a “test case” with no solution explicitly given, Fletcher ends his book with a brief summary of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—with the suggestion, I think, that the agapeic calculus means that the dropping of the atomic bombs should be considered right or “good.”

While making no reference to Fletcher, historian Michael Bess agrees with what I call the majority opinion. Chapter Ten in Bess’s excellent book Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War II (2006) is “The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb.”

Bess asserts that “it is a fair conclusion that the bomb’s use probably saved an enormous number of lives—far more Japanese than Allied” (pp. 230-1). 

An Opposing View

One of many places where an opposing view can be found is in the television mini-series “The Untold History of the United States” (2012) and the accompanying book by that title written by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick.

The fourth chapter of Stone & Kuznick’s book is titled “The Bomb: The Tragedy of a Small Man.” They are probably much too critical of Truman, but they may be right in their clear implication that the bombs were most likely not necessary—especially if better decisions had been made earlier.

For example, in all probability the bombs would not have been necessary if Truman had taken Herbert Hoover’s advice. In Chapter 76 of Freedom Betrayed, the 2011 book that contains Hoover’s writings about WWII and afterward, Hoover tells how in May 1945 he advised Truman to drop the demand for unconditional surrender and to assure Japan that the Emperor could remain as the spiritual head of the nation.

If Truman had taken Hoover’s suggestion soon thereafter, Japan would most likely have surrendered much before August 6, 1945.

What about Now?

The historical events of 1945 cannot be changed, of course. But we humans should be able to learn from history.

One essential thing that we need to learn the most is that there is always a better alternative than war—and certainly there is always a better alternative than using nuclear weapons.

Worries about Japan—25 Years Ago and Now

Do you remember the first week of January 1989? That was 25 years ago, but I remember it well as that was a time of significant transition in Japan where I then lived.

Emperor Hirohito passed away that year on January 7. Born in 1901, he became the Emperor of Japan in 1926 and at the time of his death had been Japan’s longest-reigning monarch. When a new emperor accedes to the throne in Japan, a new era name is chosen and the calendar starts again at year 1. So Emperor Hirohito died in Showa 64.

Crown Prince Akihito became the 125^th Emperor of Japan upon the death of his father and chose Heisei (“peace everywhere”) for the name of the new era. So last week was the beginning of Heisei 26 in Japan.

In the weeks before Emperor Hirohito’s death there was considerable anxiety among many Christians, and some other non-traditional Japanese people. Accordingly, “Showa, X-Day and Beyond” was the theme for the thirtieth Hayama Men’s Missionary Seminar, held on Jan. 5-7, 1989, at Amagi Sanso in Japan.

“X-Day” was the name given to the unknown day of the Emperor’s approaching death—and he died while the seminar was in progress. I had the privilege of giving the final paper at that meeting.

Part of the Christians’ concern at that pivotal time in Japanese history was the possibility of a surge of nationalistic (Shintoistic) fervor that would be detrimental to the Christian presence and activities in Japan. Even though religion and the state are to be separate according to the Japanese Constitution, there was considerably anxiety about that not being honored after X-Day.

Looking back, Emperor Hirohito’s death 25 years ago seems to have had minimal long-term effects on the religious or political situation in Japan. Things did not turn out as negatively for Christians, or others, as feared.

But now, quite unrelated to any religious affiliations or affectations, there seems to be a growing nationalistic movement in Japan led primarily by the current head of the Liberal Democratic Party, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who is now in the thirteenth month of his second stint as head of the Japanese government.

PM Abe (pronounced ah-beh) became the 90th Japanese Prime Minister in September 26, 2006. He was then Japan's youngest prime minister since World War II—and the first to be born after the war. But he served as prime minister for less than a year the first time, resigning on September 12, 2007.

Since his election again in December 2012, Abe has taken a hawkish position that is currently a concern for many Japanese—and people in nearby countries. The end of month, as the Washington Post reported, “Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited a Shinto shrine Thursday that honors Japan’s war dead, including 14 war criminals, and is seen by Asian neighbors as a symbol of the nation’s unrepentant militarism.”

That visit to Yasukuni Shine is, of course, much opposed by Christians, and others, in Japan. But much of their opposition last year was due to PM Abe’s expressed intention to change Article IX of the Japanese Constitution, which outlaws war as a means to settle international disputes involving the state.

Less than a week after his ill-conceived visit to Yasukuni, in his New Year message last week PM Abe reaffirmed his resolve to change the nation’s pacifist constitution. No wonder not only peace-loving Japanese but people of the neighboring countries, and elsewhere, have worries about the direction Japan is headed.