Spoiler alert in case you haven't read Silence and want to.
Wow, that was quick! Thanks a lot!
I don't think that Rodrigues had a messianic complex, either. Okay, maybe a little bit, early on in the book: he does seem to be a bit hung up on the concept of martyrdom, at least until his visions of which were completely shattered after seeing his new friends die brutally on the beach. Nor do I think that Rodrigues was completely misguided in his goal of going to Japan to help the persecuted Christians. While it's true that he never stated a goal of converting more Japanese to Christianity, I don't know if there's any Jesuit in the 17th century who didn't dream of a completely Christianized Japan, which probably in reality never could have happened. But I agree with you; I don't think that was ever really his direct goal.
Agreed, completely.
A parallel could be draw with the case of Christianity in China. The Jesuit missionaries there were so succesful that they could have even converted the Imperial family themselves. If only the Pope would have approved (at the request of many Jesuits, first and foremost Matteo Ricci) of equating the Chinese cult of the ancestors with the Christian feast of the remembrance of the dead... Just imagine how a late 17-th century Christian China would have changed the world's history...
The character of Inoue was fascinating: especially the whole Pilate connection. I need to brush up on my Gospels, but somehow the comparison feels incomplete. With Inoue, I don't think it was a "forgive them for they know not what they do" situation. But I am having a hard time piecing together his true motivations. I'm not convinced that he was just a violent sociopath or some demonic figure who just wanted to inflict suffering on people, but I'm also not convinced that he was a fervent believer in his own religion of Japanese Buddhism. Still trying to figure out who exactly he was in this book.
Inoue is much worse than Pilate.
First and most important, Pilate himself did not find any fault whatsoever with Christ, sent Him to Herod and when Herod returned Him without any fault whatsoever too, he reluctantly ordered Christ to be harshly flogged --- but not deadly so. He was absolutely convinced that the Sanhedrin would be satisfied with that and no more. Pilate - Inoue 1-0.
Second, Pilate can at least have the (lame) excuse that he simply fulfilled the clearly and vividly expressed desire of the Jewish people assembled in Jerusalem at that particular time. He was fulfilling a democratically sanctioned mandate. Pilate - Inoue 2-0.
Thirdly, Pilate ordered the crucifixion of Jesus Christ alone; he did not order all of his followers to be crucified as well, nor did he see to it that while he was alive each and every Christian should be tortured in order to renounce the Christian faith. Pilate - Inoue 3-0
If you ask me, Pilate is guilty of general human weakness, but not of deliberate wickedness; on the contrary, Inoue is a strong, wicked man.
While the Japanese Christians as depicted in the book were, as you say, harmless peasants just wanting to live a life of peace and striving toward Christian salvation—it is not quite so simple in my view. Christianity indeed is an existential threat to Japan in the 17th century: a completely Christianized Japan could easily have become a vassal to the Portuguese empire. Obviously, the Japanese are not willing to give up their authority. I wonder if the persecution of Christians in Japan had much more to do with politics than any sense of religious conviction.
Yes, of course, I agree. Time and again, politics and religion are intermingled and the latter is more of a loser than the former.
My favorite part of the book was Rodrigues' and Garrpe's brief ministry in the mountain shack outside the village. I found their small community of faith very honest and touching, independent of all sociopolitical and historical considerations.
Yes, of course, agreed.
I wonder if our Western perspective colors our interpretation of this wonderfully ambiguous book.
Well, I'm not Western. I'm Eastern.
Both of them being misnomers, actually.
Like you, I am a Christian, though surely not the greatest one in the world—I am not (yet) a churchgoer by any means.
I am very glad you identify yourself as a Christian --- ie, a believer in Jesus Christ, albeit an imperfect one. So am I.
That's exactly what
Silence questions: can one still be a Christian after one has formally renounced Christianity?
Do you have any answer?