An interim thought

At the beginning of the Edo Period, Daimyo Hideyoshi had grand visions of a Pan-Asia empire that included China. Under the leadership of the Tokugawa Shogunate, the country set clear restrictions that mostly isolated Japan from face-to-face contact with the world. The nation remained open to commercial trade but not to social corruption from outside influences. Through the Dutch in Nagasaki, the advances in science and technology were available to them. But their world was largely an “internal” world. What was the impact of all this on their self-view vis-a-vis other peoples and nations?

With the advent of the Asia-Pacific war in the 20th century, there was a clear doctrine of racial, cultural and national superiority whose rightful destiny was as leader of the Asia Pacific regions (and perhaps more). But was that present in the 19th century when Japan became more open to the world?

What emerged was a layered self-view of cultural centrality and moral distinctiveness. The Tokugawa Shogunate did not view itself in terms of being the center of an empire, but it did see itself as a center of a superior civilization. Its criteria included moral cultivation, ritual propriety, and social harmony, governed by proper hierarchy and order.

This can be seen by its changing view of China. Where once China was the center of learning, governance, religious thought and social order, that view was increasingly a distant memory. Classical Chinese learning was still revered but in the present the Japanese held that the Chinese had lost their moral position in the world (Confucian) by internal revolts and external wars. Japan now viewed themselves as the true heir of classical civilization. They made this judgment as an ethical and historical assessment, not a judgement on the Chinese people.

Westerners were often described as technically skilled, morally crude, and socially disordered. Christianity was seen as a western import and was condemned not as “foreign” per se, but as socially destabilizing and politically subversive. Westerners were not viewed as racially inferior, but as culturally dangerous to the higher Japanese civilization and morally undisciplined. At the same time, the Japanese became far more certain and confident in their own institutions and traditions, becoming somewhat immune from foreign moral claims. Where once the Japanese looked to China and others for recognition and approbation, they no longer sought it or needed it. 

Sakoku was certainly cultural insulation, but one that did not mandate superiority. It is later thinkers in another time that would radicalize the fruits of the Tokugawa Shogunate to become the Japan facing the world in the 20th century.


Image credit: various photographs from Naval Aviation Museum, National World War II Museum, and US Navy Archives.

The Voice

This coming Sunday we celebrate the Baptism of the Lord.  “And a voice came from the heavens, saying, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.’” (Mt 13:17). The voice from heaven speaks the words that are repeated at the scene of the Transfiguration (Mt 17:5) and reveal God’s proclamation of Jesus’ full identity. After Jesus’ acceptance of John’s baptism as the will of God for him, God declares his pleasure because of the obedience and more fundamentally, declares the unique relationship between God the Father and his Son.

The words of the declaration are usually understood to be derived from one or both of Isa 42:1 and Ps 2:7.  “Here is my servant whom I uphold, my chosen one with whom I am pleased.” (Isaiah 42:1) and goes on to say that God has put his Spirit upon him, which links closely with what we have seen in v. 16.  “You are my son; today I have begotten you.” (Ps 2:7) in which God addresses his anointed king

The echo of both passages lend themselves to Matthew’s focus of fulfillment passages. While his primary fulfillment focus will be Jesus as the One to come, greater than Moses, Matthew is attentive to other fulfillments: son, servant, king.

As R.T. France points out: “God is not quoting the OT, nor setting a puzzle for scripturally erudite hearers to unravel. He is declaring in richly allusive words that this man who has just been baptized by John is his own Son in whom he delights. From this point on Matthew’s readers have no excuse for failing to understand the significance of Jesus’ ministry, however long it may take the actors in the story to reach the same christological conclusion (14:33; 16:16; 26:63–64). It will be this crucial revelation of who Jesus is which will immediately form the basis of the initial testing which Jesus is called to undergo in 4:1–11: “If you are the Son of God …” (4:3, 6). And there, as in the account of the baptism, Jesus’ sonship will be revealed in his obedience to his Father’s will.” (Matthew, 124)


Image credit: The Baptism of Christ, Juan Fernández de Navarrete, “El Mudo” | Museo del Prado, Madrid | Wikimedia Commons | PD-US