Self-governing Churches (Congregational Churches)（自治教会［会衆主義教会］）

Background

More than Denominations

The first quote above expresses Neesima’s view of denominations in a straightforward manner. Against the movement to unite churches, he took a cautious stance from the standpoint of respecting the spirit of congregationalism. Because of this, many regarded Neesima as a narrow- minded denominationalist, but for him, the important thing was “truth,” not the superiority or inferiority of denominations. It is necessary to understand the second quote based on this premise.

Liberalism for Neesima

As can be seen from the second quote above, Neesima was not unmindful of the significance of the merger of churches. However, he feared that the congregational tradition and the spirit of the self-governing churches that Doshisha possessed would be lost if the process was carried out too quickly. Neesima also sensed a problem with the way the discussions were being conducted. He said that the way the committee members and pastors tried to reach a conclusion based on their superiors’ opinions, without hearing the opinions of the end churches and congregations, was contrary to his “liberalism.” It is important to note that in Neesima, the term “liberalism” was used exclusively in the context of ecclesiology (the idea of community). If we ignore this context and easily generalize “liberalism,” we will fall away from his intention.

Pursuit of Self-governing

What does the third quote above say? Although Neesima was at odds with his disciples and colleagues over the movement to unite churches, and he was in a difficult situation, he cites “liberalism” and “self-governing” as a line that he cannot compromise on. The term “assembly of pastors” in the second quote refers to the “oligarchic governing system” centered on the pastors and elders of the Presbyterian churches with which they tried to be united. In his idea of community, Neesima thoroughly emphasizes the preciousness of liberalism and self-governing. This is clearly shown in a letter written by Neesima in his final days: “My life-long goal is freedom education, self-governing churches, both together, long live the state. Please guess my sentiments.” (1889, See “Freedom Education, Self-governing Churches, Both Together”).

The Congregational Church in Japan

The tradition of the Congregational Church (Congregationalism), which Neesima struggled to preserve, can be said to be at the core of Doshisha’s Christianity. The following is a brief history of the Congregational Church in Japan.
　In April 1886, churches in the Congregationalist tradition, which was the denominational background of Doshisha, combined to establish the Japan Congregational Christian Church in Kyoto. The Congregationalist tradition in Japan was first introduced by missionaries from the American Board, and after Doshisha was established, it gained ground through the e f forts of missionaries such as Neesima and the Kumamoto Band (a group of students from Kumamoto who joined and supported the early Doshisha). In 1878, the Congregational churches established the Japan Christian Mission Company, and in 1886 at the ninth general meeting of the Mission Company, the Japan Congregational Christian Church was established. Later, under the leadership of Danjo Ebina (1856–1937), Hiromichi Kozaki (1856–1938), and Tsuneteru Miyagawa (1857–1936), who were called the “Three Elders of the Congregational Church,” the Congregational Church became one of the mainline Protestant denominations in Japan.
　However, with the establishment of the United Church of Christ in Japan in 1941, the Japan Congregational Christian Church ended its history by joining with other denominations. In this sense, the Congregationalist tradition in Japan took the form of an independent denominational organization for only about 55 years, from 1886 to 1941, but that tradition is still alive and well in the Doshisha-affiliated churches. The “freedom, self- governing, and independence” that characterize Congregational churches are also reflected in the spirit of “freedom education and self-governing churches,” the spirit that Neesima valued the most.

Contemporary Significance

The Particular and the Universal

The particular and the universal are often seen as dichotomous, but depending on one’s point of view, the two can easily be reversed. One example is the argument that many of the values that the West has touted as “universal” may be nothing more than Western “particulars.” If we view the particular and the universal not in opposition, but in a mutually complementary and mutually critical relationship, can we not see a new dynamism between congregationalism and Christianity? To reaffirm and reinterpret a unique tradition such as congregationalism, it is important to look beyond it to a more universal and diverse perspective. And to make a large, highly abstract framework such as Christianity a living spirit, it is necessary to have a unique nucleus that is internal to it and continues to inspire it. Rather than exclusively adhering to traditions (particulars), it is necessary to make use of unique traditions as a means of expressing the teachings and deeds of Jesus (universals) in the most flavorful way and to connect them to the diverse external world (see “Deep Forests and Large Lakes”).

Community of Freedom and Conscience

The Congregational Church as an organizational entity no longer exists in Japan. However, there is still a need for a community that can serve as a receptacle for the ideals of “freedom education and self-governing churches,” which Neesima tried to preserve in his later years despite his illness. This is the unfinished task that he posed. In a society of religious pluralism as well as value pluralism, where diverse ideas sometimes create conflict and hostility, there is now a need for Christian values that can adequately make the most of diversity. If we can give form to a universal “community of freedom and conscience” with the spirit of congregationalism as its source, this would not only be a contribution to modern society but would also bring us closer to Neesima’s ideal.

New Relationship between Individual and Community

In general, liberalism asserts the freedom of the individual in opposition to the tyrannical power of the state. The idea of constituting a civil society with the independent individual as its subject was prominent in American society in the late 19th century, when Neesima lived and worked there. In American society at that time, churches and schools existed as intermediate communities between the individual and the state, and their work and spirit are still carried on today in the activities of various unions, NGOs, and NPOs. On the other hand, in Japanese society and modern education, the traditional group-oriented community tends to absorb individuals, and intermediate communities constituting the civil society have not been sufficiently nurtured. The ideals that Neesima sought in the congregationalist tradition should be realized in modern education, which nurtures independent individuals who can take responsibility for a civil society.

(Katsuhiro Kohara)