Reflections on Dochirina Kirishitan and Foundational Instruction in Christian Practice

Basic instruction in Christian doctrine and practice, whether in the form of a catechism, a class before or after baptism or confirmation, or individual instruction from a clergyperson or layperson at another time, is common in many churches and Christian traditions. Such instruction arguably plays a foundational role in the trajectory of the life of faith for those who receive it. In so far as receiving such instruction is a shared experience of the members of a particular church community, it also serves to shape the character of a church as a whole. Through my university teaching and a travel opportunity, I was recently prompted to think again about the content of such initial instruction and the formative role that it may have not only for the individual, but also for the culture of churches and the manner in which churches relate to the world.

The triggers for my reflections were undergraduate classes I am teaching on Japanese Christian history this year and a trip to Nagasaki this past May to visit sites related to Christian history, both Catholic and Protestant. As some readers will be aware, the earliest instance of Christianity in Japan that is historically verifiable is the arrival of Jesuit missionaries to Kagoshima in the Sengoku period in 1549. While the best known among these missionaries, Francis Xavier, remained in Japan for only two years, Catholic missionary activities continued until a nationwide expulsion of missionaries in the early 17th century under the united national government of the Edo Bakufu (Shogunate) following more limited earlier edicts. A nationwide anti-Christian edict then remained in place from 1613 in the Edo period until 1873, the sixth year of the Meiji period. Prior to the anti-Christian edicts, many people throughout Japan, fragmented into provinces ruled by daimyo (feudal lords) during the Sengoku period until reunification under the Edo Bakufu, adhered to Christianity. Even during the prohibition of Christianity “hidden Christians” remained in places such as Amakusa, Kumamoto and Urakami, Nagasaki until their reemergence in the 19th century, and Nagasaki has continued to be among the prefectures with the relative highest populations of Christians in Japan.

The large number of Japanese people who adhered to Christian faith during the Sengoku period far exceeded those with direct regular contact with missionaries, and although very few Japanese received formal ordination, Christianity was largely spread and taught by Japanese Christians, with notable examples of lay evangelism and teaching by men and women. Such evangelism and instruction in Christian faith was assisted by a printing press operated by Japanese Christians in Nagasaki, where Christian books and portions of the Bible were printed. Among such books was a textbook for foundational instruction in Christian doctrine and practice entitled Dochirina Kirishitan (from Latin Doctrina Christiana), which was adapted from an earlier catechetical work by Marcos Jorge from 1566.

In addition to explanation of doctrine, the Dochirina Kirishitan contains thirteen points summarizing the fundamental Christian way of life. These thirteen points are the following:

• Give food to the hungry;
• Give drink to the thirsty;
• Give clothing to the naked;
• Visit the sick and prisoners;
• Receive the sojourner;
• Bury the dead;
• Speak what is good to others;
• Show the way [of life] to those who do not know it;
• Comfort the sad;
• Tell sinners to repent;
• Forgive even if receiving shame;
• Endure the errors and shortcomings of neighbor;
• Pray for the living and the dead, and for those who do us harm.

Seeing these points from the Dochirina Kirishitan displayed at the Christian Museum of Nagasaki Oura Church during my visit there in the middle of a semester of teaching Japanese Christian history, I was made to think again concerning the content of initial instruction in Christian practice and the role of such instruction. If the content of such initial instruction is truly fundamental, it should be expected to be shared knowledge of all members of a Christian community, understood as that which characterizes their way of life, and as recognizably shaping that community’s culture.

What if these points were taught as fundamental elements of the Christian life to those seeking baptism or church membership today? What if these points were characteristic of the individual practice of church members and understood by a church community as a whole to be the culture of how all of its members live? In my own Protestant tradition, my understanding of prayer for the dead in the final point may differ from that of the 16th century Catholic context from which the Dochirina Kirishitan originates, and burying the dead was a specific need at the time, but I am not able to say that any of the other points are anything other than what is clearly taught in Scripture as the Christian way of life. Particularly striking for me was the manner in which some of these points in Dochirina Kirishitan were taken directly from Matthew 25:32–46. I had recently taught from Matthew 25:32–46, and had been considering how, in that passage, Jesus presents giving food to the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, giving clothing to the naked, and visiting those who are sick and in prison to be such basic and fundamental characteristics of the Christian life that those whose lives are not characterized by these things are told on the last day that Jesus never knew them. When combined with Matthew 7:21–23, which, as an earlier passage in Matthew, informs the reading of Matthew 25:32–46, this is regardless of how much these people have prophesied as great teachers or done miraculous works. Yet I am afraid that in many churches, if members were asked how the people of that church live as Christians, few answers would include anything resembling many of these points. It should go without saying that such characteristics of a way of life do not characterize many churches to the extent that they are recognizable as those churches’ cultures by those outside.

For me, these reflections raised the question of why, regardless of whether for good or ill, the perception of what is fundamental (not merely commendable, but fundamental) to Christian living in many churches differs from the summary in Dochirina Kirishitan. Initial instruction in Christian belief and practice is conducted in many churches and Christian traditions. Is the difference, then, one of content, or does it result from a disconnect between what is taught as fundamental and what in actuality proves to be formative for the practice of faith in the experience of many Christians?

Concerning content, catechisms in both Catholic and many Protestant traditions include instruction in the Apostles’ Creed, Lord’s Prayer, and Ten Commandments, the first of these being an instruction in doctrine and the latter two being instruction in Christian practice. When included in a catechism, each petition of the Lord’s Prayer and each of the Ten Commandments is often accompanied by explanatory commentary. The importance of these as fundamental Christian teaching in a church community may be reinforced by regular reading or recitation during corporate worship. In the congregation to which I belong, for example, the Lord’s Prayer and the Apostles’ Creed are recited as a regular part of corporate worship, and a congregation in which I previously served within the same fellowship similarly included regular congregational recitation of the Ten Commandments. An example of a different summary of Christian living common in the 20th-century evangelical tradition that has become widespread through parachurch organizations such as the Navigators includes Bible study, prayer, “fellowship,” and evangelism.

These examples therefore display some difference with the summary points in the Dochirina Kirishitan. Setting aside the very brief four-point evangelical parachurch summary (without diminishing the importance of the points that it does include), the specificity of the points in the Dochirina Kirishitan provokes thought of whether greater specificity may also be needed in catechetical explanations of the petitions of the Lord’s Prayer or of each of the Ten Commandments for those instructed to understand how to put these into concrete practice. Notably, Jesus’s own teaching in the Gospels concerning the commandments includes specific elaboration and examples of how to follow them. In the Sermon on the Mount, he elaborates the meaning of commandments not to murder and not to commit adultery. When asked what it means to love neighbor, he responds with the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

The set of points in Dochirina Kirishitan resembles summaries of the corporal and spiritual works of mercy from Aquinas and so are taught, for example, in some Catholic contexts. Nevertheless, many within traditions where these works or mercy are taught are unfamiliar with them, and even if they have learned, there may be a gap between what has learned and what is collectively practiced because it is recognized as truly fundamental.

This leads to the problem of whether, even when fundamental instruction in Christian practice is conducted and regular reminders of it are included in corporate worship, this instruction becomes something merely learned at the time of initial instruction and then not sincerely considered in the life of Christian practice that follows. Or, worse, whether this instruction is merely read in response to questions, without understanding of how it must transform the life of the believer. If the content of such instruction is truly fundamental, as it is taught to be, it should continue as a formative basis on which the Christian way of life will proceed, and thereby to be formative for the culture and identity of the church.

I do not intend to claim that Dochirina Kirishitan should be revived as a new standard for foundational Christian instruction across all churches and denominations. I do wish to raise the question, however, of whether the culture of our churches is characterized by the points that appear in its summary of the fundamental way of the Christian life, points that are, for the most part, taken directly from Scripture. Does each member of our churches understand that each of these points is to be a characteristic of her or his own life? Do these things characterize our churches and the way in which they interact with the world? If not, perhaps reevaluation is in order.

What if each person, upon baptism or becoming a church member, learned that to live as a Christian includes giving food to the hungry, and what if this was understood as so fundamental to the Christian life that all church members simply accepted it and put it into practice? What if each also gave drink to the thirsty? What if each gave clothing to the naked, visited the sick and prisoners, and received the sojourner? What if each daily sought to speak what is good to others, comfort the sad, forgive even if receiving shame, enduring the errors and shortcomings of others while praying, including those who would seek to do them harm? Think of how churches would be transformed, and, indeed, the blessing they could be to those who are not part of a church, were each of these points simply the characteristic of each church, understood by each church member to be the fundamental way in which each Christian is to live.

---

© Kai Akagi, 2023.

This work is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).

Cover Image: “The cover of Doctrina Christam published in Nagasaki” by Wikimedia is a public domain image.