Of course, there is direct evidence that he did apostatize. Very clearly Endo writes,
"The priest raises his foot. In it he feels a dull, heavy pain. This is no mere formality. He will now trample on what he has considered the most beautiful thing in his life, on what he has believed most pure, on what is filled with the ideals and the dreams of man." (p. 171).
According to the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, Rodrigues meets the criteria for apostasy in a general sense. Specifically, this source says, "The word itself in its etymological sense, signifies the desertion of a post, the giving up of a state of life; he who voluntarily embraces a definite state of life cannot leave it, therefore, without becoming an apostate." Some might argue that his actions were only to save the other Christians and that his actions did not mean anything. However, in the same breath, one could argue that another man was charged with denying Jesus and the faith just on word alone. And here we have Peter, yes the first Pope of the Catholic Church. However, before he was entrusted with the keys to the Kingdom, he blatantly denied Jesus even after professing up and down that he would never do such a thing. I think Endo wants us to draw the link between Peter's denial of the faith and the apostasy of Rodrigues, as he says,
"The priest placed his foot on the fumie. Dawn broke. And far in the distance the cock crew." (p. 171).The cock crew to mark both the denials of Rodrigues and of Peter. Jesus knew that Peter would deny Him. He did not say to Peter at the Last Supper, "Oh, Peter you'll probably say that you don't know me later tonight, but I know that you are just kidding. #justkidding #YOLO." No, Jesus clearly tells Peter that when the cock crows he will have denied him three times - plain and simple. Rodrigues did deny the faith and apostatize - plain and simple.
However, if that was the end of the story for Peter, then we would not have had the first Pope. If that was the end of the story for Rodrigues, Endo would have had a pretty depressing story. Just as Peter found a renewed way to look at his relationship with Jesus after His Passion, death, and resurrection, so too does Rodrigues have a new perspective on his faith after his apostasy. Let's take a couple of steps back to where Rodrigues swore, "No matter what happens never will I apostatize." (p. 99). While that was a brave and noble thought at the time, the reality of his situation was that he would be faced with a terrible decision between keeping his own faith and saving the lives of others. Flash forward to the end of the novel, after his apostasy. Through his though times and conversations with God about his silence, Rodrigues comes to realize that,
"He loved him now in a different way from before. Everything that had taken place until now had been necessary to bring him to this love." (p. 191).In order to grow leaps and bounds in his faith, Rodrigues had to stumble and fall along the way. Though perhaps by the letter of the law, he was an apostate priest, but in his heart of hearts I find it hard to believe that he truly renounced he faith and gave up hope for the promises of God. But then again, he did go back on his word and stomp all over the fumie. So what do we think -- once and apostate, always an apostate? Or is it more important that when we fall from grace we learn from our mistakes and then come to realize the true presence of the Trinity in our lives? For the sake of Rodrigues' soul, I hope it is the latter.
You decide.
---
As a complete side note, if you are not sure about the forgiveness offered to all and the importance of keeping the faith through though times, one wise man said:
Mother mother tell your children
That their time has just begun
I have suffered for my anger
There are wars that can't be won
Father father please believe me
I am laying down my guns
I am broken like an arrow
Forgive me
Forgive your wayward son
...
Faith: you know you're gonna live thru the rain
Lord you got to keep the faith
Faith: don't let your love turn to hate
Right now we got to
Keep the faith
Keep the faith
Keep the faith Lord we got to keep the faith
- Bon JoviMaybe these words inspired Rodrigues to come back to The Way, The Truth, and The Life =].
---
Sources:
Liz, I too was struggling with whether or not the father truly did apostatize. Like you emphasized in with the Catholic encyclopedia definition, he may have apostatized in the general sense of the word, but I still think he has the faith in his heart. I too was thinking of Peter while reading this last section of the book and Endo leaves numerous clues that you picked out to guide the reader to this conclusion. I think the quote you picked out at the end (pg. 191)is central evidence to his "not- so-apostatized" state. The idea of learning from your mistakes and growing from them that you brought up also brings to mind the Catholic understanding of suffering. While the father did apostatize in the general sense, I don't think his mission or work can be thrown out with that, as the suffering only glorifies Christ's death.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I thoroughly enjoyed your hashtags!
I don't know...I think it depends on how much you emphasize the physical act of Rodrigues placing his foot on the fumie. I don't think he really apostatized in his heart, and I think Christ knows that. A quick definition of apostasy: "A willful falling away from, or rebellion against, Christian truth. Apostasy is the rejection of Christ by one who has been a Christian." Liz, I know you quoted the physical act on pg. 171, but I would also quote just above that: "And then the Christ in bronze speaks to the Priest. 'Trample! Trample! I more than anyone know of the pain in your foot. Trample! It was to be trampled on by men that I was born into this world. It was to share men's pain that I carried my cross'."
ReplyDeleteCan you imagine being in his place? Knowing that three Christians, who had followed the orders of Inoue and apostatized would still not be saved from their torment unless you apostatized? Ferreira says it himself on pg. 170: "Now you are going to perform the most painful act of love that has ever been performed."
My point is this--Rodrigues did what he did out of love for his fellow man, and out of his love for Christ and doing as He would do. I am not convinced in the least that he apostatized in his heart, regardless of what his feet did. I would argue Rodrigues did not "willfully" rebel against the teachings of Christian truth, according to the definition of apostasy. If nothing else, he felt that His God told him to do this act to save his fellow man.
And as has already been pointed out, you've got what comes on pg. 191. "No doubt his fellow priests would condemn his act as sacrilege; but even if he was betraying them, he was not betraying his Lord."
...I've got more where that came from, but I have to write this First Pass. So I'll save the rest for class in the morning. :)
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAdam, It's definitely a terrible situation to be in. It's so paradoxical. I find myself going back on forth in my decision on this one. On the one hand my mind seems to tells me that to apostatize in any situation would be against God's will, but on the other I am so utterly repulsed and sickened by the idea of letting others suffer unwillingly for my faith. I just don't know. Endo doesn't give us a clear answer to whether what Fierra and Rodrigues did was right. I think he did that on purpose to make us consider it, to wrestle with this question ourselves...or maybe it was because he wasn't so sure either...who knows?
DeleteAnyways, I still haven't figured this one out. I'd love to talk this over. maybe over lunch. Any takers?
Liz, I'd venture to say that your question is perhaps the most important question of the entire novel. As you state, "If [apostosy] was the end of the story for Rodrigues, Endo would have had a pretty depressing story." I certainly agree.
ReplyDeleteSo, did Rodrigues apostatize? I would say that the answer is both yes and no, and that the origin of this duality is the difference between objectivity and actuality. Objectively speaking--that is, using dictionary definitions to classify external actions--Rodrigues did indeed apostatize. His foot touched the holy image, end of story. However, what happened in actuality--that is, including the internal dimension beyond the mere act--did not, I would argue, constitute actual apostasy. The forced nature implied a lack of consent to the objectively-performed act, thereby invalidating the actual consequences. After all, if someone cannot be forced to love God, how can he be forced to reject Him?
Thus, in my view Rodrigues did apostatize but is not an apostate. Though not guilty of actual apostasy in the eyes of God, he still has to deal with the humiliation of his objective apostasy. As with Judas, it is only this resulting despair—not the rejection itself—that has the power to damn Rodrigues.
Joe - excellent points! I enjoyed your question that "if someone cannot be forced to love God, how can he be forced to reject Him?" I think this really sums up Rodrigues true intentions. His intentions were pure and he meant well. He couldn't have both, simultaneously, given up the faith and thought about the need to save God's people. It wouldn't have been in the heart of true apostate to think like that. That is why I personally lean towards the end of my blog post - he learned to love Christ even more through those dreadful experiences.
ReplyDeleteTo continue what I brought up in class, I really believe that him stepping on the fumie was a symbol of his weakness and his lack in belief in himself. I do not know whether he apostatized or not, but I believe that this moment in the novel is due to a greater aspect of the story than just a conversion of his faith. I think this being a symbol of a weaker moment tied into the Catholic aspect of him sacrificing his own morals for the lives of others is a great issue throughout the novel that is summed up in this one scene. He is always struggling with his own suffering and the suffering lives of the Japanese Christians.
ReplyDeleteGood points, Maggie. I too have thought more about our discussion in class today, and I've come to the conclusion that I don't buy the alternative interpretation, suggested by the ambiguity in the appendix, that Rodrigues continued to secretly serve the Christians under the guise of a public apostate. If this were the case, I think the strain on the priest's conscience would be even more unbearable than the moral dilemma that led him to trample on the fumie in the first place. If he had had such a hard time stomping on the faced of his beloved Christ even as a "mere formality," I cannot imagine how he could bring himself to pen an explicit renunciation of Christianity with any ease of mind at all if he did indeed still believe.
ReplyDeleteThe whole situation reminds me of earlier in the book, when Mokichi, Ichizo, and Kichijiro were ordered to trample on the fumie. Although they did so at the previous urging of Rodrigues, their feigned sincerity was easily detected by the Magistrate:
"Do you think we are fools? Do you think we didn't realize how heavy and nervous your breathing became...?" (p. 56)
If Rodrigues were still a sincere believer, I cannot imagine the apostate author's publisher saying anything but the same.
Sorry to keep dominating the comboxes (I forgot that it's patience, not procrastination, that's the virtue) but in the process of writing the above comment I stumbled upon a hitherto-unmentioned parallel. The parallel is between Rodrigues and Christ and their "Trample!" comments. Of course, we're all familiar with the famous line of Christ at the end of the book that, in Rodrigues' view, permits him to trample upon His face:
ReplyDelete"Trample! Trample! It is to be trampled on by you that I am here." (p. 171)
But was Christ the first to say this? Certainly not. In response to Mokichi's question about what to do if shown the fumie before the Magistrate, it is none other than Christ's ordained representative on Earth who himself utters the first two of these bone-chilling words:
"Trample! Trample!" (p. 54)
It would be very interesting to see if the original Japanese also uses the permissive tense for this latter usage. If so, then could Endo be making a not-so-subtle jab at Rodrigues' allowing the Japanese Christians to perform the act he himself so strongly resisted doing? And if not, if the latter usage is imperative rather than permissive, then what does this say about the differences in authority between the two speakers?
I have no answers to these questions and perhaps never will. But I do think they point to yet another deeper reality that Endo is trying to express...whatever that is.
Joe, I definitely agree with your last point. Furthermore, as I brought up in class, the origin of the voice of Jesus there when Rodriguez must trample is unclear, not as clear as one might think. As for the priest, he clearly believes that Christ did speak to him, urging him to trample and save the lives of the people in the pit. However, couldn't this be the inner voice of Rodriguez trying to absolve himself of the guilt of apostasy of his entire belief system. Remember back when Rodriguez's heart betrayed his faith when he watched Garpe sacrifice himself while trying to save his fellow Christians that were on the small boat in the sea? His heart told him to scream out "Apostatize!" The answer to whether Christ did break his silence is unclear.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I think that Christ was speaking to Rodriguez directly. The reason why is because Rodriguez experienced a profoundly deeper understanding of what sacrifice means, how hard it must have been for Christ, and the result of that sacrifice (the saving of man from sin). The priest's relationship with Christ is definitely stronger. Endo has a point here somewhere. Maybe it is to convey a sense of what sacrifice actually means in the context of martyrdom, both of one's life and of one's faith. Perhaps his point is to show that the meaning of what apostasy means (which is awesomely examined in Joe's comments of the objectivity vs the reality of Rodriguez's apostasy) is not as clear cut as some may think it to be.
ps. Joe that comment on despair, not the rejection of his faith, damning Rodriguez was pure gold. Great insight!
After reading Liz's other post on the supplemental reading, I have been thinking about the same thing you bring up here - whose voice speaks to Rodrigues as he hears "Trample! Trample!" The more accurate translation given by Endo's wife in this reading is, "You may step on me." For me, the answer to the voice lies here. Whereas the translation we read in the novel seems almost from a demonic force, begging Rodrigues to give in and apostatize, the truer translation sounds far more Christ-like. For this reason, I see this command as coming from Christ himself, and I see this break of silence on the behalf of Christ as what led Rodrigues to physically apostatize. However, despite performing the act of apostatizing, I do not believe that Rodrigues apostatizes in his heart. On the contrary, I think hearing the voice of Christ and obeying his command actually brings Rodrigues closer to Christ, allowing him to enter into a deeper faith.
DeleteReading these comments reminded me how much I love this class. :D
ReplyDeleteGreat post, Liz! I tend to side with the idea that Rodrigues truly did not apostatize. It killed him to even take a step on the fumie, but he realized that just because he steps on it does not make him less a Catholic. The thoughts and beliefs are still in his head and heart, and that's the most important thing.
ReplyDelete