Japanese Internment Camps: Biblical Interpretations in Support and Opposition

Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month, celebrated in May, recognizes the rich contributions, diverse cultures, and complex histories of AAPI communities. It serves multiple essential purposes:

Historical Awareness and Recognition
Internment starkly illustrates systemic injustice and racism faced historically by AAPI communities. Remembering such injustices during AAPI Heritage Month fosters empathy, historical awareness, and critical dialogue, essential for a just society.

During World War II, following the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the U.S. government forcibly relocated and incarcerated approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans in internment camps. The majority were American citizens. This policy, established by President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066 in February 1942, reflected widespread suspicion and fear that Japanese Americans posed a security threat. Many Christians, representing the majority religious tradition in the United States, either supported these internments or remained notably silent. However, some Christian individuals and groups publicly opposed internment. Both supporters and opponents often grounded their stances in biblical interpretations, highlighting how scripture can be employed to justify contrasting ethical perspectives.

Historical Context of Japanese Internment
Following Pearl Harbor, anti-Japanese sentiment intensified rapidly across the United States. Executive Order 9066 permitted military commanders to designate “exclusion zones,” effectively forcing Japanese Americans into internment camps. Families were relocated to isolated facilities primarily in western states, such as California, Arizona, and Wyoming, where they faced harsh living conditions, economic loss, and significant psychological trauma. Internment was justified publicly as necessary to prevent espionage or sabotage, despite scant evidence that Japanese Americans posed a genuine security risk.

Christian Majority’s Support or Silence: Reasons and Biblical Justifications
Most American Christians either supported internment or chose silence, influenced heavily by wartime patriotism, racial prejudice, and widespread fear. Certain biblical justifications prominently emerged among those actively supporting the policy or passively accepting it.

Obedience to Government Authorities (Romans 13:1-2)
Many Christians cited Romans 13:1-2, stating: “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.” This verse was frequently invoked to argue compliance with government decisions as a Christian duty, particularly during wartime, leading many churches to rationalize their support or passivity.

National Security and Protection (Psalm 144:1)
Some proponents selectively cited scriptures emphasizing protection and defense, such as Psalm 144:1: “Praise be to the LORD my Rock, who trains my hands for war.” Contextually about defense, these verses were employed to legitimize government actions as morally justified wartime measures.

Fear and Xenophobia in Wartime Context
Many Christian congregations succumbed to prevailing cultural prejudices and wartime fears, viewing ethnic Japanese suspiciously as “foreign” threats. Christianity’s ethical principles of justice, love, and inclusion were overshadowed by fears of espionage and sabotage, leading to moral complicity or silence.

Christian Opposition: Ethical and Biblical Foundations
Despite widespread silence, notable Christian voices actively opposed internment based on clear scriptural principles advocating justice, compassion, and universal humanity.

Justice and Equality (Galatians 3:28)
Opponents cited Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile… for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Internment, they argued, directly violated biblical principles of equality and justice, discriminating unjustly based solely on race and ancestry.

Compassion for Marginalized (Matthew 25:35-36)
Others emphasized Jesus’ teachings on compassion, referencing Matthew 25:35-36: “I was a stranger and you invited me in.” Internment contradicted Christ’s commandment of hospitality and compassion toward marginalized populations, rendering it morally indefensible from a Christian ethical perspective.

Love of Neighbor and Enemy (Matthew 5:43-44)
Jesus’ commandment to love even one’s enemies also served as a powerful opposition argument: “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Christian opponents contended that even amidst war, believers were called to love, not unjustly incarcerate, others based on suspicion or fear.

Historical Examples of Christian Opposition
Certain Christian leaders and organizations courageously challenged internment policies. The Quakers were particularly outspoken, driven by pacifist and egalitarian beliefs deeply embedded in their theology. For example, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), representing Quakers, provided critical advocacy and direct humanitarian aid to interned Japanese Americans, openly condemning internment as incompatible with Christian compassion and justice.

Methodist Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam was another prominent critic, publicly condemning internment as morally indefensible and contrary to democratic and Christian principles. Oxnam’s vocal criticism underscored the profound ethical and theological inconsistency between internment and Christian doctrine.

Institutionally, the Federal Council of Churches cautiously but notably criticized internment, advocating fair treatment and vigilance against racial prejudice. Though their response was more restrained, the Council’s public statements provided crucial moral leadership grounded in biblical ethics and raised important ethical questions within mainstream Protestantism.

Globally, international Christian communities also expressed concerns about U.S. internment policies. British and Canadian church leaders questioned the morality of incarcerating innocent citizens based solely on ethnicity, exerting moral pressure on American Christians to reconsider their support or silence.

Long-term Impacts on Christianity
The widespread complicity or silence of American Christianity regarding internment led to profound self-examination and theological reflection in subsequent decades. This historical episode compelled many denominations to re-evaluate how scripture should guide responses to political and social injustices. Internment became a cautionary tale illustrating the consequences of selective and uncritical biblical interpretations aligned with prevailing cultural fears or prejudices. Over time, denominations began emphasizing the importance of prophetic voices advocating justice, equality, and compassion—lessons integral to contemporary Christian social ethics.

Contemporary Relevance and Connection to Current Issues
Reflecting on the internment episode remains profoundly relevant, especially as contemporary society grapples with rising xenophobia, Islamophobia, anti-immigrant sentiment, and hate crimes targeting Asian Americans. The selective biblical interpretations that justified internment parallel contemporary misuses of scripture in debates around immigration, border control, and the treatment of religious minorities. Modern Christian leaders and communities, informed by historical reflection, increasingly recognize their responsibility to oppose policies rooted in prejudice, fear, and injustice, reinforcing the need for proactive moral leadership grounded in biblical compassion and justice.

Importance of AAPI Heritage Month
Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month, celebrated in May, recognizes the rich contributions, diverse cultures, and complex histories of AAPI communities. It serves multiple essential purposes:

Historical Awareness and Recognition
Internment starkly illustrates systemic injustice and racism faced historically by AAPI communities. Remembering such injustices during AAPI Heritage Month fosters empathy, historical awareness, and critical dialogue, essential for a just society.

Combatting Persistent Stereotypes
AAPI Heritage Month challenges stereotypes and misconceptions, highlighting the rich diversity and achievements of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. It underscores their integral role in shaping America’s social, cultural, and economic landscapes.

Promotion of Inclusivity
Celebrating AAPI Heritage Month fosters multicultural understanding, inclusivity, and appreciation for cultural diversity, reaffirming societal commitment to equality and integration of diverse communities.

Addressing Contemporary Issues
AAPI Heritage Month provides platforms to address ongoing challenges like discrimination, hate crimes, underrepresentation, and socioeconomic disparities affecting AAPI communities. It emphasizes society’s collective responsibility to pursue justice and equity continually.

Conclusion and Ethical Reflections
The historical episode of Japanese internment during World War II exemplifies the profound role biblical interpretation plays in either supporting or opposing moral injustices. The majority Christian response, characterized by silence or endorsement, underscores the dangers of selective scripture use aligned with cultural prejudices and fears. Conversely, the biblical opposition rooted in universal justice, compassion, and equality demonstrates faith traditions’ powerful ethical potential to challenge unjust policies.

Remembering internment during AAPI Heritage Month and reflecting critically on Christianity’s response compel contemporary believers and institutions to consistently uphold foundational biblical principles. The historical reflection teaches that ethical engagement with scripture must resist narrow interpretations, ensuring faith becomes a catalyst for justice, inclusion, and compassionate advocacy in every generation.