Links
- CV
- Titles
- Topics
- Tickets
- Science
- About Eric
- Book Reviews
- Country Profile
- Modern China
- Contact Eric
- Podcast
- Vision
- Sekai
- John
Archives
RSS
Reflections on a Wandering Life.....
Wednesday, May 08, 2019
What is generosity?
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Watchman Nee, Witness Lee, and the Local Church
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Shouwang Church
A couple weeks ago, 160 members of Shouwang Church were arrested as they approached the outside meeting area they had chosen for their assembly after they were not allowed to occupy the meeting place they had purchased. In one sense, this is not really news, because churches in China are required to register, and this church was not registered. So it is not surprising. What really is news is that they have been allowed to accumulate some 1000 members before they had this kind of trouble.
Actually, that's not quite true. This is not their first brush with the "law." I use the term loosely, because I am not sure whether the policy requiring registration is actually law, or just Party policy. The church leaders insist they are not breaking the law. They may be right in a technical sense, because the National People's Congress is the "highest body of state authority," and I don't know that the Congress have ever passed a law that specifically restricts the size of religious meetings, especially the maximum size for religious meetings that don't need to be registered. But that's kinda irrelevant, because, as as Jiang Jinsong says in his book, The National People's Congress, in China, the party is over the State. So in China, what the party says supercedes law. So I'm not sure whether the policy came from the National People's Congress (law) or directly from the Party (edict). What is clear, though, is that the members of the Shouwang Church knew about the policy, and chose to violate it. Here is what the policy actually says:
There is no registration requirement for, to quote from Chinese Christians, "house services," which are mainly attended by relatives and friends for religious activities such as praying and Bible reading. [Official English version]House churches take full advantage of this clause to set up home fellowships that are not registered. As long as the fellowship in question can be considered "family and a few friends," the police will not bother them. The problem, of course, is that if the church is successful, pretty soon you will have another family and a few more friends, and before long, the fellowship will exceed the limits of what can be considered a "house service." When this happens, the police will begin to take action to stop this development. Many churches respond to this action by splitting up and becoming two or more churches. In this way, you could argue that the policy actually promotes church growth in China. But other times, the fellowship in question will resist the pressure and just keep on growing and developing. At this point, it is up to the police to decide how they will respond. In some places in the countryside, the police take quite an active role in stopping the growth of these family churches, because they have clearly gone beyond what can be considered "relatives and friends." But in Beijing, and in some other cities, the police will often look the other way, as long as the unregistered fellowship is not too large, and especially as long as the fellowship is not being run by foreigners. I have been to several "family churches" which were actually informal, unregistered groups of Christian believers who had rented a meeting place, and were conducting church meetings on a regular basis. But since these fellowships have clearly grown beyond the limits of the policy, every city seems to have its own unofficial limit to how big a church group will be allowed to grow before the government gets involved. In Beijing, I would gernally say that a group of one hundred to two hundred people would probably not have too much trouble. In Wuhan, unofficial churches are generally allowed to get quite large, and actually have an open relationship with the police. They register in a more or less unofficial way and the police allow them to operate, as long as they comply with basic requirements for public meetings.
My first introduction to Shouwang Church was a couple years ago when I was asked to give a presentation about freedom of religion in China. A young lady came up to me after the presentation and asked me what I thought of this unofficial church that had just been shut down. I told her that they would probably disperse and then reemerge. I turned out to be partly right and partly wrong. They eventually did reemerge, but they had not really dispersed. They just kept getting bigger and bigger. If a church changes their location, they can sometimes elude the authorities, because they have moved to a different police district or something. But again, the Shouwang church as clearly grown beyond what the powers that be will tolerate from a church that is not registered. They have not accepted this yet. They even bought a meeting place. But the police have prevented them from moving into it.
Labels: Church Life, Family Churches
Friday, July 03, 2009
Persecution in China
I have always had a certain feeling of ambivalence regarding the persecution of Christians in China. The reason for this is because the cases I hear about are decidedly political in nature. It is true that certain activities of Christians that would not be cause for trouble with the police in any western country are enough to get you arrested here. But it is simply not true that Chinese people are being rounded up just because they are Christians. They get into difficulty when they categorically reject any control of religion by the state. A pastor being apprehended by the police because he is attending to the spiritual needs of his flock is just not the same as a pastor being apprehended by the police because he wants to see President Bush and lodge a protest, especially when his protest is not about the right to worship God freely, but the right to build his own inter-church organization in competition with the Three-Self Patriotic Movement.
But recently, some of the cases that have come to my attention have had more to do with Christians who are technically violating the government policy, but who are not in any way political. This has caused me to wonder if perhaps it isn't time to have a discussion about the policy itself, especially since it is enforced so unevenly throughout China. I'll tell you what the scoop is, and you can decide. The government policy requires all churches to register. But house churches are expressly exempted from this requirement:
So here's the question: When the church was closed by the police in December of 2008, should the house church Christians have accepted this action, and ceased meeting, or were they right to deliberately defy the order? Nothing would have prevented them from continuing to meet in small groups in compliance with the government policy. Yet, while the public meeting they were conducting was clearly more than just "relatives and friends," it really wasn't that large, and certainly not more than many, many informal house churches throughout China. I visited a "house" church just a couple weeks ago that was held in a rented room in the Central Business District here in Beijing. There were fewer than a hundred people there, but the room could have held a couple hundred quite easily. I don't attend house churches very often, because they are not set up to accommodate foreigners (no English translation), and they often meet on Sunday mornings, which takes me away from my home church. But I have been to several, and I can tell you for sure that an informal church meeting with a hundred or so members is not at all unusual in China. Most of the time, the police look the other way. The largest unregistered "house church" I have attended was Samuel Lamb's church in Guangzhou, which accommodates several thousand worshippers a week in four services. When confronted by the police, Samuel Lamb (Lin Xiangao) insisted that he was in full compliance with the government policy ("this is my home; these are my friends").
But recently, some of the cases that have come to my attention have had more to do with Christians who are technically violating the government policy, but who are not in any way political. This has caused me to wonder if perhaps it isn't time to have a discussion about the policy itself, especially since it is enforced so unevenly throughout China. I'll tell you what the scoop is, and you can decide. The government policy requires all churches to register. But house churches are expressly exempted from this requirement:
There is no registration requirement for, to quote from Chinese Christians, "house services," which are mainly attended by relatives and friends for religious activities such as praying and Bible reading.The problem, of course, is that if this house church is successful, you will have a few more relatives and a few more friends and pretty soon you are pushing the limits of the policy. A recent case in Henan Province illustrates this situation. The case concerns a house church that was ordered closed by the police in December of 2008. The court judgment does not state why the church was shut down, but one can deduce that it was probably because the church in question, although not large, was clearly more than just "relatives and friends."
So here's the question: When the church was closed by the police in December of 2008, should the house church Christians have accepted this action, and ceased meeting, or were they right to deliberately defy the order? Nothing would have prevented them from continuing to meet in small groups in compliance with the government policy. Yet, while the public meeting they were conducting was clearly more than just "relatives and friends," it really wasn't that large, and certainly not more than many, many informal house churches throughout China. I visited a "house" church just a couple weeks ago that was held in a rented room in the Central Business District here in Beijing. There were fewer than a hundred people there, but the room could have held a couple hundred quite easily. I don't attend house churches very often, because they are not set up to accommodate foreigners (no English translation), and they often meet on Sunday mornings, which takes me away from my home church. But I have been to several, and I can tell you for sure that an informal church meeting with a hundred or so members is not at all unusual in China. Most of the time, the police look the other way. The largest unregistered "house church" I have attended was Samuel Lamb's church in Guangzhou, which accommodates several thousand worshippers a week in four services. When confronted by the police, Samuel Lamb (Lin Xiangao) insisted that he was in full compliance with the government policy ("this is my home; these are my friends").
I suppose I should mention that the case I have singled out here took place in Henan Province. Henan has a special reputation in China. I was not aware of this when I first came to China, but you can't live in this country very long without hearing about it. They are viewed as shifty, underhanded and willing to say anything to get out of a tight spot. A friend from Henan said, "Henan is to China what China is to the rest of the world." I was amused by this statement, because it expresses two stereotypes at the same time. Henan people would no doubt dislike the first one, and Chinese people in general, although endorsing the first one, would be insulted by the second one. I am a bit wary of stereotypes, because there are always notable exceptions. But I suppose it would be safe to say that Henan seems to have been characterized by a unique hostility to the Christian message. The Heavenly Man chronicles the brutal suppression of house churches throughout the eighties. And Henan's hostility to the gospel is not new. When Jonathan Goforth, the 19th Century Canadian missionary announced that he was going to do work in Henan Province, Hudson Taylor wrote him a letter:
There is a bright side. The persecution in Henan has produced a rich, vibrant Christianity. There is a peasant woman in Henan who has written more than a thousand hymns--beautiful melodious hymns rich in worship and praise to God. So I do not have fears for the church. The hostility toward Christians in Henan has had the effect of making the church stronger, not weaker. But China is more and more interested in being seen as a normal country within the community of nations, so it remains for us to discuss how this policy could be adapted to effect a more fair and uniform enforcement throughout China. I must confess to having mixed feelings about this. In one sense, it seems very unfair that these Christians are singled out for trouble, when house churches of this size are almost routinely tolerated throughout this country. But it is just as true that the restriction on large meetings has had the effect of building a very strong Christian community in China. I attended a mega-church in Arizona for seven years. Every once in awhile, they would have a big push for development of small groups. The idea would take off for awhile, and then people would gradually lose interest. They would come for one of the big weekend events, but didn't bother to join a small group. Mega-churches in America tend to follow a rock concert motif, where the audience is largely being entertained. And, of course, church discipline is virtually nonexistent (except in the case of church staff). This does not make for a healthy, robust church community. American mega-churches tend to be materially rich and morally feeble.
China is very different. House churches tend to be small, because that keeps them "under the radar," so to speak. Church discipline is intense (sometimes excessively so), and people know each other, so they are less likely to slip through the cracks, as happens so often in large American churches. But much of this would also be true in churches up to say, about 150 or 200. You don't need to be small enough to fit in a living room to be personal. It seems to me that there wouldn't be any harm in allowing house churches to grow to a moderate level. It is quite apparent that the cops in most places agree with me, because, as I said, there are many such churches in China, and they are not shut down, or harassed, and their pastors are not sent to labor camps.
So what would you do? If you were going to write the policy, how would you word it? Remember, China is not a Christian country. There are lots and lots of very "interesting" people in this country. If you get to loose about allowing any group to meet and organize without government supervision, you could be opening a "Pandora's box." Or am I too worried? Just let people do whatever they want? You see, when you put the responsibility on your own shoulders, it does compel you to view the problem a bit more comprehensively. I think China needs to change. But what kind of change? I do think that America, as a (formerly) Christian nation, has taught the world much about the importance of faith in the life of society. But I also fear that American style religious freedom, with all of its excesses, is probably not the best model for China. China needs to find Chinese solutions to Chinese problems.
We have been trying, unsuccessfully, for ten years, to get into Honan [pre Pinyin spelling]. We’ve been beaten, stoned, and turned back time and again. Brother, if you would enter that province, you must go forward on your knees!The year was 1888. As I said, Henan has a reputation.
There is a bright side. The persecution in Henan has produced a rich, vibrant Christianity. There is a peasant woman in Henan who has written more than a thousand hymns--beautiful melodious hymns rich in worship and praise to God. So I do not have fears for the church. The hostility toward Christians in Henan has had the effect of making the church stronger, not weaker. But China is more and more interested in being seen as a normal country within the community of nations, so it remains for us to discuss how this policy could be adapted to effect a more fair and uniform enforcement throughout China. I must confess to having mixed feelings about this. In one sense, it seems very unfair that these Christians are singled out for trouble, when house churches of this size are almost routinely tolerated throughout this country. But it is just as true that the restriction on large meetings has had the effect of building a very strong Christian community in China. I attended a mega-church in Arizona for seven years. Every once in awhile, they would have a big push for development of small groups. The idea would take off for awhile, and then people would gradually lose interest. They would come for one of the big weekend events, but didn't bother to join a small group. Mega-churches in America tend to follow a rock concert motif, where the audience is largely being entertained. And, of course, church discipline is virtually nonexistent (except in the case of church staff). This does not make for a healthy, robust church community. American mega-churches tend to be materially rich and morally feeble.
China is very different. House churches tend to be small, because that keeps them "under the radar," so to speak. Church discipline is intense (sometimes excessively so), and people know each other, so they are less likely to slip through the cracks, as happens so often in large American churches. But much of this would also be true in churches up to say, about 150 or 200. You don't need to be small enough to fit in a living room to be personal. It seems to me that there wouldn't be any harm in allowing house churches to grow to a moderate level. It is quite apparent that the cops in most places agree with me, because, as I said, there are many such churches in China, and they are not shut down, or harassed, and their pastors are not sent to labor camps.
So what would you do? If you were going to write the policy, how would you word it? Remember, China is not a Christian country. There are lots and lots of very "interesting" people in this country. If you get to loose about allowing any group to meet and organize without government supervision, you could be opening a "Pandora's box." Or am I too worried? Just let people do whatever they want? You see, when you put the responsibility on your own shoulders, it does compel you to view the problem a bit more comprehensively. I think China needs to change. But what kind of change? I do think that America, as a (formerly) Christian nation, has taught the world much about the importance of faith in the life of society. But I also fear that American style religious freedom, with all of its excesses, is probably not the best model for China. China needs to find Chinese solutions to Chinese problems.
Labels: Christianity, Church Life, Human Rights, Persecution
