Eric's Beijing Diary

The first few minutes of this video (after the introduction) features the Christian church movement in China, particularly illegal churches.

There is a lot of talk now about the changes in the government's approach to Christians, especially family church Christians. Much of what I read or hear in the western media is so full of hyperbole that it doesn't reflect what is actually going on. But this report is worth watching, because I think it is mostly accurate, although it could be misleading if you don't know the situation in China. One thing I contradict. Todd Nettleton of Voice of the Martyrs says that the Communist part is concerned because there are more Christians in China than there are party members. I don't think anyone knows. The estimates by Western Christians are never less than a hundred million, which seems large to me. But even the China Daily estimated fifty million. So let's say, for the sake of argument that the number of Christians exceeds the number of party members. Does that really mean that Christianity is more popular than the party? Not necessarily. In fact, party membership is competitive. If the party accepted into membership everyone who wanted to join, I'm pretty sure they could outnumber Christians quite easily.

But I suppose you could say the same thing about the churches. Church membership wouldn't be called "competitive," but it does require belief--they don't just take anybody. The Communist Party can't require belief. because they don't believe in anything. They still use words like "Marxism," but today's "Communists" are anything but Marxist. Even the main propaganda papers (China Daily and Global Times) admit this. They talk about "updating" Marxism. Updating means changing. The reason you change something is because you don't like it the way it is. Nobody in China likes Marxism (I mean real Marxism). So the party uses a different method. In the universities, students vote for each other. To join the party, they must be chosen by their peers. So the Party could easily have many more members if they accepted everybody.

The real problem, I think, is that family churches are technically illegal, and beyond the control of the Party. The official government policy does allow small groups involving a family and a few friends to meet for prayer and Bible reading without being registered. So most illegal churches refer to themselves as "family churhes" in order to consider themselves as fitting with in the rubric of this policy. But that self-designation approaches the ridiculous when a "family" church has hundreds of members. So realistically speaking, the vast majority of so-called "family" churches are actually small illegal unregistered churches. The Party has always smarted at this reality, but has decided to ignore them as long as they don't get too big. But how big is "too big?" In the past, more then thirty people was considered problamatic in the countryside. But in Beijing, it was not uncommon at all to see a church with several services, each with a hundred to a hundred and fifty worshippers in attendance.

That is changing. "Family" churches that previously rented office space for their church activities are facing trouble now, because their landlords are being told not to rent to them. I talked to a sister the other day who told me that her "family" church used to have three services, each with about 100 people. Now they have divided into almost 30 cell groups, each with about 10 members.

But this piece features a large family church in Chengdu that was shut down. That's not new at all. Anyone who tries to build a large "family" church knows that it's only a matter of time before they wil have to go the way of history. Furthermore, the pastor of Early Rain Church who was arrested had a history of political activism. He talks about "faithful disobedience." This is atypical, to say the least. Chinese Christians are the most apolitical people I have ever met. They may be sympathetic with this guy's views, but they would never do what he is doing. So this little segment is interesting, and largely factual, but not representative at all.

Comments

Labels: Christianity, Family Churches, Persecution

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

My life verse, the scripture God set as a banner for my life when I was a young child, is one I memorized in Sunday School when I was in Kindergarten or first grade:

"I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the LORD." (Psalm 122:1)

Church is boring for any kid, I suppose, but for me, even though I sometimes found myself getting bored, there was something about church that I always felt drawn to. I guess it was because I really believed that I could meet God in that place, and to me, nothing could be greater than to be able to hear God speak to me.

This "life destiny," if you will, was confirmed a few years later, when Dad wrote the following in the flyleaf of my confirmation Bible:

"One thing have I desired of the LORD, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the LORD, and to enquire in his temple." (Psalm 27:4)

The church, and what it represented has always seemed to me to be the focal point of everything important in life. In my childhood, it was the repository of my dearest hopes. And when I was taken to America with my other brothers and sisters at the age of 13, it was the cause of my deepest disillusionment. Perhaps I was not totally objective. I didn't really want to go to America. Adjusting to American culture was not easy. America has a very complicated culture, and I had come from a culture that was ever so much simpler. I grew up in the countryside of Northern Japan, during the time of relative peace and prosperity that followed World War II. America was respected then, not only because the Americans had defeated the Japanese, but because they had treated the Japanese kindly. The result of this was that, even though Japan is not thought of as a Christian country, we, as Christian missionaries were well received.

Although we were never treated with hostility, Christianity was not popular in the Japan I knew as a child. So the Christianity I grew up with was relatively simple. There was usually only one Christian church in the community, and Christians were known as precisely that. They were called "Christians," not "Lutherans," or "Baptists," or "Pentecostals." So when I went to America, and saw the way Christians seemed to be divided into so many splinter groups, I was disgusted. I began to wonder about the meaning of it all. How do you determine what is really genuine, when so many who call themselves Christians are identifying more with a particular "brand" of Christianity, than with the person of Christ? In other words, how can we encourage a lost world to see Jesus of Nazareth as the answer to the deepest questions of life, if we ourselves identify most strongly with something that really has more to do with a particular Christian club than with the church as the earthly expression of the Body of Christ?

When I was in college, I came across a couple of books by Watchman Nee that had a profound influence on my thinking. The books were called, The Orthodoxy of the Church, and The Normal Christian Church Life. Watchman Nee has been known for quite a few years as a gifted devotional writer, but the books that I was drawn to were not in that category. They are not devotional books, and would not ordinarily be found in the many Christian book stores throughout the United States that sell the devotional literature that Nee is so well known for. I was interested in them because they addressed a subject that was deeply important to me, and because in them, Nee dared to take a position rejecting the institutionalized sectarianism that Western Christians seem so hopelessly addicted to. In other words, he dared to repudiate what I found so revolting about American church life.

During the time that Watchman Nee lived and taught in China (the years between World War I and World War II), his teaching and writing created quite a stir among Evangelical Christians from the West. More than a few missionaries left their own organizations and joined his "movement" Actually, Watchman Nee never intended to start a movement, but it was clear to all that a movement had developed around his ministry. Watchman Nee felt a spiritual responsibility for these people, and tried to address their needs. One of the ways he did this, was to publish a hymnbook, which he called, "Hymns for the Little Flock." The name stuck, and Watchman Nee was identified from that time on as the leader of the "Little Flock" movement.

At one point during this period, the missionaries called him in and talked with him. Their most important question was, "Do you think missionaries have a place in China?" Watchman Nee assured them that missionaries would always be welcome, but that they should come as teaching elders in the local churches. I remember reading this when I was in college. I thought it seemed fair, but I could also understand how the missionaries would tend to react to this. Western missionaries in China were used to being in charge. They were not entirely comfortable being part of something that they did not control. And I suppose in one sense, they could be justified in asking where Watchman Nee got the authority to decide how they should fit in. What is most interesting to me, though, is that the type of church life that has developed in China today is one where Western Christians who insist on being in charge are pretty much non-effective. Missionaries are not allowed in China today, but Western Christians are welcome in every church I have visited. Several of the churches I have visited either provide translation, or provide English language services.

Watchman Nee was arrested in 1951 or 1952, and he spent the next 20 years of his life in prison. I am not clear about whether or not he died in prison, but if he did get out it would have been shortly before he died. His imprisonment was, for the Communist Party, the ultimate act of hypocrisy, because Watchman Nee, more than any other personality on the Chinese landscape, embodied what the "Three Self Patriotic Movement" was supposed to be about. When the TSPM was set up, it was stated as being, "self governing, self supporting and self propagating." That's exactly what Nee taught. But he also taught a type of Christianity that was a deep threat to the Communist system, because it was genuine. Persecuting people like Watchman Nee gave credibility to those who charged that the TSPM was just a thinly veiled attempt to wipe out Christianity. I don't argue much with those who make the charge, as long as they are talking about the church during the days just following the Communist revolution of 1949, because whether or not it was true, it sure looked that way, and the Communist party is as much responsible for that impression as any other entity.

The problem I have is with those who try to dismiss the TSPM today with the same charge. It is a view that misses a very important year in recent history. The year I am referring to is 1989. During that year, a truly revolutionary wind blew through the Communist world, and changed the landscape in ways that were every bit as significant as the original Communist revolutions. It started when Hungary decided to take down the fence that separated them from Austria. People from all over Eastern Europe took vacations to Hungary and simply walked into Austria. The trickle became a flood, and the flow of refugees started a stampede. The Berlin Wall came down, the Soviet Union fell, and with it, other Communist governments throughout Eastern Europe. In China, this revolution erupted in Tiananmen Square when students from Beida and other universities thronged to the square to express their demands for more democracy, something they did not understand, but knew they wanted. As I have said before, in discussing this issue, the students lost the battle and won the war. They were forcibly removed from the Square, and their movement was broken up, but China was forever changed, and could never be the same.

What is the nature of this transformation throughout the Communist world with respect to the church? It varies, of course, depending on which country you are talking about, but generally speaking, the change in attitude was characterized by a gradual acquiescence to Christianity as a more or less permanent fixture on the landscape of modern society. What this meant in China, was that the government changed from a posture of hostility to Christianity, to a recognition that Christianity was here to stay, and that the focus should be on control and regulation rather than elimination. This major sea change has had a dramatic effect on the Christian community. The government, being Communist, and essentially atheistic, began to adopt an approach which, while still characterized by a determination to be "in charge" of religion, was much more livable, because it is at the same time characterized by a disinterested "hands off" approach toward religious activities, as long as there is not a perceived attempt to challenge the authority of the government. This is essentially the balance. China is not like America. China is a controlled society. Religion, like other areas of Chinese life, is controlled by the government. But China is also not like North Korea. Or more importantly, China is not like China during the Cultural Revolution. So you do hear of clashes between Christians and the government from time to time, especially in cases where a religious group is quite obviously trying to establish a separate ecclesiastical authority outside the purview of the Three Self Patriotic Movement and the China Christian Council. But it simply is not the case that Christians are being arrested or harassed simply because they are Christians. We can argue all day about the pros and cons of such a status quo. If there are aspects of this that I like or dislike, I do not choose to discuss them here. I am merely describing the situation.

Now then, as to the way church life is expressed in China, I will talk about the Church in China in three different areas. First, the Three Self Churches, second, the house churches, and finally, since I have been involved in them personally, the international churches.

The Three Self Churches. Ironically, the Three Self Church today functions very much according to the outline that Watchman Nee laid down for how church life was supposed to be expressed in a non-sectarian manner. Watchman Nee said that there was only one local church in each community, and that all believers were part of it. This is essentially how the Three Self Church operates. In a city the size of Beijing in America, there would probably be a couple thousand churches. It is very easy to incorporate a church in the United States. I think it takes at least three people, but it is a pretty simple process. But in China, it is not easy at all. The Religious Affairs Bureau basically allows one church in each district. So there is one (Protestant) church in the Haidian District. The church is not a member of any denomination. We would call it "Protestant," but the Chinese term is jidu-jiao, which says nothing about being Protestant. It is a generic description for Christian. So the folks who go to the Three Self Church are known as Christians. There is little argument about doctrine. I am sure the issues are discussed at some point, but they just don't show up in everyday church life. I have never heard Chinese Christians in the Church I go to talk about becoming a member of the church. They are required to go to a beginner's class for six months before they can be baptized. Once they are baptized, they are allowed to take communion, and accept responsibilities in the Church.

Watchman Nee also taught that denominations were unscriptural. He openly repudiated the proliferation of Western sectarian groups in China. Today, the Three-Self Church is largely postdenominational. Again, this does not mean that there are not differences of expression, but that the denominational structures which typically make ideological purity the standard of membership are pretty much gone. There are separate institutions for Protestant and Catholic--the Government recognizes that distinction. But the institutionalized sectarianism that Western Christians have become so addicted to has been purged from the church in China by 55 years of Atheistic government, as well as the Cultural Revolution.

It is hard to generalize about the spiritual climate and style of worship of Three Self Churches, because there are so many of them throughout China, but my experience has been that they are largely Evangelical. They are also very crowded, but they tend to be filled with sincere Christians who call themselves believers, not with Sunday Christians who go to church because it gives them status in the community. Beyond that though, there are different expressions. I was having breakfast at the Lush once, and an American who introduced himself as a Baptist preacher told me that they were getting ready to go to a "Lutheran" Church. When he described where he was going, I realized that he was talking about Haidian Church. He was quite surprised when I told him that it was a Three Self Church. Actually, I can see how people, especially from a Baptist background would think if it as Lutheran, although there is no liturgy to speak of, except for the Lord's Prayer. But they are not all like that. I went to a Charismatic Three Self Church in Fuzhou which was similar in some ways, but also quite a bit more lively in worship.

Before I came to China, I was aware that many Westerners view the Three Self Church as a "lost cause." I have been acquainted with Western Christians who would never have anything to do with a Three Self Church, because it is "controlled by the government." When I came to China, I found this same sentiment among the house churches. It is not universal by any means, but it is definitely a prominent feeling among many house church Christians. Wouldn't you know it, the same Devil who invented denominations, has figured out all sorts of other ways to keep brothers and sisters from working together. I was at a house church meeting not long ago, where another sister I was with happened to mention to someone that she went to the Haidian Church. One of the brothers in the House Church lectured her sternly about being involved with the Three Self Church. Last spring, when I visited Samuel Lamb in Guangzhou, I told him that I was involved with a Three Self church. He said, "Three Self Church no good." I have a lot of respect for Samuel Lamb, and I think I understand where he is coming from, but I don't agree with that position. The Three Self Churches, for all their weaknesses, are still churches. They are local churches run my Christians for the spiritual benefit of Christians, and for the purpose of preaching the gospel, and the one I am involved in clearly performs both of those functions. Every few months there is a baptism. Last time they had a baptism, they had to divide it into two services, because there were 130 people being baptized. In addition to all of that, many of the Three-Self churches still operating today are old CIM church plants. For the life of me, I cannot understand why we should give them up without a fight. Christians should be flocking to these churches, not running away from them. In many ways, the modern Three Self Church is the world's best kept secret.