| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Watchman Nee and Mao Tse-tung were contemporaries. Mao, who was ten years older than Nee, established the Chinese communist party in 1920-- the same year that Nee began his ministry. Kinnear suggests that Nee and Chou En-lai may have been in Shanghai at the same time, and that student unrest there, in which Chou participated, may have had appeal to Nee as well.67 These two revolutions, beginning at the same time, eventually collided head-on. It certainly seemed clear that, in the race to win China, Mao and Chou won.
Those involved in the underground church movement in China, as well as the established missions, have engaged in painful soul-searching, wondering whether more could have been done. The Christians had a 400 year head-start on the Marxists, and at least 70 years of all-out missionizing before a communist party existed. Yet they were apparently swept away by a movement only 30 years old.68 Lately however, some are wondering whether the Chinese Christians might not get the last word!
One issue that has become very important in this regard is the area of Christianity and patriotic nationalism. As mentioned earlier, nationalism in China was intimately connected with anti-foreign resentment from the beginning.69 Today, the communist regime, working through the agency of the TSPM, uses the existing nationalistic consensus in its attempt to extend its control over the religious life of the country.
In most policy statements, the TSPM refers to patriotism and/or family in the same context as religion. In other words, the twin values of "blood and soil" are mixed in liberally with Christian vocabulary in an attempt to cater to the "hearth and home" feelings of the people albeit with a thin coating of religion spread over the top. The following statements are illustrative:
"Freedom of religious belief must operate within the scope permitted by law. Whether citizens are religious believers or not, their common political base is patriotism, upholding the leadership of the Party, and upholding socialism. This demands that we Christians uphold the constitution and the government's policies and decrees. This is also a necessary condition for the normalization of religious activities.70
The doors of the two city Christian organizations are wide open, welcoming everyone--even those who have made mistakes--to change their attitudes and return to the big family which loves country and loves religion.71
"Fellow workers and fellow believers,. . . there are still, according to our knowledge, some rather abnormal religious activities in existence in Canton. We hope that the people involved will. . .uphold the policy of the Three-Self and be patriotic and law-abiding, going along the road of loving country and loving religion, and striving together for the unity of the church."
and,
"We hope that Lin Xiangao will. . . be at one with the believers in the entire city, standing on the platform of loving country and loving religion."72
The reader who has learned to read between the lines will quickly recognize the presence of code words in these statements intended to stimulate a warm spot in the heart of the Chinese people, while keeping all loyalty to Christ strictly contingent upon loyalty to the state.73
Should Nee have taken a stronger stand in favor of the state's programs? Kinnear says that,
It seems clear that Nee believed some degree of cooperation with the New Government on the lines of Romans Chapter 12 to be both possible and necessary. . . (they urged) believers not to emigrate but to stay in China for the Lord's sake. They should be prepared to give up material comforts and, as good Christians and good Chinese, to cooperate sincerely with the State when called upon for such public work as road-building and irrigation works. Only, they must not act in conflict with the Bible nor deny their Lord.74
Of course, this would have to be his stand in public, but one wonders how naive Nee was in his private outlook. Did he realize that it was only a matter of time until the whole church would be forced completely underground? Was he secretly taking measures to get ready for the ferocious holocaust that was descending?
Kinnear thinks not.
It would be probable that Watchman, like so many others, was deceived by those Party officials he observed into thinking them reasonable men who could be dealt with wisely.75
If Kinnear is right, then Nee was in the same boat as the World Council of Churches, who have accepted the legitimacy of the TSPM from the beginning (and still do), as have most of the Protestant mission based churches.76 Indeed, few could have predicted the horrors of the cultural revolution.
Nee did seem to be insensitive to the social currents at work in the communist movement in China. In another passage, Kinnear points out that in 1948, the Little Flock churches began to attain an unexampled level of prosperity,
". . . just at a time when "capitalist" was to become a term of opprobrium and when, in a regime without any concept of Charities Commission, the mere possession of wealth was going to arouse immediate suspicion. The case for ideological reformation of the movement seems almost, by this ill-conceived development, to have been presented to the Communist Party ready-made on a tray."77
Before we become too critical however, we should probably ask ourselves what we think the Little Flock should have done with this money. Further, while this development was unfortunate, it is doubtful that it changed the outcome significantly. To committed Marxists, a voice like Nee's had to be silenced.
It is the view of this author that Nee and the Little Flock were in a no-win situation, as regards their relationship to the political powers. Attempts by Christians to curry favor with the government in China have had pathetic results in the past. The Marxist government has cynically used any cooperation offered, and later repressed the appeasing church in the same way they have the resisting one.78 There is also the further issue of whether cooperation with the present regime could be justified even if it did issue in good results on the pragmatic level.79
In the view of this author, the best tactic that the Little Flock could have taken is the one they did take--namely, creating the structures needed to take the church underground. Any church that was easy to take over on the organizational level proved to be no match for the TSPM and the Religious Affairs Bureau, because of the latter's willingness to use violence. On the other hand, history is clear in detailing the difficulty of erasing a true grass- roots movement from any society.
This means, for instance, that the Little Flock would have had to do their charitable and educational works on the level of the local church, rather than through a national denominational agency. Ironically, the doctrine of "locality" (a hyper-autonomous view of the local congregation), one of Nee's most widely criticized doctrines, had the effect of conditioning these house churches to expect nothing from a national structure.
This doctrine would have conditioned them to raise up their own leadership from within the group as well. Nee taught that, just as foreign missionaries sought to make the Chinese church self propagating, self supporting, and self governing, he sought to make the church in each city and village that way.80 Under present conditions such an arrangement is essential. Note that there is no suggestion that we should adopt a doctrine that is unbalanced, but that God has used the unique features of this group to move ahead even against terrifying opposition.
One group that understands the irrepressible nature of grass roots Christianity perfectly is the TSPM and the Religious Affairs Bureau of the People's Republic of China. Notice the importance they place on following a normal institutional pattern.
All churches which have obtained government approval. . . must uphold the "Three Self" principles, and . . . (a) fix the field of operation (local area for the preacher's ministry); (b) fix the place (for the church); (c) decide on the people (appoint the responsible people).
and again,
The ministerial activities and religious activities of each church should all be conducted inside the church building.81
Unfortunately, the TSPM's zeal for conventional wineskins has nothing at all to do with doctrine, but rather with the issue of control. So far however, they have shown themselves unable to control the Spirit of the Living God.
Today in China according to Bohr, ". . . increasingly critical of Marxist ideology, many Chinese youth claim to be searching for "spiritual fulfillment."82 If this is true, there is certainly a growing voice from house churches offering that fulfillment. This is a clear indication that the story of God's witness in China is far from over. Indeed, there is no reason to think that China will not continue to be one of the true spiritual hot-spots in the world--due in part to the work done by one of God's agents, Watchman Nee.
Ask Dennis a question or share a comment.
Download the entire document in Word 97 format (33K zipped file)
Go back to the Church History page
Go back to the Xenos home page
