Continued vacillations
Last fall in Hong Kong I was able to stop by the big diocesan-run Catholic bookstore in Central. I was looking for some materials concerning the history of the Catholic Church in the People’s Republic of China, and having contacted the Holy Spirit Study Centre directly, sought out some general history books at the diocesan bookstore at their recommendation. The Holy Spirit Study Centre is sponsored by the Diocese of Hong Kong to research and dissemination information about the Catholic Church in China.
The first Holy Spirit Centre publication I have now read is the short book Decades of Vacillation : Chinese Communist Religious Policy and its Implementationspirit publicantio by Dr. Anthony S.K. Lam. I must confess that I bought it because in the maze that is the diocesan bookstore it was the easiest to find. This book isn’t specifically about the Catholics in China, but rather about Religious policy in general in China. It was published originally in 1997, with the English version I read published in 2003.
As I said, it is a very short book that is full of interesting information (if you are interested in Religious Policy in China) as well as several threads I want to pursue further. For instance, in the first Chapter, Dr. Lam provides an overview of the rise of the Communists in China over the Nationalists.. He doesn’t give a specific play-by-play, but suffices to describe what happened in 1949 was not in anyone’s imagination.
At the time of their coming to power, writes Lam, the Communists did not have a “religious policy,” despite proudly embracing atheism. There are a variety of theories Lam mentions that describe the Communists’ eventual position with respect to all religions in China, including the “devil theory” and “the liberator theory.” To counter the “devil theory,” Lam writes
The footnote in the text to that last sentence, which is not explained any further in this book, refers back to another of Dr. Lam’s books, The Church in Present Day China—Through Darkness and Light. This book is certainly one I have to purchase on my next trip to the bookstore, because I am absolutely unable to understand what he means.
Dr. Lam eventually concludes the first chapter to set up the rest of this thin book, that the Chinese Communists would eventually come to define religion as a “contradiction among the people,” which would then lead to, per Bishop Tong of Hong Kong, “decades of ‘tightening and relaxing.’” (13) He then in the rest of the book analyzes various policies and official documents of various Bureaus to track the “tightening and relaxing” as a matter of official policy. Some of this reading can be rather dry and very tied up in matters of Chinese procedure that I admire anyone for understanding. However, I did find this book, brief though it may be, to be helpful in making sense of much of the mixed information I’ve read about the state of religions in China. If it seems mixed it is because the status of religions in China has been mixed.
There are a few other points he makes that I found interesting. Dr. Lam devotes a chapter to seminaries, which are state-run institutions. One problem he illustrates that has faced the seminaries is that attendance to a seminary has not require anyone to demonstrate a strong religious calling, but merely an aptitude to pass a test (57). He cites high drop-out rates (for instance, he refers back to his data in the book The Church in Present Day China that Catholic seminaries have a drop-out rate close to 30%, though I am guessing from the context this data is from the 1990s). The drop-out rate during seminary and post-graduation also varies throughout the country; from one Muslim seminary in Shenyang in 1990, 45 out of 52 graduates went on to become Imams, Dr. Lam notes, while only 10 of the other 220 graduates from the other five Muslim seminaries continued into the Muslim clergy. Instead of the government propagandizing this situation, they issued a report in 1992 that indicated more alarm than pleasure at these numbers. Dr. Lam writes that “The Chinese government expressed its dissatisfaction with “the weak faith” and “improper motivation” of these seminarians” (57). This is hardly the congratulations one would expect from a regime whose intent is to wipe out religious belief. Further on in this same chapter, Dr. Lam even questions the popular belief that the seminaries, many being under the auspices of the Religious Affairs Bureau, operated exclusively as merely another appendage of the government. From that same 1992 report, Dr. Lam comments
I refer back to this book from time to time, especially when what I read going on with respect to the Catholic Church here in China. I mean, on one hand you have the recent restrictions happening in Sheshan, but on the other hand the China Philharmonic and Shanghai Opera Chorus travelling to Rome to perform Mozart's Requiem for the Pope. In the last two years we've had Chinese bishops approved by the Vatican and those that haven't. And, as I just read at Gashwin's blog, the Vatican may be beginning to close its diplomatic shop in Taipei, a major step towards establishing diplomatic relations with Beijing.
We may never see the end of this.
The first Holy Spirit Centre publication I have now read is the short book Decades of Vacillation : Chinese Communist Religious Policy and its Implementationspirit publicantio by Dr. Anthony S.K. Lam. I must confess that I bought it because in the maze that is the diocesan bookstore it was the easiest to find. This book isn’t specifically about the Catholics in China, but rather about Religious policy in general in China. It was published originally in 1997, with the English version I read published in 2003.
As I said, it is a very short book that is full of interesting information (if you are interested in Religious Policy in China) as well as several threads I want to pursue further. For instance, in the first Chapter, Dr. Lam provides an overview of the rise of the Communists in China over the Nationalists.. He doesn’t give a specific play-by-play, but suffices to describe what happened in 1949 was not in anyone’s imagination.
In recalling this period of history, I do not intend to probe into the rights and wrongs of the Nationalist and Communist Civil War during the pre-1949 period. What I wish to point out is that gaining complete control over the country in 1949 was something the Communists did not expect. Because their victory was so sudden, the Chinese Communists failed to have concrete policies in place in many areas. All their energies had been directed towards fighting the Nationalists. It was as if they had been crossing a river by feeling for rocks on the bottom. Their first major concern was how to get the political and economic situation, now in shambles, back on track. Other matters were evidently secondary and not so urgent. (7)
At the time of their coming to power, writes Lam, the Communists did not have a “religious policy,” despite proudly embracing atheism. There are a variety of theories Lam mentions that describe the Communists’ eventual position with respect to all religions in China, including the “devil theory” and “the liberator theory.” To counter the “devil theory,” Lam writes
To define Chinese Communists as devils is easy; it does not require any logic or reflection, and it provides an avenue for self-justification that is always gratifying. Nevertheless, such an opinion without rational basis is tantamount to putting the heads of the people in the sand, and completely obscures the true nature of the problem.
I am Catholic, but I do not in any way consider the Chinese Communists to be devils in disguise. There is no doubt, however, that Communism, being an atheistic social entity, can present formidable challenges to the Church. These challenges can reduce the Church’s influence in society, but they will also help the Church free itself of much unneeded baggage. (8-9)
The footnote in the text to that last sentence, which is not explained any further in this book, refers back to another of Dr. Lam’s books, The Church in Present Day China—Through Darkness and Light. This book is certainly one I have to purchase on my next trip to the bookstore, because I am absolutely unable to understand what he means.
Dr. Lam eventually concludes the first chapter to set up the rest of this thin book, that the Chinese Communists would eventually come to define religion as a “contradiction among the people,” which would then lead to, per Bishop Tong of Hong Kong, “decades of ‘tightening and relaxing.’” (13) He then in the rest of the book analyzes various policies and official documents of various Bureaus to track the “tightening and relaxing” as a matter of official policy. Some of this reading can be rather dry and very tied up in matters of Chinese procedure that I admire anyone for understanding. However, I did find this book, brief though it may be, to be helpful in making sense of much of the mixed information I’ve read about the state of religions in China. If it seems mixed it is because the status of religions in China has been mixed.
There are a few other points he makes that I found interesting. Dr. Lam devotes a chapter to seminaries, which are state-run institutions. One problem he illustrates that has faced the seminaries is that attendance to a seminary has not require anyone to demonstrate a strong religious calling, but merely an aptitude to pass a test (57). He cites high drop-out rates (for instance, he refers back to his data in the book The Church in Present Day China that Catholic seminaries have a drop-out rate close to 30%, though I am guessing from the context this data is from the 1990s). The drop-out rate during seminary and post-graduation also varies throughout the country; from one Muslim seminary in Shenyang in 1990, 45 out of 52 graduates went on to become Imams, Dr. Lam notes, while only 10 of the other 220 graduates from the other five Muslim seminaries continued into the Muslim clergy. Instead of the government propagandizing this situation, they issued a report in 1992 that indicated more alarm than pleasure at these numbers. Dr. Lam writes that “The Chinese government expressed its dissatisfaction with “the weak faith” and “improper motivation” of these seminarians” (57). This is hardly the congratulations one would expect from a regime whose intent is to wipe out religious belief. Further on in this same chapter, Dr. Lam even questions the popular belief that the seminaries, many being under the auspices of the Religious Affairs Bureau, operated exclusively as merely another appendage of the government. From that same 1992 report, Dr. Lam comments
the writers of the report was able to looks squarely at the problem of student drop-outs, and did show concern for the fact that “some seminary students do not value what they learn in their religious courses or keep up their religious practices. Their faith is very shallow and, after graduating, they do not want to engage in any religious work.” This is really quite surprising. In the past many overseas observers criticized the seminaries that were under the control of the Religious Affairs Bureau. They said that they were only a showcase for China’s new opening. Now that the Religious Affairs Bureau has corrected its aim, and sees that it is necessary to train young believers firm in faith and committed to lifelong service is certainly a good thing.(65)
I refer back to this book from time to time, especially when what I read going on with respect to the Catholic Church here in China. I mean, on one hand you have the recent restrictions happening in Sheshan, but on the other hand the China Philharmonic and Shanghai Opera Chorus travelling to Rome to perform Mozart's Requiem for the Pope. In the last two years we've had Chinese bishops approved by the Vatican and those that haven't. And, as I just read at Gashwin's blog, the Vatican may be beginning to close its diplomatic shop in Taipei, a major step towards establishing diplomatic relations with Beijing.
We may never see the end of this.
Comments