China persecuting Christians, is it coming to an end?

JimiTime

Interesting article here from one of my favourite sources, Dr Michael Brown, about his recent trip to China in which 'unofficial' church leaders were actually invited to meet with government officials etc.

http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/in-the-line-of-fire/41891-reciting-an-ancient-hebrew-blessing-in-the-offices-for-religious-affairs-in-china

Progress hopefully.

Manach

While welcome news, the Chinese authorities (based on what I've read else where) are still punishing Catholics who do not join their Patriotic version of the Church including clerics who have join in communion to the Vatican loyalists.

Manach

Double post

JimiTime

Manach wrote: »

While welcome news, the Chinese authorities (based on what I've read else where) are still punishing Catholics who do not join their Patriotic version of the Church including clerics who have join in communion to the Vatican loyalists.

No denying there is still much to be done, but this is the first good news story in terms of China's governments relationship to non state sponsored Christianity that I've seen.

verbumdei

The the Pope visits China I will believe things have changed...

Turtwig

Saw a documentary recently on Gays,non orthodox Christians and other minority groups in parts of Russia. Don't know how bad the situation in China is but in Russia if you're not with the status quo you can experience serious crap. Families were actually being blackmailed to pay money so that their relatives wouldn't be tortured in prison! Horrific stuff.:eek:

There is sadly always going to be persecution of minorities in various parts of the world. I hope China will give Christians are more even playing field but as Jimi says there's still a long long way to go .

Benny_Cake

verbumdei wrote: »

The the Pope visits China I will believe things have changed...

The Vatican is the last European state to recognise Taiwan (the Republic of China) as the legitimate government of the whole of China. That would have to change before a papal visit although I wouldn't rule it out, I'd suspect the Vatican plans on using recognition as a bargaining chip which is probably sensible enough. From what I understand, there is a fair deal of crossover now between the official church and the underground church (some bishops recognised by both).

The situation with Protestants is rather different and both the official Three-Self movement and the underground church seem to be growing rapidly. Hopefully the situation for Christians in China, as well as other groups around the world persecuted for what they believe or don't believe will improve in the future.

J C

Benny_Cake wrote: »

The Vatican is the last European state to recognise Taiwan (the Republic of China) as the legitimate government of the whole of China. That would have to change before a papal visit although I wouldn't rule it out, I'd suspect the Vatican plans on using recognition as a bargaining chip which is probably sensible enough. From what I understand, there is a fair deal of crossover now between the official church and the underground church (some bishops recognised by both).

The situation with Protestants is rather different and both the official Three-Self movement and the underground church seem to be growing rapidly. Hopefully the situation for Christians in China, as well as other groups around the world persecuted for what they believe or don't believe will improve in the future.

Amen to that.

J C

Jernal wrote: »

Saw a documentary recently on Gays,non orthodox Christians and other minority groups in parts of Russia. Don't know how bad the situation in China is but in Russia if you're not with the status quo you can experience serious crap. Families were actually being blackmailed to pay money so that their relatives wouldn't be tortured in prison! Horrific stuff.:eek:

There is sadly always going to be persecution of minorities in various parts of the world. I hope China will give Christians are more even playing field but as Jimi says there's still a long long way to go .

It's not inevitable that minorities are persecuted ... strong anti-discrimination laws with adequate and even-handed enforcement will stop discrimination and other forms of bullying in its tracks.

J C

JimiTime wrote: »

No denying there is still much to be done, but this is the first good news story in terms of China's governments relationship to non state sponsored Christianity that I've seen.

Is this the start of a separation of church and state in China?

pauldla

I know quite a few openly practicing Christians here. I've seen people handing our leaflets on the street as well (oddly enough, once at Sun Yat Sen's museum in Wuhan). Off the top of my head I can think of two churches currently with open doors in Shenzhen. As mentioned above, once you're a member of a state-sponsored church, you'll generally be left in peace. The CPC is jealous of its power, though, and is deeply suspicious of 'foreign' missionaries and churches (and with very good reason, too). Now North Korea, on the other hand....

Peregrinus

J C wrote: »

Is this the start of a separation of church and state in China?

Short answer: probably not.

Longer answer: There’s a couple of factors at work here.

First, the Chinese government is formally atheist. Party members and Communist Youth League members are required to be atheists. At the same time, the Constitution explicitly guarantees freedom of religious practice, forbids discrimination on the grounds of religious belief and officially recognises five religions practiced in China (two of which are Catholicism and Protestantism). Right there you’ve got a tension which can cause policy to swing sometimes one way and sometimes the other.

Secondly, the Chinese government dislikes feudalism and colonialism, and the history of Christianity in China of course overlaps to a fair degree with the history of colonial intervention in, and exploitation of, China. So there is ample room for, um, suspicion and mistrust.

Thirdly, and connected with the point just mentioned, the Chinese government is opposed to, or at least deeply suspicious of, any movement in China which makes moral or ethical claims on its members and which is controlled, or which appears to its members to be controlled, from outside China.

They’re also opposed to any movement which makes moral or ethical claims on its members which appear to run counter to the policies of the Chinese government. But they see this as a second-order issue on the thinking that, if the movement is run from within China, then they well-positioned to control and restrain it , so the problem of it saying things that cause problems for the government can be made to, ahem, go away.

At various times the Chinese government has tried to eradicate Christianity; most notably during the Cultural Revolution. But they have long ago accepted that this is (a) not possible, and (b) probably not even not desirable. So their main concern is (as it was before the Cultural Revolution) to ensure that Christianity in China is controlled from within China, and controlled by people who are sensitive to and considerate of the interests and policies of the state.

The Three-Self Patriotic Movement was founded in 1951 as a sort of umbrella group for Chinese Protestants to promote a strategy of self-government, self-support and self-propagation for Chinese protestant churches, and to promote anti-imperialist, anti-feudalist and anti-capitalist views within those churches. It isn’t a church itself; it’s a liaison between Protestant churches and the Chinese state. There’s also the Chinese Christian Council which is another umbrella group, encouraging co-operation and sharing of resources between its member churches.

Churches which joined the TSPM and, later, the CCC tended for obvious reasons to sever any links they had with parent bodies abroad. Consequently the TSPM includes what used to be the Anglican Church in China, the Methodists in China, the Baptists in China, etc. Athough the TSPM is not formally a church or denomination, because its members have no links abroad, co-operate closely and share resources like seminaries, it looks a lot like a church to western eyes, and is often spoken of as such. Theologically, it’s a pretty broad church.

Protestant congregations are encouraged, but not required, to participate in the TSPM and the CCC. Of course, there is a lively “house church” movement which does not. The government is suspicious of this, but mostly tolerates it as long as house churches don’t seem to be coming under foreign control or taking an anti-government line.

So far as Catholics are concerned, because of the structures of the Catholic church the Chinese government is extremely suspicious of foreign control and influence. The Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association was set up in 1957. Like the TSPM, it’s not a church itself; it’s an association of people which seeks to provide Chinese leadership and direction to the Catholic church in China. (And it seeks to do so in a way that suits the policies of the Chinese government; for example, the CPCA considers both contraception and abortion to be morally permissible.)

For obvious reasons, the relationship between Rome and the CPCA is basically antagonistic; they are both attempting to provide leadership to the same church. People are sometimes tempted to see two Catholic churches in China; an “official” church controlled by the CPCA and an “underground” church loyal to Rome, but this isn’t really correct. There is one church, with competing leadership claims. But both competing leaders have an interest in not forcing the faithful to choose between them, so there is plenty of quiet compromising going on. For example, formally the CPCA rejects the authority of the Second Vatican Council over the Chinese Church, but since the mid-1980s it has been implementing the liturgical and other reforms of that Council. Similarly, it formally rejects exercise of papal authority like the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the 1992 Catechism, but in practice accepts and uses both. On its part, Rome has been legitimating and confirming the appointment of (most) bishops chosen by the CPCA; and in fact for the past number of years most episcopal ordinations in China have been pre-approved both by the CPCA and by Rome.

So, no, there isn’t separation of church and state in China; nor is there likely to be, given that the Chinese government is basically totalitarian, and also suspicious of churches as a vector for foreign influence in China.

martinedwards

I read somewhere that China prints more Bibles every year than any other country.....

OK, I think it was the QI book of facts, so it MAY not be accurate!

pauldla

martinedwards wrote: »

I read somewhere that China prints more Bibles every year than any other country.....

OK, I think it was the QI book of facts, so it MAY not be accurate!

They also print more Tibetan flags than any other country too, as was observed during the run up to the Beijing Olympics (shudder, the memories. That was not a fun time to be here).

Manach

Peregrinus wrote: »

Secondly, the Chinese government dislikes feudalism and colonialism, and the history of Christianity in China of course overlaps to a fair degree with the history of colonial intervention in, and exploitation of, China. So there is ample room for, um, suspicion and mistrust.

A tad ironic, given from my reading of Chinese history, in that both the Imperial regime of China had a confrontation attitude with its neighbours and that Christian education was a key driver of the abortive democratic reforms that nearly took place in China if not stifled by the progressive communism regime.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

A tad ironic, given from my reading of Chinese history, in that both the Imperial regime of China had a confrontation attitude with its neighbours and that Christian education was a key driver of the abortive democratic reforms that nearly took place in China if not stifled by the progressive communism regime.

There is no shortage of irony in Chinese history, and that's the truth.

To get some idea of the influence of Christian missionaries in China in the 19th century, one needs to look at the seismic events of that era: in particular, the Opium Wars, the Taiping Rebellion, and the Boxer Rebellion, all of which involved Christian proselytising activities to a greater or lesser extent, and none of which are remembered by the Chinese with any great fondness.

In any case, democratic reforms were long dead by the time the Communists took power. Chiang Kai Shek was no democrat.

Peregrinus

What pauldla said.

The Chinese encounter with western "civilisation" in the nineteenth and early twentieth century was, from the Chinese perspective, a uniformly miserable and humiliating one. Like it or not, it's pretty well inevitable that that's going to colour Chinese attitudes to Christianity. One of the appeals that the Communist regime has for Chinese people is that, for all its faults, it succeeded in establishing a united China, free of western political and economic domination, something neither Imperial China nor Nationalist China were able to do.

Any attempt to understand the place of Christianity in Chinese society which ignores this aspect is doomed to failure.

Manach

Which I beg to differ. Christianity provided a world view on the emerging age but one that whilst in some ways took a Western slant, had managed to carve out a distinct voice which allowed elements of the Chinese elites to see beyond their moribund system. Christians suffered greatly in the various tumults in that century caused in large part by a stoleric system that collapse under its weight.
In the sweep of the 19thC/20thC history, whatever association that apologetics link with the West can be overshadowed by the poisonous record of the Communist regime which at least if under the Nationalist governance would have been likely avoided.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

Which I beg to differ. Christianity provided a world view on the emerging age but one that whilst in some ways took a Western slant, had managed to carve out a distinct voice which allowed elements of the Chinese elites to see beyond their moribund system.

I'd be interested to know which elements?

Manach wrote: »

Christians suffered greatly in the various tumults in that century caused in large part by a stoleric system that collapse under its weight.

20 million people died during the Taiping Rebellion. It would be more honest to say 'millions suffered', rather than singling out one (very negligible) minority.

Manach wrote: »

In the sweep of the 19thC/20thC history, whatever association that apologetics link with the West can be overshadowed by the poisonous record of the Communist regime which at least if under the Nationalist governance would have been likely avoided.

An optimistic appraisal, seeing as the KMT of the day were described by one US observer to the effect that they were 'fascist in everything expect their efficiency'.

Manach

Then we must be reading differing accounts of the many Chinese converts that were killed during the various upheavals in China at that time, calling them negligible seems to be a fine way of depersonalising them.
As far calling the Nationalist fascists, based on one US source both denigrates their efforts in defending China against the Japanese, which has been painted out of modern history and shows an untoward irony given the actual excesses of the Communist regime.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

Then we must be reading differing accounts of the many Chinese converts that were killed during the various upheavals in China at that time, calling them negligible seems to be a fine way of depersonalising them.

Compared to the massive size of the population of China, and the shocking death tolls of 19th and 20th century Chinese history, then yes, they were negligible. I remind you, 20 million people died during the Taipeng Rebellion alone. That's comparable to the number who died during the First World War, and that's just one chapter of 19th century Chinese history. I stand by my choice of words.

Can you tell me which elements of the Chinese elite had their eyes opened to moribund aspects of their society by their embracing of Christianity, as suggested in your earlier post, please?

Manach wrote: »

As far calling the Nationalist fascists, based on one US source both denigrates their efforts in defending China against the Japanese, which has been painted out of modern history and shows an untoward irony given the actual excesses of the Communist regime.

As the quote dates from the early 1940's (AFAIR: I'll try to reference it later), it's not terribly fair declare it ironic 'given the actual excesses of the Communist regime'. I'd go so far as to call it completely irrelevant, in fact. The excesses of the Cultural Revolution or the Great Leap Forward have no bearing on the KMT regime and Chiang Kai Shek; the suggestion is risible.

Manach

The only rather risable element of the post is to demand sources when you yourself have likewise be scant on the providing of either primary or secondary sourced material (*).
It is both valid and correct to compare both the Nationalist governance and that of the Communist given both the continuation of the former in Taiwan and the contemporaneous regimes on the mainland.
To dismiss the thousands of Chinese Christians who died during that period, specially in the era of the Boxer revolt who were specifically targeted for their faith shows a selective and blinkered view of Chinese history which no doubt feeds into the prevailing anti-Western narrative. Again ironic in that should a very sparrow fall to the field by a Christian action, then this is a matter of perpetual ignominy.
These were both converts and other of long-standing faith who with the Western missionaries had build communities of faith that embraced education and a similar style openness to global values that feed into the reformist attempts in China. It was the missionary tradition and examples (both Catholic and Protestant) in that period that had sowed the strong and growing example of faith in China, on which even state displeasure cannot solely irradiate.

* - my sources are undergrad history material, text/visual, some of which I'd no longer possess.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

The only rather risable element of the post is to demand sources when you yourself have likewise be scant on the providing of either primary or secondary sourced material (*).

The Opium Wars, the Taipeng Rebellion, and the Boxer Rebellion are widely considered to be actual events. You want me to provide sources on them?

Manach wrote: »

It is both valid and correct to compare both the Nationalist governance and that of the Communist given both the continuation of the former in Taiwan and the contemporaneous regimes on the mainland.

Not in the context of 19th century history, it isn't; which is what I was referring to in my earlier posts. Further, the offences of the Communist regime have no bearing on Chiang Kai Sheks status as a democrat (in a nutshell: he wasn't).

Manach wrote: »

To dismiss the thousands of Chinese Christians who died during that period, specially in the era of the Boxer revolt who were specifically targeted for their faith shows a selective and blinkered view of Chinese history which no doubt feeds into the prevailing anti-Western narrative.

I'm not dismissing them: I'm saying that Chinese Christians were always a negligible minority. As in, there was never very many of them. As in, maybe one or two million of out a population of hundreds of millions. As in, only a few percent of the population.

Manach wrote: »

Again ironic in that should a very sparrow fall to the field by a Christian action, then this is a matter of perpetual ignominy.

Are we talking about sparrows falling in fields? The Chinese refer to it as the Century of Humiliation. They saw their country being carved up and sold into drug dependency. And they saw (rightly or wrongly) Christian missionaries as being a major part of that. They saw Christian beliefs as being bizarre (only one God?), destabilizing (the so-called 'Rice Christians', Taiping), and dangerously anti-Chinese (ancestor-worship, etc).

By way of example, in her excellent The Boxer Rebellion, Diana Preston recounts the story of well-meaning French nuns who used to buy children from their parents and house them in their orphanage. The nuns intentions were pure enough, no doubt: protect the children, offer them a better chance in life, and perhaps win a few converts for the faith. But they didn't allow for how their actions would be perceived by the locals, especially when disease caused many of the children to fall ill and die. The Chinese saw children being paid for at the front door, and dead children being brought out the back. You can imagine the conclusions they came to.

Manach wrote: »

These were both converts and other of long-standing faith who with the Western missionaries had build communities of faith that embraced education and a similar style openness to global values that feed into the reformist attempts in China. It was the missionary tradition and examples (both Catholic and Protestant) in that period that had sowed the strong and growing example of faith in China, on which even state displeasure cannot solely irradiate.

* - my sources are undergrad history material, text/visual, some of which I'd no longer possess.

I'd argue that the Chinese reform impetus of the Nineteenth Century was fed more by British gunboats cruising with impunity in the Pearl River Delta (see Julia Lovells The Opium Wars) than it was by the Christian faith.

Let me repeat my earlier question, which you have yet to address, as I am very interested to get your insight on it:

Can you tell me which elements of the Chinese elite had their eyes opened to moribund aspects of their society by their embracing of Christianity, as suggested in your earlier post, please?

Manach

Firstly, one assumes you did read where I drew my sources from in the previous post, and not just skimmed ahead ...

I've also read Paxman, cover to cover. She also, AFAIR, mentions, in numerious parts of her book, the excellent missionary work done by Missionaries and the community building and the great efforts of the clergy to aid their flock during the Boxer rebellion both in Peking and the provinces - as per the various photos within the book. This "small percentage" was disproportionately targeted during that area. A policy the Chinese authorities seem to still have in their playbook.
The cause of the weakness of the Chinese state was more likely caused by a deliberate and inward policy adapted by the imperial court at a much earlier period than by a the outside actions of Western at that time. The context we are discussing is that of Chinese history, not on any particular period in time and how this internal policy (from work by Nial Ferguson on Empire) lay at the root of Chinese vulnerability to the west, and not any Christian action. The latter instead play the role of scapegoat to explain the turbulence of that era. Based on what I'd read early this year by Mannerheim who toured Northern China a century ago, it was a belief in their own perfect System of governance that cocooned the state into an inertia that effected that society.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

Firstly, one assumes you did read where I drew my sources from in the previous post, and not just skimmed ahead ...

Manach wrote: »

my sources are undergrad history material, text/visual, some of which I'd no longer possess.

You read it in a text, or texts, unnamed, which you no no longer possess. You didn't actually tell me what those sources were, so what can I read?

Manach wrote: »

I've also read Paxman, cover to cover. She (?) also, AFAIR, mentions, in numerious parts of her book, the excellent missionary work done by Missionaries and the community building and the great efforts of the clergy to aid their flock during the Boxer rebellion both in Peking and the provinces - as per the various photos within the book.

Are you referring to Paxman's Empire (aka What Have The British Ever Done For Us)? My overall impression of the book and TV series is Paxman being slightly bewildered that the former colonials didn't have the happiest of memories about their experience of Empire. And none of them wanted the British back.

Regardless, it's still something of an irrelevance. Contemporary China has an official distrust of missionaries, for the reasons I have outlined above. I'm not denying that there were good missionaries, or that their work did not have some positive aspects. I'm merely trying to point out where this modern mistrust comes from.

Manach wrote: »

This "small percentage" was disproportionately targeted during that area. A policy the Chinese authorities seem to still have in their playbook.

Indeed. As I have stated, missionaries generally weren't liked very much. Which is why I'm curious to get more details about the Chinese elites who had their eyes opened to the moribund aspects etc etc. You still haven't answered that, BTW.

Manach wrote: »

The cause of the weakness of the Chinese state was more likely caused by a deliberate and inward policy adapted by the imperial court at a much earlier period than by a the outside actions of Western at that time.

Yes, and it was their humiliation at the hands of foreign rebels from a small island on the other side of the world that exposed this weakness. See my reference above to British gunboats on the Pearl River Delta.

Manach wrote: »

The context we are discussing is that of Chinese history, not on any particular period in time and how this internal policy (from work by Nial Ferguson on Empire) lay at the root of Chinese vulnerability to the west, and not any Christian action. The latter instead play the role of scapegoat to explain the turbulence of that era. Based on what I'd read early this year by Mannerheim who toured Northern China a century ago, it was a belief in their own perfect System of governance that cocooned the state into an inertia that effected that society.

Indeed. Let us keep in mind the linear nature of history.

To restate my point: I'm not dismissing the suffering of some Christians in China in the 19th century. Nor am I saying that It Was All Their Fault. My point is that, rightly or wrongly, missionaries are not remembered with any great affection by the Chinese in general, as they were seen as an element, if not a personification, of the humiliation of China by western powers.

Incidentally, your pastor above seems to be on the wrong side of a land grab by local officials. It's a sore point in contemporary China (see Peter Hessler's Country Driving for a description of a similar scenario), and is one that is repeated up and down the country. But this case involved a Christian pastor, so now it's on Sky News. Echos of the 'Rice Christians' of the 19th Century (see again The Boxer Rebellion, above).

hfallada

I have spoken to westerners living in china and they said the state is very controlling with Christian churches. There is a service for the Chinese and a service for the westerns. Neither of them are supposed to speak to each other ( one of the evaganical church's and not catholic).

But most "catholic priests" in china, are often bs and have nothing to do with Rome. They are connected to the Chinese government to ensure nothing controversy is said at mass

pauldla

hfallada wrote: »

I have spoken to westerners living in china and they said the state is very controlling with Christian churches. There is a service for the Chinese and a service for the westerns. Neither of them are supposed to speak to each other ( one of the evaganical church's and not catholic).

But most "catholic priests" in china, are often bs and have nothing to do with Rome. They are connected to the Chinese government to ensure nothing controversy is said at mass

For what it's worth, my mother, when she visited, attended Catholic mass attended by Chinese, Filipinos, and westerners. But yes, you are right, the Chinese government runs the Chinese Patriotic Catholic association, which AFAIK is not recognized by Rome. I'm not sure their clergy would appreciate being called 'bs', though.

Manach

Source material it would be from the Open University A326 on Empire - lecture material etc. This would have included apart from set material
Niall Ferguson’s Empire - which was read
John Darwin’s After Tamerlane: The Global History of Empire - which was skimmed.
+ other works such on general imperial theory texts such as Empire by Alejandro Colás
As for Paxman (who as an aside did not seem to know who Kitcherer was when asked), that was in error - it should have been Preston.

Reading some other non-graduate material - Hitchcock on History of the Church. That the efforts to associate Christianity with progress had begun with the Jesuits who concentrated on the mandarin class, by the use of scholars such as Fr. Ricci in their mission. However, there were other orders such as the Francsians who concentrated their efforts on the poor - which were numerically more successful by the era of the Boxer revolution - 700, 000 Catholic alone. My guess same ratio of Protestant. As well as the building of education establishments and a University in Beijing. Also, it was mentioned a Christian convert within the the Chinese Government- foreign minister - who ended his life as an abbot.
It was also mentioned the rather harsh methods and false allegations to ring confessions out of Christians during the peak of Communist persecutions. I'm not an expert on Chinese land law, but would have studied on their Internet and Censorship regulations, and there is precedent to create such diversions .

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

Source material it would be from the Open University A326 on Empire - lecture material etc. This would have included apart from set material
Niall Ferguson’s Empire - which was read
John Darwin’s After Tamerlane: The Global History of Empire - which was skimmed.
+ other works such on general imperial theory texts such as Empire by Alejandro Colás
As for Paxman (who as an aside did not seem to know who Kitcherer was when asked), that was in error - it should have been Preston.

Reading some other non-graduate material - Hitchcock on History of the Church. That the efforts to associate Christianity with progress had begun with the Jesuits who concentrated on the mandarin class, by the use of scholars such as Fr. Ricci in their mission. However, there were other orders such as the Francsians who concentrated their efforts on the poor - which were numerically more successful by the era of the Boxer revolution - 700, 000 Catholic alone. My guess same ratio of Protestant. As well as the building of education establishments and a University in Beijing. Also, it was mentioned a Christian convert within the the Chinese Government- foreign minister - who ended his life as an abbot.
It was also mentioned the rather harsh methods and false allegations to ring confessions out of Christians during the peak of Communist persecutions. I'm not an expert on Chinese land law, but would have studied on their Internet and Censorship regulations, and there is precedent to create such diversions .

I must admit, I'm a little disappointed, Manach. When you mentioned "a distinct voice which allowed elements of the Chinese elites to see beyond their moribund system", I was expecting something more expansive than one (unnamed) foreign minister becoming an abbot. The fault, of course, is my own.

But I can see why some might harbor such resentment against the communists. As you point out, Matteo Ricci was spreading the Word in China back in the 17th century; Chinese students didn't start reading Marx until the end of the 19th century. Yet despite being such relative newcomers, within 50 years they had control of the whole shop. An impressive achievement.

BTW, with your last comment, are you suggesting that the Chinese government is using land 'appropriations' (for want of a better term) as a diversion for targeting Chinese Christians?

Manach

Again I invite you to actually spend time and effort in doing this course or something like it, as it would give you a better background and a grounded understanding history and the various elements and tools that regimes use to legitimise themselves by having a selective spin on the past. As for diversions, from what I've read (mostly in the area of online legislation and jurisprudence) on how the Chinese government had and has dealt with dissidents from across the politician spectrum.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

Again I invite you to actually spend time and effort in doing this course or something like it, as it would give you a better background and a grounded understanding history and the various elements and tools that regimes use to legitimise themselves by having a selective spin on the past. As for diversions, from what I've read (mostly in the area of online legislation and jurisprudence) on how the Chinese government had and has dealt with dissidents from across the politician spectrum.

Then it is a great pity that your reading of history has not given you more empathy with the Chinese viewpoint. Perhaps your reading material is not challenging enough?

Just to restate my argument:

The Chinese government, and by extension a large part of the Chinese population, have a residual distrust of Christian missionaries. This mainly stems back to the nineteenth century, when missionaries were seen as being hand in glove with the imperial powers. These days, as stated above, the main stumbling block to a normalization of the relationship between China and the Vatican is the issue of recognition of Taiwan as the Republic of China, though I suspect that there may be other issues at play too (the CPC certainly would look askance at any body that could, even in theory, see itself as being above or beyond secular law).

I am at a loss to summarize your argument, because looking back over the thread so far I must confess I'm not sure what your points are, beyond knee-jerk reactions to perceived criticisms of Christian missionaries in China. Why do you think contemporary China continues in its distrust of Christianity? Where does this mistrust come from?

I've read the historians and writers referenced above, as well as books by Jonathan Fenby (The Penguin History of Modern China, 1850 - Present) and Robert Bickers (The Scramble for China: Foreign Devils in the Qing Empire, 1832-1914), as well as numerous articles and other works. I'm no expert, but I've lived here for over a decade, and it's a subject I'm very interested in.

smacl

pauldla wrote: »

Then it is a great pity that your reading of history has not given you more empathy with the Chinese viewpoint. Perhaps your reading material is not challenging enough?

Certainly to get a decent perspective on the boxer uprising, you need to go beyond Preston's book. Highly entertaining as it is, it deals primarily with the siege of Beijing. One of the better books I've read on that era in China is Eshrick's Origin of the Boxer Uprising, which gives a far clearer account of the Chinese viewpoint. From this and other books I've read, the missionaries were no small part of the problem, and it is hardly surprising that they were targeted. It's also worth remembering that they were far more exposed in rural China, where the bulk of the other foreigners were concentrated near cities.

pauldla

smacl wrote: »

Certainly to get a decent perspective on the boxer uprising, you need to go beyond Preston's book. Highly entertaining as it is, it deals primarily with the siege of Beijing. One of the better books I've read on that era in China is Eshrick's Origin of the Boxer Uprising, which gives a far clearer account of the Chinese viewpoint. From this and other books I've read, the missionaries were no small part of the problem, and it is hardly surprising that they were targeted. It's also worth remembering that they were far more exposed in rural China, where the bulk of the other foreigners were concentrated near cities.

Thank you kindly, I'll add that to the wishlist.

robindch

smacl wrote: »

[...] From this and other books I've read, the missionaries were no small part of the problem, and it is hardly surprising that they were targeted [...]

There's also the matter of the Taiping Rebellion which, if my understanding is generally correct, was started and carried on by a man who'd acquired christianity from an American missionary and who'd subsequently figured out that he was Jesus' younger brother who'd been sent to China to rid the country of corruption, devils and the like. It's believed around 20 million people died in the Taiping Rebellion, making it the bloodiest civil war ever to take place.

Manach

pauldla wrote: »

I've read the historians and writers referenced above, as well as books by Jonathan Fenby (The Penguin History of Modern China, 1850 - Present) and Robert Bickers (The Scramble for China: Foreign Devils in the Qing Empire, 1832-1914), as well as numerous articles and other works. I'm no expert, but I've lived here for over a decade, and it's a subject I'm very interested in.

I will follow up on the above references.

My final summarised objection is that the Chinese communist state perceives groups, such as Christian and others as well as both inimical to their monopoly rule and by casting them as the 'Other' sets them up as scapegoats.

pauldla

Manach wrote: »

I will follow up on the above references.

My final summarised objection is that the Chinese communist state perceives groups, such as Christian and others as well as both inimical to their monopoly rule and by casting them as the 'Other' sets them up as scapegoats.

Well that's certainly true enough. In fairness to them, though (great bunch of lads etc), they were hardly the first to start beating on about it, and they were handed a big stick with which to do the beating.