Refugee Review Tribunal AUSTRALIA

RRT RESEARCH RESPONSE

Research Response Number: CHN31627 Country: Date: 19 April 2007

Keywords: China – Christian Assembly of Sydney – Little Flock

This response was prepared by the Country Research Section of the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the RRT within time constraints. This response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum.

Questions

1. Please give me information about Christian Assembly of Sydney. Particularly interested in specific beliefs and how they are different from other Christian beliefs/churches that are tolerated in China. 2. Is it linked to First Family Church in China? 3. Is First Family Church in China banned?

RESPONSE

1. Please give me information about Christian Assembly of Sydney. Particularly interested in specific beliefs and how they are different from other Christian beliefs/churches that are tolerated in China.

No detailed information was found in the sources consulted regarding the specific beliefs of the Christian Assembly of Sydney. The Chairman of the Christian Assembly of Sydney stated in a conversation with a Tribunal Member that the Christian Assembly of Sydney is in the tradition of Watchman Nee and the Brother Movement. Watchman Nee, strongly influenced by the Brethren Movement, founded the Christian Assembly in China (also known as the Little Flock) in 1922. The Christian Assembly in China is a non-denominational religion, influenced by and with a strong history of itinerant preaching. Sources suggest that the most distinctive feature of the church is its rejection of hierarchal and centralised authority and the strong belief in the localised independence of churches free from external interference. Despite strong government opposition the Little Flock church continues to operate as an underground or movement in China.

The website for the Christian Assembly of Sydney was not accessible and an archive search of the website provided very limited theological and administrative information. The church provides the following “Statement of Faith” on their website (‘Statement of Faith of the Christian Assembly of Sydney’ (undated), Christian Assembly website, Accessed through Internet Archive website http://web.archive.org/web/20040606132957/www.christianassembly.com.au/aboutus.htm – Accessed 12 April 2007 – Attachment 1).

The Chairman of the Christian Assembly of Sydney was contacted in August 2006 by a Tribunal Member. The Chairman stated that the Christian Assembly of Sydney was based on the tradition of the Brotherhood Movement and the work of Watchman Nee ( Tuosheng). The Chairman also stated that the Christian Assembly is an illegal church in China:

Following the hearing, the Tribunal made contact with the Chairman of the applicants’ church and arranged to take oral evidence from him on 4 August 2006. He outlined the main theological beliefs of his church and explained that the church was in the tradition of a church called the “Brother Movement” which had its roots in Europe about 200 years ago, and of the work in China in the 1920s by a man known as “Watchman Nee.” The Tribunal asked if his church was in the same tradition as the “Shouters” church in China, a church which it understands to be particularly at risk in China, but he distinguished his church from . He said that the movement was “very pure” in the beginning but, after the Communist takeover of China, the Shouters came under other influences. In 1956, all the leaders of the Christian Assembly were arrested on one day. Some Christians went overseas, but the Assembly split into various groups in the 1970s. He said that the Shouters come from the same tradition as his church but he said that they had split and “we regard them as taking the wrong path.” The Chairman also explained his church’s attitude to baptism. The Tribunal asked if he was aware of any members of his church who have had difficulties in other countries because of their religion. He said there were three “old people” who had been imprisoned for twenty years in China. Among the younger people in his congregation there would be “not many” such people …The Tribunal asked the chairman if people of his religious beliefs are able to practise their religion openly in China. He said he believed such people do hold illegal religious gatherings in China. He said they can attend the approved “Three self” church if they wish to. However, if they wish to keep the name “Christian Assembly,” then it is illegal (RRT decision 060463473 of 5 September 2006 – Attachment 2).

Watchman Nee founded the Christian Assembly in China in 1922. The Christian Assembly is also widely referred to as the Little Flock:

An urban-based group founded in , it was led by Watchman Nee (1903-1972)… The correct name of this group is the Christian Assembly, derived from the understanding that Christians had a place where they worshipped God, but were without a church which was understood to be a human institution (Wickeri, Philip L. 1990, ‘Rejection from the Right’, Maryknoll, New York, pp.156-165 – Attachment 3).

Joseph Lee in his article Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China describes how the Christian Assembly or Little Flock was influenced by evangelical and the teachings of the Brethren Movement. The Brethren movement was an English sectarian movement which advocated localised and independent churches free from hierarchical influence. Sources state that this egalitarian notion of highly autonomous local churches became a defining feature of the Chinese Christian Assembly:

The Christian Assembly originated from the teaching and ministry of Watchman Nee (1903- 72), who was probably the most influential Chinese Protestant preacher in the early twentieth century.

…At the age of 17, he gave up pursuing a teaching, medical, or business career and decided to become a full-time evangelist… In 1922, he and the two Wang brothers (Wang Zai and Wang Lianjun)… launched the Christian Assembly in Fuzhou and nearby villages. In 1923, he went to study Christian doctrines with Margaret E. Barber… Barber, after being influenced by the Brethren Movement, returned to China to found a school southeast of Fuzhou.

The Brethren Movement (or the ) was a sectarian movement in early- nineteenth-century England that sought to recapture the outlook and beliefs of the church. …Rejecting priestly hierarchy, they believed in the “priesthood of all believers.” …Overall, what distinguishes the Brethren from other denominations is the absence of church government beyond the local church. Unconstrained by a hierarchy or centralized organization, local churches were free to adapt the Christian message to contemporary needs and the local situations (Lee, J. 2005, ‘Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China’, Church History, Vol.74, No.1, 1 March – Attachment 4).

Joseph Lee states that under the influence of Brethren ideas Watchman Nee established a fully independent nation wide Christian movement. This movement advocated notions non- hierarchical, non-denominational local church assemblies free from external interference. The desire for autonomy was partially inspired by a wish to free Chinese churches from the influence of foreign missionaries:

Dissatisfied with the hierarchy that he saw in the Catholic Church and most of the Protestant denominations in China, he rejected the pastoral office partly because he felt that the office of the priesthood obstructed believers’ communion with the Christian God and contradicted the biblical teaching that all God’s people were priests, and partly because it kept ordinary Christians from service within the church. His rejection of the pastoral office also stemmed from the context of Western imperialism in China. For decades, Chinese pastors served as extensions of Christian missionary enterprises. They were employed by foreign mission societies. Many of the Chinese denominational churches reflected this dependent relationship of local workers on foreign missionaries. Therefore, Nee urged Chinese Christians to develop strong lay leaders and to break away from their dependence on foreign missionary enterprises for doctrinal instruction and administrative support.

Other features that distinguished Watchman Nee from other Protestant denominations were his antagonism towards denominational affiliation and his emphasis on the church as a local entity. To Watchman Nee, the most vivid expression of Christian community was the local church (difang jiaohui) or local assembly (difang juhuisuo)… Strongly in favor of autonomous and independent local churches, he maintained that there should be “one church in one locality… A church should not represent an area smaller or larger than a city and, therefore, its jurisdiction should correspond with administrative limits of a city.

…As Grace Y. May points out, “The empowerment of the laity was the backbone of the [Christian] Assembly and the goal of his [Watchman Nee’s] ministry. Unlike denominational churches, which were clergy centered, the Assembly was clearly a ministry by and for the people.” Evidently, the Little Flock not only represented a growth of consciousness among significant numbers of the Chinese Protestant population, but also redefined the power relations between Chinese converts and their missionary patrons over the issue of church management (Lee, J. 2005 ‘Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China’, Church History, Vol.74, No.1, 1 March – Attachment 4).

Sources describe how the Christian Assembly or Little Flock used itinerant preachers, known as Apostles to disseminate their religion. These Apostles travelled throughout China proselytising and establishing churches. This led to the growth of Little Flock churches and practitioners throughout China. By 1949 the Little Flock had developed into a nationwide movement: The apostles travelled frequently, preached the Christian message, founded churches in different localities, trained elders and church leaders, and decided doctrinal matters. Once a church was established, the apostle was expected to transfer the authority to the elders. In this perspective, apostles were simply wandering evangelists whose ministry and authority lay outside, not inside, the local church.

…Watchman Nee, in his late twenties, had become one of the most celebrated Protestant evangelists and writers in China. His ideas spread from Fuzhou throughout and Zhejiang provinces, from into inland provinces, and from coastal China into the Overseas Chinese communities across Southeast Asia. His followers organized themselves into proselytizing communities and created a nationwide network of Little Flock assemblies with headquarters in Shanghai.

…By 1949, the Little Flock established a nationwide church network and continued to expand westward into the frontier provinces (Lee, J. 2005 ‘Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China’, Church History, Vol.74, No.1, 1 March – Attachment 4).

Sources reveal that the Little Flocks desire for independence led to strong resistance of Communist Party reforms. The Little Flock withdrew from the state sponsored Three-Self Patriotic Movement and publicly declared that it was a mechanism of Communist Party control. They also purged their churches of pro-government practitioners and continued their program of itinerant preaching. During the mid 1950’s the Chinese Communist Party launched an aggressive campaign against the Little Flock. Watchman Nee was arrested in 1952 and sentenced to 15 years in prison. He died in a labour camp in 1972. Practitioners lost their jobs in educational institutions, industrial enterprises, and government departments. A wave of arrests were conducted in which Little Flock church leaders were charged with crimes against the state. By 1958 the Little Flock had been successfully taken over by the Three Self Patriotic Movement. According to Joseph Lee it was not until 1978 and the Little Flock began to resume their activities in public:

The most serious challenge facing the Little Flock was the continuous organization of mass campaigns by the government. The large-scale campaigns against reactionaries and class enemies purged Chinese church leaders who had worked with foreign missionaries. In 1951, four Little Flock members in the Nanjing Assembly denounced Watchman Nee as a reactionary. In response, Nee launched a counterdenunciation campaign and disciplined those progovernment Little Flock members. But one year later, he was arrested. In 1956, he was accused as a counterrevolutionary and charged with a series of crimes against the state. He was sentenced to fifteen years in prison and died in a labor camp in 1972.

…Following the arrest of Watchman Nee in 1952, the Little Flock leaders adopted several strategies to respond to the state persecution and to rebuild the Christian Assembly. The first strategy was to consolidate the internal unity of the Little Flock congregations by expelling the progovernment members.

…The second strategy was to challenge the Three-Self Patriotic Movement. In July 1953, Yan Jiale and Fang Aiguang, leaders of the Beijing Assembly, publicly condemned the Three- Self Patriotic Movement as an instrument of the Communist state to take over the church and therefore withdrew from the Three-Self on the basis of religious conscience... By 1954, over thirty assemblies across China, including all the eleven assemblies in Fujian province, withdrew from the Three-Self Patriotic Movement. They all refused to attend religious services and political meetings held by the Three-Self Patriotic leaders. This large-scale anti- Three-Self campaign undermined the legitimacy of the Three-Self Patriotic Movement and directly challenged the Communist government’s united front policy. The third strategy was to proselytize and recruit members from all social sectors across the country.

…In the short term, this phenomenon of mass conversion was solidifying an ideological resistance to the state.

…The Communist state launched an aggressive nationwide campaign against the Little Flock during the mid 1950s... In January 1956 Watchman Nee was accused of espionage, licentiousness, and stealing of church funds. Meanwhile, extra effort was made to purge the Little Flock members from educational institutions, industrial enterprises, and government departments. Most of the Little Flock leaders across the country were arrested and denounced as “reactionaries” and “counter-revolutionaries.” They were charged with crimes against the state… By the Great Leap Forward in 1958, the Three-Self Patriotic Movement had successfully taken over the Little Flock institutions and integrated them into its hierarchy. Most of the Little Flock members appeared to distance themselves from Watchman Nee’s teaching, but they carried on their activities…It was not until the opening of China to the outside world in 1978 that the Little Flock had begun to resume their activities in public (Lee, J. 2005, ‘Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China’, Church History, Vol.74, No.1, 1 March – Attachment 4).

Although the Little Flock had been effectively suppressed in the mid 1950’s they still managed to operate underground and resist government pressure. Tony Lambert in China’s Christian Millions describes the survival of the Little Flock and their strong growth in areas of China. He describes their determined pursuit of independence and unwillingness to join the state sanctioned church and comply with registration procedures:

However, the Little Flock survived the persecutions of the 1950’s and the Cultural Revolution. Their focus on the Scriptures, on close fellowship in small group meetings and their freedom from foreign control stood them in good stead. By the late 1970’s many house churches in the Little Flock tradition were again flourishing in many cities, and their influence was strong in the countryside areas, too. In Fuzhou, the original home of the movement, the Little Flock remain strong today. In nearby Fuqing County as early as 1981 it was reported there were 70, 000 Christians of whom 30, 000 adhered to the Little Flock. By 1987 a local pastor reported growth to 100, 000 Christians with corresponding growth among the Little Flock. In Northern Zhejian Province, Xiaoshan County is home to large numbers of Little Flock Christians opposed to joining the TSPM. In 1984 the Shangahi Academy of Social Sciences conducted an investigation of Christianity in Xiaoshan, they concluded that more than 95 per cent of the 63,000 Christians in Xiaoshan belonged to the Little Flock; that they were opposed to joining the “Three Self” so met independently… Two years later numbers had grown to 80,000 of whom 75 per cent were still outside TSPM control. In 1998 local Christians reported numbers had grown to 100,000 (some even to 300, 000). The staggering growth of the Little Flock in Xiaoshan can be traced back…During the Cultural revolution great persecution came upon them, but in the late 1970s this was followed by a great spiritual awakening. House churches sprang up everywhere… …The direct headship of Christ over each local assembly is a truth upheld strongly by the Little Flock. Some have said they will never register nor accept government and TSPM interference in spiritual matter even if their buildings are demolished; others resolutely oppose joining the TSPM which they consider an apostate, but are willing to register with local authorities. Such debates are common in house church circles far beyond Little Flock Assemblies. It appears that the Little Flock have had a widespread influence. Their emphasis on the headship of Christ, on fellowship, and on eschatology and separation from the world are generally accepted by many Chinese Christians, especially those who meet in independent churches. (Lambert, T. 2006, China’s Christian Millions, Monarch Books, Oxford, p.64 – Attachment 5).

While no information was found in the sources consulted that indicated that the Little Flock was illegal or banned in China it has previously been the subject of harsh government treatment due to it’s unwillingness to acquire the correct government registration. In Xiaoshan County, home to a large number of Little Flock practitioners, three church leaders were arrested in 2003. It was also noted in 2003 that the Xiaoshan Little Flock church had been destroyed three times in 25 years:

On July 13, police raided a house church in Xiaoshan and arrested at least three church leaders. Shen Shaocheng, 80, who had helped to found the church more than 25 years ago, was among those held. Xu Weimin and Gao Chongdao, two other house church leaders, were also taken into custody. The church, with 1,500 members, belongs to the “Little Flock”, one of the largest house church “streams” active in China. The Little Flock is best known abroad for Watchman Nee, its founder, whose writings have circulated among Christians in the West. Nee died in a labour camp in 1973. The Xiaoshan church has been destroyed three times by the authorities over the past 25 years. It was rebuilt each time (August, O. 2003, ‘China destroys churches and temples in crackdown on underground religion’, The Times, 10 November – Attachment 6).

Tony Lambert also describes the government attacks against Little Flock churches in Xiaoshan but states that due to the large number of practitioners Chinese authorities have more recently “taken a more conciliatory line”:

Since 1994 when registration of all meetings was first enforced by the authorities they have been engaged in constant spiritual battle. Many meeting places have been demolished, then rebuilt, only to be demolished and rebuilt again! Because of the large number of Christians the authorities have more recently taken a more conciliatory line. (Lambert, T. 2006, China’s Christian Millions, Monarch Books, Oxford, pp.64-65 – Attachment 5).

The US Congressional-Executive Commission on China’s Annual Report 2006 provides useful information on the treatment of unregistered Christian groups in China:

Religious organizations are required to register with the government and submit to the leadership of ‘‘patriotic religious associations’’ created by the Party to lead each of China’s five recognized religions: Buddhism, Catholicism, Daoism, Islam, and Protestantism. Those who choose not to register with the government, or groups that the government refuses to register, operate outside the zone of protected religious activity and risk harassment, detention, imprisonment, and other abuses.

The Chinese government continues to repress Chinese Protestants who worship in house churches. According to reports from a U.S. NGO that monitors religious freedom in China, officials raided house church services or meetings, and detained and questioned leaders and members. Although public security officials held most of those whom they detained in such raids for short periods, they held house church leaders for more extended periods, sometimes for weeks or months. Officials also reportedly tortured or physically abused some of the house church detainees. Officials confiscated personal property belonging to house church leaders and members, and officials also detained foreign missionaries who provided training to house church leaders. From May 2005 to May 2006, the government detained nearly 2,000 house church members, according to the same U.S. NGO. Almost 50 percent of the reported detentions of Protestant house church members and leaders took place in Henan province, where the Protestant house church movement is particularly strong (US Congressional-Executive Commission on China 2006, Annual Report 2006, 20 September, pp.76 & 92 – Attachment 7).

2. Is it linked to First Family Church in China? 3. Is First Family Church in China banned?

No information was found in the sources consulted regarding the First Family Church in China.

List of Sources Consulted

Internet Sources: Amnesty International website http://www.amnesty.org/ Christian Research Institute http://www.equip.org/ First Family Church website http://www.ffc.org/ Freechurchforchina.org http://www.freechurchforchina.org/ Freedom House http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=1 Google search engine http://www.google.com.au/ Human Rights Watch documents on China http://www.hrw.org/asia/china.php Immigration & Refugee Board of Canada http://www.irb.gc.ca/ International Christian Concern http://persecution.org/humanrights/china.html International Coalition for Religious Freedom http://www.religiousfreedom.com/ The Committee for the Investigation on Persecution of Religion in China http://www.china21.org/English/index.htm United States Commission on International Religious Freedom http://www.uscirf.gov/ Voice of the Martyrs (Australia) http://www.persecution.com.au/

Databases: FACTIVA (news database) BACIS (DIMA Country Information database) REFINFO (IRBDC (Canada) Country Information database) ISYS (RRT Country Research database, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, US Department of State Reports) RRT Library Catalogue

List of Attachments

1. ‘Statement of Faith of the Christian Assembly of Sydney’ (undated), Christian Assembly website, Accessed through Internet Archive website http://web.archive.org/web/20040606132957/www.christianassembly.com.au/aboutus .htm – Accessed 12 April 2007.

2. RRT decision 060463473 of 5 September 2006.

3. Wickeri, Philip L. 1990, ‘Rejection from the Right’, Maryknoll, New York. (CISNET China CX306)

4. Lee, J. 2005 ‘Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China’, Church History, Vol.74, No.1, 1 March. (FACTIVA)

5. Lambert, T. 2006, China’s Christian Millions, Monarch Books, Oxford. (Sydney Library)

6. August, O. 2003, ‘China destroys churches and temples in crackdown on underground religion’, The Times, 10 November. (FACTIVA)

7. US Congressional-Executive Commission on China 2006, Annual Report 2006, 20 September.