A Christian utopia in China: A historical study of the Jesus Family (1921--1952) (Chinese text)

The significance of Jesus Family movement in the history of Chinese Christianity can be discussed in many aspects. Firstly, the movement may be seen as a result of the missionary activities in China which demonstrated the conflicts and compromises between the missionaries and Chinese converts and between Christianity and Chinese culture. Secondly, it may be seen as a typical indigenous church movement which reflected the demand of the Chinese Christians, particularly those in the rural area, for independence. Thirdly, it may be seen as an endeavor of Chinese Christians to deal with their contemporary social problems by means of Christian idealism. The more important significance, however, is that the movement can be seen as an outstanding example of Christian utopia practiced in China, as one successful attempt in bringing together the sacred and the profane, combining the religious communal and social economic life within this Jesus Family movement.; The present paper, comprising eight parts, probes into this history from the perspective of Chinese Christian utopian movement. The introduction discusses the theory of the Christian utopia related with the general questions of the Jesus Family. The whole development of the movement from its origin, evolution to the end of the Family is fully unfolded from chapter one through chapter six. The author will attempt to challenge and discredit the traditional understanding, which claims that the Jesus Family was either ‘a thoroughly independent Church’ or a Chinese Church which was heavily influenced by ‘cultural aggression of imperialism’. The author will also discuss the changes of the Jesus Family before and after the Wartime, revealing the fact that because of the destruction of the war the Family got the momentum and became a prosperous Christian community. However, the innate contradictions and weaknesses of the movement damaged the esprit de corps of the organization when the social conditions became normal. Finally, by analyzing closely the processes in which the Family was disbanded, the author will proceed to argue that the outside pressure or internal problem could not be the only reasons for the failure of the Family, whereas the political pressure, the internal tension and excessive response to the challenge by the leader of the Family had all played a part in its demise.